Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I've seen several comments around the web from privacy advocates along the lines of "I'll punch anyone I see wearing glass" or "I'll rip it right off your face" etc.

Have there been any reports of this happening yet?




I overheard a guy at the supermarket checkout, he was saying to what seemed to be his GF that he would actually kick people with a Glass from behind because that way he wouldn't be recorded... not very happy thoughts, I have to admit.

What's true though is that we're taking a very dangerous road here:

1. Google Glass means total and permanent surveillance

2. Total and permanent surveillance means people will be afraid to use their right to freedom of expression (out of fear of blowback)

3. Suppressed freedom of expression means: Democracy is dead and a police state becomes very realistic.

Who in their right mind wants that?


I'm not sure punching people in the face or kicking them in the back counts as "freedom of expression".


no one said that. you are mixing physical violence in. could you elaborate what you mean?


daivd's reply to this was reasonable and civil, but you'll have to turn on showdead to see it, now (though none of his other recent comments are dead).

Hiding opinions you disagree with is not what the downvote arrow should be used for.


I certainly hope not. I was quite shocked to see such comments on Hacker News. While I can understand disapproval for the device, but a proud proclamation that someone would physically abuse another person, that seems out of place and very wrong.


You expect Internet Tough Guy Syndrome to manifest as physical action?

Spend a week in one of the Anarchist newsgroups on Usenet during the early 90s to see how far that usually goes. ;)

Edit: Bonus - you'll understand why Fight Club was so popular.


This came up in a pub a few days ago, and one guy piped up to say "If I see anyone staring at me while wearing one I'll hit them".

The guy next to him laughed and said "Brilliant, then he can kick your ass, film it, and put it all over YouTube".

When it comes out, I'm going to buy one, and I'm going to wear it everywhere. I'm willing to bet that no one says anything, and that those that think about doing so won't. People say whatever they want on the Internet, or around friends at the pub, but in the real world they won't bat an eyelid.


Thay may not complain directly, but they may start disliking you, stop associating with you etc.


If they "stop associating with you" on account of a pair of glasses, perhaps they were not your friends..


Well, I didn't mean just friends. If you do something other people don't like or something that is socially weird, the average person (friend, stranger, etc.) will have a lower tendency to associate with you.


As much I see the usefulness in Google Glasses, this is how its mostly going to end up. People especially your co-workers will become less open and careful around you since everything they say or do can be recorded and used against them. Why would they risk losing their job over some out of context comment or inside joke that you have a copy of.


I think people's reactions to Glass pretty cleanly divide into two camps by their reaction to "you could be being recorded by anyone at any time":

A. those who actually find this to be a novel problem unique to Glass, and

B. people who have assumed that since inconspicuous recording of others has always been possible by, say, someone wearing a wire, it was a factor that is unable to be discounted from one's daily activities, and thus it was best to just act as if it were always the case unless one has taken specific steps to guarantee one won't be being recorded. (People with the security mindset, in other words.)

The latter group don't seem to have any problem with Glass: they already had their freak-out long ago when inconspicuously recording others around you became possible. Making it easier doesn't change anything for them; it just gives the power to record others around you to people who don't really have a strong motive to use it. The real "attackers" (in the cryptographic sense) never needed it to be easy; they had the motivation and the resources to use the clunky old methods.


I do agree that it is independent of glass, but glass is part of the ongoing trend of extensive recording of our lives with and without our consent. Technology changes everything and as you are saying, people need to adapt.

It's interesting that the most recent presidential election in the US was influenced by a video recording of one of the candidates taken without their knowledge (the 47% comment by Romney). I think it's safe to say that this happened in 2012 because video recording devices are more common and smaller and that google glass and similar devices will only increase that trend. It's kind of like how the Nixon Kennedy debate being aired on TV changed american politics forever. And how "video killed the radio star."


You've stated my position (B) better than I've managed to. Thanks.


I think that's a bit of an overstatement, but some people can react similarly like in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDumyGJdLrU (one guy goes around and videotapes people). Of course, I'm not saying that what the guy does is equivalent to wearing Google Glass. Considering that the camera indicator can be disabled, I wouldn't be comfortable around people with Glasses.


Like cellphones, I expect they'll become objects targeted by thieves - only it's potentially easier to steal since it's sitting on somebody's head, and their focus may not be on their surroundings if they're interacting with Glass.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2027 batch! Applications are open till November 2.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: