coffee_rules Posted February 22, 2013 Posted February 22, 2013 :hysterical::hysterical: That shyte is pretty crazy. Sometimes I see these people and don't realize the bluetooth part...phir sochta hoon "bechara pagal hai..apne aap se baat kar raha hai"...:cantstop: I saw a middle-aged black woman on the subway doing this. I was pitying her thinking she was crazy, was not directly looking her for that reason. Usually seen such people in the subway among the black folk, talking muttering to themselves. She gets up pulls the BT out and walks out. Felt relieved for her, she was not a crazy person.
akshayxyz Posted February 22, 2013 Posted February 22, 2013 "I used Google Glass: the future, with monthly updates" http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/22/4013406/i-used-google-glass-its-the-future-with-monthly-updates
akshayxyz Posted February 22, 2013 Posted February 22, 2013 Here is first most brilliant application of GG I read. "I want glass to work as RL DVR, where I can pause and go back a few seconds back and re-read or listen to what did happen when I wasn't paying attention, I think this would be great for that use, real life dvr." On second thoughts.. while it looks like extremely useful, now I feel this can be potentially dangerous to brain/psychology - in long term... (happy murugan?)
akshayxyz Posted February 22, 2013 Posted February 22, 2013 :hysterical::hysterical: That shyte is pretty crazy. Sometimes I see these people and don't realize the bluetooth part...phir sochta hoon "bechara pagal hai..apne aap se baat kar raha hai"...:cantstop:
surajmal Posted February 22, 2013 Posted February 22, 2013 "I used Google Glass: the future, with monthly updates" http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/22/4013406/i-used-google-glass-its-the-future-with-monthly-updates :two_thumbs_up: Apple can suck it.
surajmal Posted February 22, 2013 Posted February 22, 2013 Here is first most brilliant application of GG I read. "I want glass to work as RL DVR, where I can pause and go back a few seconds back and re-read or listen to what did happen when I wasn't paying attention, I think this would be great for that use, real life dvr." On second thoughts.. while it looks like extremely useful, now I feel this can be potentially dangerous to brain/psychology - in long term... (happy murugan?) India Army (entire infantry unit and not just special forces) has been in the conceptualization phase for its future soldier program (similar to the current status of NATO and US forces) for a while now. Biggest problem they are facing is whether an average grunt can adapt to all the techno gear, considering their fairly modest upbringing. No such debate in the western forces, since they grow up with video games and all sort of fancy gizmos. Human mind is fairly adaptable (as you said) but I wonder where the limit lies. And I don't mean just psychologically but at a societal level. Where do we set the limit. How much Technology + Brain synthesis is too much? Simulacra and Simulation... Baudrillard was a genius. My question is, where do we stand with component miniaturization? - for the consumer level. (I'm sure US Infantry, particularly special forces, has all sorts of gizmos that are out of the purview of the public).
Crookbond Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 Here is first most brilliant application of GG I read. "I want glass to work as RL DVR, where I can pause and go back a few seconds back and re-read or listen to what did happen when I wasn't paying attention, I think this would be great for that use, real life dvr." On second thoughts.. while it looks like extremely useful, now I feel this can be potentially dangerous to brain/psychology - in long term... (happy murugan?) It is an interesting question which I wish someone takes up to study.
