Can we stop the stop repeating the 'Glasshole' meme over and over and over on every single article about Google Glass please ? It's offensive in a way that 'fanboi' isn't and it's like listening to a kid with a new favourite naughty word - it gets tiresome really fucking quickly.
'Steve Jobs killed music biz', but Bon Jovi don't mind Google Glass
Two years after Bon Jovi accused Steve Jobs of killing the music industry, the band's keyboardist, David Bryan, let their Google flag fly when he donned Mountain View's wearable Glass computer device while playing a sold-out gig. The world's biggest Glasshole, PR spindoctor Chris Barrett, persuaded the least famous member of …
-
-
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 17:31 GMT Anonymous Coward
we come up with an offensive term for 'Citizen Journalism', as opposed to 'People recording stuff''
Sadly I don't have a better term, but an observation:
Chris Barrett runs a company called PRServe, which runs publicity campaigns for startups, and is one of the Chocolate Factory's Google Glass Explorers.
His first major coup was capturing footage in the aftermath of a fight on Jersey Shore without either party noticing that he was filming.
Isn't it telling that the first PR created was effectively spying on people? I hope he encounters reality soon.
-
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 07:58 GMT Anonymous Coward
But Chris Barrett most definitely IS a Glasshole
I know some people don't like the term Glasshole, but I'll wager saying so will just make The Reg use it more.
At least that has been the case in the past for other terms people have taken issue with such as 'mobe', which was so hated they eventually had a poll about whether to ban use of that term and they were (mostly) forced to do so!
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 17:04 GMT neek
Re: But Chris Barrett most definitely IS a Glasshole
Fuck you. We love saying that. Maybe the Reg will start using that more?
No, it is employed because it is a nice half way mark between the product in question and a suitably derogative swear word that they wouldn't usually choose to use, and can be employed en masse against every single person using the product because there aren't many of them, we don't know them, we are assumed not to like the technology (and therefore the person using it), and frankly it is not far removed from what could be found rife in Hitler's Germany. Ithankew.
-
-
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 10:19 GMT Tim Parker
"What are we supposed to call them then? Just regular asshole? Asshole with silly thing on face? Asshole 7 of 9? Early Adopter Asshole (that one sort of limits itself I guess). Gooholes?"
Well golly gosh - I don't know.... perhaps we could grow the fuck up a bit and not instantly label every single person who tries these out an 'asshole' of any sort. Fat fucking chance around here mind... I mean - poke fun at them, perhaps, but 'asshole' is just plain insulting, and not that funny when it repeated over and over again at every opportunity IMO.
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 11:37 GMT Tim Parker
"> poke fun at them, perhaps, but 'asshole' is just plain insulting, and not that funny
Yes but these are people filming us without our permission. I am *really* *not* *happy* about this. They're arseholes, and I don't care if they don't like it."
Not all of them are looking at them for filming other peoples life - there are a lot of developers out there talking about the HUD / "augmented reality" aspect of it (not sure I like that phrase either), for instance, how probably couldn't give a rats ass about recording anything. I dislike that everyone is tarred with same insult.
"> perhaps we could grow the fuck up a bit
er, is this an oxymoron? If you don't like bad language then I suggest you stop fucking using it."
It's not the occasional use of an expletive I mind, it's the over-use of their favourite new word that is getting on my nerves - so, no, not an oxymoron.
-
Friday 2nd August 2013 07:34 GMT Ace Rimmer
"Yes but these are people filming us without our permission"
So is the state, everywhere you go, your mobile sends tracking information about you everywhere you go, every shop you walk in, police cars, citizens with dash cams, people filming themselves and catching you in the frame, etc etc etc, you are being filmed and tracked everywhere you go but you're "*really* *not* *happy*" about someone with a pair of glasses doing the filming instead?
Where's the fekking "reality check" icon?
-
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 23:08 GMT Anonymous Coward
"Well golly gosh - I don't know.... perhaps we could grow the fuck up a bit and not instantly label every single person who tries these out an 'asshole' of any sort. Fat fucking chance around here mind... I mean - poke fun at them, perhaps, but 'asshole' is just plain insulting, and not that funny when it repeated over and over again at every opportunity IMO."
It is called profiling and guess what, it works for a reason.
-
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 19:35 GMT Captain DaFt
What are we supposed to call them then?
Well... a toughie... They have an overwhelming need to try out the latest gadget or shiney with total disregard for how it helps the Paranoids in Power by eroding their own privacy and the privacy of everyone around them...
How about 'unwitting collaborators'?
(Geez, this sounds so paranoid... but it fits with the times.)
-
-
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 11:44 GMT Tim Parker
"Why, do you want a pair? "
Nope.
"Don't like the thought of everything thinking you're an asshole? Think you're too late."
I'm an asshole because I used my real account details to say I thought using a fairly hefty insult to apply to an entire group of people was (IMO) rather strong, and it's repetition irritating ? I don't particularly care if people disagree with me, that's their right, but being an asshole for saying that - really AC ?
