Woman claims she was assaulted in Google Glass 'HATE CRIME' A California woman claims to have been the victim of a "hate crime" after allegedly being attacked in a San Francisco bar because she was wearing Google Glass. "OMG so you'll never believe this but... I got verbally and physically asaulted [sic] and robbed last night in the city, had things thrown at me because of some wanker …
"she was able to capture some footage of the confrontation, which she started recording in the bar"
Did it come to her mind, that this could be part of the problem?
She should call herself lucky, that no one punched her in the face. I could imagine it would be difficult to extract parts of her spy glasses from her eyeball.
I don't think the problem is in the filming as such. With a camera or phone it's reasonably easy to tell when somebody is filming or preparing to take a photograph. Google Glass looks the same regardless of whether the user is wearing them as traditional glasses or is actually attempting photography. I imagine that it's the constant ambiguity that causes the aggravation. People act differently when they're being recorded. Just because someone is happy to behave a certain way in public doesn't mean they're happy to have it recorded for all time.
@crisp: I feel that wearing that particlar device in a pub is quite offensive. Not to take it off, once people state, that they are feeling offended is either arrogant or stupid. To start taking a video after people get angry about you wearing a video device is - well, offensive. Add enough alcohol to the mix and things can go violent pretty fast.
IMHO she should call herself lucky that she only lost her purse.
Being assaulted is always a bad experience, regardless of whether you are badly injured or not. But, maybe she is taking the wrong message from this incident. If you are going out to places where there is a risk of assault (and these days that can be pretty much anywhere, you don't just have to walk down dark alleys), you need to keep alert to what is going on around you* to try and avoid bad situations as far as possible. I don't believe wearing your Google glasses "all the time" is going to help your situational awareness..
*Yes, I know that's no guarantee, there are people who will king-hit you from behind without warning..
@Grey Ham
"I don't believe wearing your Google glasses "all the time" is going to help your situational awareness.."
An app opportunity there shurely?
GPS tracker querying a database and popping up warnings
"Did you know 5 people have been mugged on this street in the past 4 months?"
"Warning: You are entering an area where wearing Google Glass may attract bodily harm or ridicule."
"Warning: You appear to be wearing Google Glass. Please remove headset and pretend you don't have it."
This kind of thing happens all the time;
a.Someone goes 'slumming' in seedy bars, looks like they have some bucks. (terminology: 'The Mark')
b. The 'diversion' causes a scene with the mark, drawing them out of the bar.
c. The mark returns to the bar, can't find valuables... "Nobody saw nothing, honest! Besides, you started it!"
it's completely different to film in public with your cellphone and film with google glass.
Actually, it is. Using a cellphone means it's visible you're doing it, whereas you can happily perv away with Google glass after judicious use of a black marker to cover the LED. Personally, I would ask someone too to remove themselves if they were wearing this thing. Or I'd start following them with a real camera for as long as I got away with it, to see how they liked it themselves.
I would have zero problems with Google glass if it recorded the user itself, but that's exactly the only person who will NOT have their data uploaded to Google - and if you have ever read their ToS you'd know it's theirs to use into perpetuity (read the "limitations" on that right properly and you'll realise they're no limitations at all). Screw that.
This is a very odd statement to make. Do Google expect the glasses to mainly appeal to social misfit numpties who will go out of their way to annoy people?
I can't think of any other product that carries a statement like this.
Do short dresses have a label saying "Please show some decorum when wearing this dress." No.
Nor do iphones say: "Please don't annoy others by having long conversations with Siri."
Google obviously expect these glasses to have great twat appeal and they're probably right.
"Well the idea is that they'd be used by the masses, after this BETA period. (Although, they may keep it on Perpetual BETA phase for ever to give responsibilities a miss)."
That's correct, but the guidelines helpfully instructing people to not be creepy is meant for current Glass Explorers (or whatever fancy word is used), therefore the message was related to current users thus my joke might be weakened, but should still work...
By making that statement Google knew what they were doing. It would attract and encourage some Glassholes to actually be creepy and rude. Ordinary people, non-Glassholes, would then possibly react like they did to this stupid ditz.
Result? Free 'advertising' for Google and Glass via Twitter, Facebook, forums etc.
We're doing it now.
There's no such thing as bad publicity.
This is a very odd statement to make. Do Google expect the glasses to mainly appeal to social misfit numpties who will go out of their way to annoy people?
Standard US company stuff. You should see our 'ethics course' which contains such nuggets as "you must always abide by local laws" and "refrain from making unwelcome sexual advances"
Although the pedant in me says one probably has to make at least one sexual advance before knowing whether further advances are welcome or not --- and the scientist in me says a larger sample is surely required before drawing such a conclusion.
Although the pedant in me says one probably has to make at least one sexual advance before knowing whether further advances are welcome or not --- and the scientist in me says a larger sample is surely required before drawing such a conclusion
And that's how I lost my job as a teacher
Yes, perhaps this wasn't the real story this time, but I imagine we'll be hearing a lot more about this sort of thing in time.
Until this technology is in the shops, the best way to recreate the experience of this woman for yourself is to go into a crowded bar and stick your mobile phone up in front of your face filming everyone you chat to or look at...
...if that's what you think is a good night out, of course!
If I'm in a bar and someone comes in and starts recording me without my approval (apart from the 17 security cameras and accidental photo-bombs of the incessant selfies of self-congratulatory students about how brave they are coming to the bars I hang out in)... oh wait, I guess it doesn't really matter if yet another wanker starts recording me in a public dive.
I'm guessing the glasses were grabbed as a very standard ploy to distract from the real theft of the purse/wallet/phone. It worked.
"I'm guessing the glasses were grabbed as a very standard ploy to distract from the real theft of the purse/wallet/phone. It worked."
Sure, except now there's video of the one suspect, and probably his friend lurking about in the bar at the same time. Should make at least one arrest pretty easy, and then the fun US justice system of 100 million years unless you plead guilty and dob in everyone else comes into its own...
In the heat of the moment that she seems to have had the whit to reduce the assailants personalities down to "ugly, nasty, angry, jealous, confused and threatened" - but no awareness at all that she was the victim of a sting operation to relieve her of her handbag and wallet.
What a dimbo.
Raises an interesting point, I've never broken any glasses or anything, but get through 1 or 2 pairs a year, purely by losing them when drunk
but if they were high-tech and liable to sell well on ebay they're probably very easy to snatch off someone's face compared to nicking an iphone, which was a craze for a long while, and that's in your hand which has the ability to grab..
i think the lesson is don't take them to bars, i don't even take my smartphone to pubs in case i drop it or get mugged (i go out in middlesbrough..)
not always when i'm wearing them. sometimes they just fall out of a jacket when they're in my coat pocket and then i bend over, take it off and sling it on a chair, or the gets folded in half top-pocket-facing-down on the short journey from cloakroom girl to hanger or whatever. they're just remarkably unsuited to ever staying with me (don't want them in the same pocket as my keys, not in my trousers because of all the sitting actions bending them etc so i usually keep them in the dangerous top-pocket of a coat)
@Valeyard, considered a belt holster? Style death, I know, but if you're a geek anyway then what does that matter? ;)
Of course if you're a hardware engineer you can always say it's your Leatherman. Nobody disses the Leatherman. Just don't do so in earshot of the bouncers (they'll probably just want to play with it).
Tangent: is it me or did all the text just go from black to grey? Weird, eyes no likey.
is the first part of the name: Google. Everything recorded with Glass goes to Google to be associated with all the other data that Google collects. That pisses me off. If the recordings were personal and private I wouldn't mind. Being spied on by a huge multinational 24/7 with the collusion of my fellow citizens is just right out.
Yes, I can imagine the "Google Review Room". All those hapless Caltech grads employed in the tens of thousands reviewing every video being uploaded. Shouts emanating across the room of "Quick everyone I've got an accidental nipple slip" and "car chase, someone is involved in a car chase" as the other grads quickly connect to the talked about video and merrily joke and laugh about it before posting it up on you tube and generating billions in ad revenue.
Google Top Brass are probably delighting at their "anti-privacy" room (or pervs room as it is colloquially known). Every month they get their biggest advertisers to come in and show them a select range of videos who then get to decide the users they would like to target most "Yep, Graham Smith - we'll start pushing baldness cures to him, Mary Brason - she's going to need a new car soon, lets get onto Ford to see if they want to deal".
Or maybe I'm being ridiculous...
maybe I'm being ridiculous
Not in my opinion. Basically, Glassholes are helping Google expand Streetview into homeview, and create a globally usable network of CCTV.
"We need eyes on New Bond Street!"
Localising Glassholes in vicinity, please wait .. Found user in proximity, now remotely enabling Glasses..
Far fetched? Nope - only the lack of distribution prevents this scenario.
- GPS location? Check
- Camera not living in a pocket (the problem with mobile phones)? Check
- User aware? Not really a problem either.
There is far, far more to this than just idiots taking pics of each other.
You are being ridiculous. The problem is not a bunch of pervs getting their jollies. The problem is a huge multinational company recording everything with the ability to cross reference your picture, the location, and other people to build a profile of everyone and everything in order to more efficiently earn money selling advertisements. That's the problem.
A single, random person recording a scene in a bar doesn't bother me much. It's the google connection that makes it a problem.
Your complaint was about you being recorded by someone else and it being uploaded to Google and now your issue is they can efficiently earn money from advertising it.
So
1) how are they going to show you this advert while some one catches you accidentally in their video (or are you really suggesting that you are so interesting that people are going to be actively, continuously recording you - do they do this now on their smartphone)
2) What would be special about you that would warrant a advert being triggered. Do you believe that Joseph Eoff has a keyword match on Google to automatically show adverts whenever you are in the room?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