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 17:38 GMT Anonymous Coward
I'm an asshole because I used my real account details to say I thought using a fairly hefty insult to apply to an entire group of people was (IMO) rather strong, and it's repetition irritating ? I don't particularly care if people disagree with me, that's their right, but being an asshole for saying that - really AC ?
There is no correlation between arsehole status and the use of A/C accounts. However, the fact that you just chose to make that association makes you one. Now go and get your Google Glasses already.
Oh, on that topic: I don't care if someone is allegedly using for benign purposes. It still has recording capabilities and there is as yet too little known about the device to trust it. Given history, I fully suspect Google to say after a couple of months that they have *cough* accidentally *cough* left all the cameras on on the Glasses of Glassholes everywhere. I rather not give them the chance. Better make this stuff as embarrassing as possible upfront so we limit exposure to both Google's NSA sponsored data acquisition and, of course, people called Glassholes.
So, Glassholes gets my vote, multiple times over.
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 18:04 GMT Tim Parker
"There is no correlation between arsehole status and the use of A/C accounts. However, the fact that you just chose to make that association makes you one."
I didn't make that association, much as I dislike ACs in general. What makes you think I did ?
"Now go and get your Google Glasses already."
Why do you think I want some, just because I objected to what I saw as overly-repetitive juvenile jibes ?
-
-
-
-
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 07:42 GMT wowfood
The best use
I can think of for Glass is in the police force. See a fight on the street? Glass records it, arrest somebody glass records it (and when they claim brutality you have a first person view of what happened) criminal getting away by car? Chrome GPS pops up and tells you how to get to maple and 7th. For average joe, I don't see that many uses though aside from being an annoyance. Could be good for some decent youtube videos etc. Cooking lessons or piano lessons "Hey you can follow my hands" where you won't need a second camera man because you're the camera etc.
-
-
-
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 13:23 GMT Eradicate all BB entrants
Re: I highly doubt this was the first time a concert was recorded from a performer's POV
Thank whomever I got those tickets free, watching 2 guys with miners lamps on dance around and occasionally press play on a cd player is not a gig. There were more people queuing for the toilets than in the hall
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 15:41 GMT LinkOfHyrule
Re: I highly doubt this was the first time a concert was recorded from a performer's POV
Orbital would be good performers if they actually pressed play on their CD player in a gents toilet instead of an empty nightclub - I would genuinely pay to see that.
I think 20p is the going rate for bogs in railways stations aint it? Yep i'd pay 20p to see Orbital.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 08:44 GMT jake
@AC 08:22 (was: Re: killing the music industry)
But AC, I don't think you (or anybody else) can show an example of Cowell actually doing anything useful for the music industry, outside of padding his pocketbook ... It's the industry that sucks, not the music ...
Yes, I agree, Bon Jovi was almost as bad as Disco.
-
-
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 08:41 GMT RonWheeler
Rubbish international pricing strategies killed music
Album on Amazon UK £6.99
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Devil-Put-Dinosaurs-Here/dp/B00CWM7VJM/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1375346221&sr=8-2&keywords=the+devil+dinosaurs
Same album in Amazon USA $5.99
http://www.amazon.com/The-Devil-Put-Dinosaurs-Here/dp/B00CWM3F4C/ref=sr_1_1_bnp_1_mus?ie=UTF8&qid=1375346314&sr=8-1&keywords=the+devil+put
So £6.99 vs £3.96 (according to online currency convertor)
So the record companies don't think I notice I'm getting financially shafted? Except I'm not - I'm just not buying, I'll just use Spotify or not listen..
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 09:49 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Rubbish international pricing strategies killed music
£6.99 vs £3.96
"So the record companies don't think I notice I'm getting financially shafted?"
Assuming "they" are driven by profit, enough people (aka consumers) don't notice. Or notice, but don't care. Or notice, and care, but don't care enough. Or notice, care enough, and use alternative channels to acquire what they want (some of which I won't dare mention, because of the censorship*).
* Error 404. Page Not Found
-
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 11:17 GMT Nanners
The record companies did it
The record corporations pushed digital music because there were so many pressing their own vinyl records (creating competition) and recording music on cassette (instead of buying it). They tried to "flip the script" and wound up screwing themselves in the arse.
Glass holes is an acuarate discription.
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 13:15 GMT Anonymous Coward
after Bon Jovi accused Steve Jobs [...] David Bryan, let their Google flag fly
Next thing we learn, Google bribed them with a free GMail account? Seriously. I'll start worrying when they get a Google tatoo.
And what's wrong with GG? It's a HUD. Video-capable? Yup. But when a girl has her phone facing me, how can I be sure she's not taking my picture, filming me or running a facial recognition software to find about me? At least GG turn on a red LED to warn you.
Regarding looks, is wearing GG worse that clutching all day to a smartphone? I'd rather keep my hands free.
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 13:16 GMT sisk
I still think that, while till wildly inaccurate, "Apple saved the music industry" would be a lot closer to the truth than "Apple killed the music industry". If they hadn't dragged the music industry kicking and screaming into the 21st century they'd still be trying to stay afloat by selling shiny plastic discs that no one buys anymore.
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 14:43 GMT Mark .
Because no one did mp3s before Apple Records did(!)
I'm more concerned now though how places seem to be drying up - a few years ago there were loads of places to buy mp3s, now it seems to be for many bands "let's only offer it on itunes", in some cases trumpeting the exclusivity as if it were a good thing, or making whole albums itunes-only. Lack of choice to buy from is not a good thing, and will do far more harm than downloading or anything else (same with the trend in videos and TV to make things only viewable on an ipad - hopefully Chromecast will put an end to that). I've also seen people say they want to buy other media players, but aren't sure if the Apple non-mp3 format their music is in, because they bought it in, will work on devices other than ipods (I don't know if this is a valid concern or not, but again it's discouraging competition in the market).
Shiny plastic discs? I stream my music from Google Music to the TV speakers - having to plug in a device and play from physical media is so 20th Century.
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 17:35 GMT Anonymous Coward
A better reality
"Shiny plastic discs? I stream my music from Google Music to the TV speakers - having to plug in a device and play from physical media is so 20th Century."
"Shiny plastic discs? I stream my music from Google Music to the TV speakers - having to plug in a device and play from physical media AND GET BETTER QUALITY is so 20th Century.
As I've become a '21st Century' consumer, I've evolved into a lazy couch potato that expects the world to come directly to me. I have also become tone deaf, thanks to lowest common denominator products like iPods, and no longer can tell the difference between playing lossy music on my TV speakers versus listening to a much higher quality source on a much higher resolution reproduction system. We'll forget what about live, unamplified music sounds like - what's that? "
There. Fixed that for you.
-
-
-
Thursday 1st August 2013 18:02 GMT Anonymous Coward
The Real Truth
You want to know what destroyed the music industry?
The music industry.
The music industry's problems go way, way beyond the fact that their typical marketing regime was upset by Apple, granting said outside party a large chunk of the usual profits. That issue IS important, but the REASON Apple was able to grab so much power is the fundamental issue here.
The reason Apple's iTunes was able to take so much profit from the industry was due to the fact that the industry stuck to the same 1950's marketing scheme - sell singles. The PROBLEM is that the 45 RPM singles industry dried up and, back in the 80's, the cassette single format never caught on.
Now, the fundamental question that this should cause: Why is the music industry still stuck in the mentality of selling singles, in a world where single sales no longer make those kind of profits?
And this is where we have the problem.
The music industry is still stuck on selling to the 14-23 year olds; the PROBLEM is the music industry targets (what they believe to be) their main demographic. The music industry pushes "oyouth" music - hip hop, reggaeton, rap, youth-directed pop, dance music and modern 'country', etc. - in the hopes and belief that this is their main profit market. What the music industry has failed to accept is that this modern demographic:
(a) can't afford your $16-$20 per copy product (the pre-packaged CD)
(b) has other options available for acquiring your music, both legal downloads and pirating
The fact is that the music industry has been marketing to the demographic with the LOWEST AMOUNT OF PERSONAL DISPOSABLE INCOME for YEARS. Said demographic can no longer afford your most profitable products - the CD - so they grab the affordable option, the legal download or the illegal piracy. The PROBLEM is that, even via the legal channels, the profit margin is minimal since the sale price is minimal ($0.99) and the aforementioned distributors of the modern "single" (Apple / Amazon) take a significant slice out of the profits of that minimal sale price for distribution access.
So, instead of seeking the higher profit sales (the non-urban, non-youth music market, AND IT IS OUT THERE contrary to YEARS of statements by the music industry, as Adele PROVED it) the music industry continues to seek the lowest priced, lowest income spending market and then complains when the most valuable distribution access channel to said market demands a good profit margin of their own.
The music industry is too stupid to change. They KNOW their mass market goods sell for very little, they KNOW their distribution channel to said market is fixed to only 2 distributors (Apple and Amazon), they KNOW their target demographic has very little discretionary spending money, they KNOW their target demographic as access to vast quantities of illegal copies (if they wish to seek it out)...
and yet they don't change a thing.
STUPID.
-
Friday 2nd August 2013 00:41 GMT Ian Michael Gumby
"Barrett, who has previously filmed an arrest using Glass, said that watching a minor member of the rock band wearing Google's creepy creation was "the most amazing night" of his life."
Wow. And I thought I led a dull life. ;-)
If he wanted some excitement he should try that stunt, filming police in action, here in Chicago, IL. That simple act will get him arrested.
I'm sure he can then say that meeting his new friend Bubba in lockup was the most amazing night of his life. ;-)
This topic is closed for new posts.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