Crookbond Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 Google Glass product director Steve Lee weighs in to Josh T as to why they came up with Google Glass. http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/22/4013406/i-used-google-glass-its-the-future-with-monthly-updates "Why are we even working on Glass? We all know that people love to be connected. Families message each other all the time, sports fanatics are checking live scores for their favorite teams. If you’re a frequent traveler you have to stay up to date on flight status or if your gate changes. Technology allows us to connect in that way. A big problem right now are the distractions that technology causes. If you’re a parent — let’s say your child’s performance, watching them do a soccer game or a musical. Often friends will be holding a camera to capture that moment. Guess what? It’s gone. You just missed that amazing game." Isabelle chimes in, "Did you see that Louis C.K. stand up when he was telling parents, ‘your kids are better resolution in real life?’" Everyone laughs, but the point is made. Human beings have developed a new problem since the advent of the iPhone and the following mobile revolution: no one is paying attention to anything they’re actually doing. Everyone seems to be looking down at something or through something. Those perfect moments watching your favorite band play or your kid’s recital are either being captured via the lens of a device that sits between you and the actual experience, or being interrupted by constant notifications. Pings from the outside world, breaking into what used to be whole, personal moments. Steve goes on. "We wondered, what if we brought technology closer to your senses? Would that allow you to more quickly get information and connect with other people but do so in a way — with a design — that gets out of your way when you’re not interacting with technology? That’s sort of what led us to Glass." I can’t stop looking at the lens above his right eye. "It’s a new wearable technology. It’s a very ambitious way to tackle this problem, but that’s really sort of the underpinning of why we worked on Glass."
Sachin=GOD Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 Is Google Glass a threat to our privacy? The tech giantŽÃŽÔ ŽÃŽØearable computing project is now being tested by volunteers, meaning you might already have been surreptitiously filmed and uploaded on to GoogleŽÃŽÔ servers. How worried should you be? If you havenŽÃŽÕ heard about the excitement around Google Glass the head-mounted glasses that can shoot video, take pictures, and broadcast what youŽÃŽÓe seeing to the world then hereŽÃŽÔ an idea of the interest in them. Last week, someone claiming to be testing Glass for Google auctioned their $1,500 device on eBay. Bidding had reached $16,000 before eBay stopped it on the basis that the person couldnŽÃŽÕ prove they had the glasses. (They werenŽÃŽÕ due to get them until March 1.) Google Glass is the most hotly anticipated new arrival in ŽÅŽØearable computing which experts predict will become pervasive. In the past 50 years we have moved from ŽÅŽÎainframe computers that needed their own rooms to ones that fit in a pocket; any smartphone nowadays has as much raw computing power as a top-of-the-line laptop from 10 years ago. The next stage is computers that fit on to your body, and GoogleŽÃŽÔ idea is that you need only speak to operate it. The videos that the company has put online and the demonstrations by Sergey Brin, GoogleŽÃŽÔ co-founder, who has been driving these imaginative leaps suggest you can whirl your child around by their arms, say: ŽÅŽ°K, Glass, take video! and capture the moment. (To activate Glass you need to tilt your head, or touch the side, and then say, ŽÅŽ°K Glass, record a video or ŽÅŽ°K Glass take a picture?) The only other way to get that point of view is to strap a camera to your head. Mr. Brin has already appeared on stage at a TED conference wearing his Glass glasses (will we call them Glasses?) and looking vaguely like a space pirate. He has described ordinary smartphones as ŽÅŽÆmasculating (invoking quite a lot of puzzlement and dictionary-checking: yup, it still means what you thought). And yet people are already beginning to fret about the social implications of Glass (as itŽÃŽÔ quickly becoming known). The first, and most obvious, is the question of privacy. The second is: how will we behave in groups when the distraction of the internet is only an eye movement away? David Yee, the chief technology officer at a company called Editorially, tweeted on this point the other day: ŽÅŽµhereŽÃŽÔ a young man wearing Google Glasses at this restaurant, which, until just now, used to be my favourite spot. Mr. YeeŽÃŽÔ worry was that the young person might be filming everything and uploading it to GoogleŽÃŽÔ servers (and a Google+ page). Which just feels creepy. NOT A TRIVIAL CONCERN ItŽÃŽÔ not a trivial concern. Joshua Topolsky, an American technology journalist who is one of the few to have tried out Google Glass at GoogleŽÃŽÔ invitation discovered this directly. He wore them to Starbucks, accompanied by a film crew. The film crew were asked to stop filming. ŽÅŽ£ut I kept the GlassŽÃŽÔ video recorder going, all the way through. Still, you might think, whereŽÃŽÔ the harm? The thing is, though: this is Google, not FredŽÃŽÔ Amazing Spectacles Company. This is the company that has repeatedly breached the boundaries of what we think is ŽÅŽÑrivate? From Google Buzz (where it created a ŽÅŽÔocial network from peoples email lists, forgetting that sometimes deadly enemies have mutual friends; it was bound over for 20 years by the U.S.ŽÃŽÔ Federal Trade Commission) and the rows over Street View pictures, to the intentional snaffling of wi-fi data while collecting those pictures (a $25,000 fine from the U.S. Federal Communications Commission for obstructing its investigation there). And thatŽÃŽÔ before you get to criticism in Europe over its attitude to data protection (information commissioners grumbled last October that its unification of its separate privacy policies meant ŽÅŽÖncontrolled use of personal data without an individualŽÃŽÔ clear consent.) For Google, ŽÅŽÑrivacy means ŽÅŽØhat youŽÃŽ×e agreed to? and that is slightly different from the privacy weŽÃŽ×e become used to over time. So how comfortable or uneasy should we feel about the possibility that what weŽÃŽÓe doing in a public or semi-public place (or even somewhere private) might get slurped up and assimilated by Google? You can guess what would happen the first time you put on Glass: there would be a huge scroll of legal boilerplate with ŽÅŽ¢gree at the end. And, impatient and uncaring as ever, you would click on it with little regard for what you were getting yourself, and others, in to. Can a child properly consent to filming or being filmed? Is an adult, who happens to be visible in a cameraŽÃŽÔ peripheral vision in a bar, consenting? And who owns and what happens to that data? Oliver Stokes, principal design innovator at PDD, which helps clients such as LG, Vodafone and Fujitsu design products, says Mr. YeeŽÃŽÔ restaurant scenario is ŽÅŽÄoncerning? ŽÅŽµhe idea that you could inadvertently become part of somebody elseŽÃŽÔ data collection that could be quite alarming. And Google has become the company which knows where you are and what youŽÃŽÓe looking for. Now itŽÃŽÔ going to be able to compute what it is youŽÃŽÓe looking at. That, he points out, could be hugely useful. ŽÅŽ´upermarkets and packaging companies spend lots of money trying to work out which packages you look at first on a shelf. Potentially, through Google Glass, they would be capturing that data as standard. That would be quite powerful to be able to say why people buy things. Of course, the benefits wouldnŽÃŽÕ accrue to the wearer. Google would sell the data (suitably anonymised, of course). And your smartphone already provides a huge amount of detail about you. Song Chaoming, a researcher at Northeastern University in Boston, has been analysing mobile phone records (including which base stations the phone connects to) and has developed an algorithm that can predict with, he says, 93 per cent accuracy where its owner is at any time of the day (by triangulating from the strengths of the base station signals; thatŽÃŽÔ part of how your smartphone is able to show where you are on an onscreen map). He analysed the records of 50,000 people; the accuracy was never below 80 per cent. When you consider that Mr. Chaoming was only doing this in his spare time, and that Google has teams of people whose only task is to develop better algorithms to work out where a phoneŽÃŽÔ owner is, and what theyŽÃŽÓe going to do based on their past activity and searches, you realise that if youŽÃŽÓe using an Android phone, Google probably knows what youŽÃŽÓe going to do before you do. The obvious objection to these concerns is that weŽÃŽÓe used to being filmed; CCTV is part of life. Mr. YeeŽÃŽÔ response: ŽÅŽ¯ot 5,000 cameras a city five million. Not 5,000 monitors one. Where the five million are the wearers of Glass and the one monitor is Google, aggregating, sifting, profiting. MELTING PUBLIC-PRIVATE BOUNDARIES Yet we already live in a world where the boundaries of whatŽÃŽÔ private and whatŽÃŽÔ public are melting. The other day my Twitter timeline came alive with someone tweeting about watching a couple having a furious row in a cafe; the man had had multiple affairs, the woman had had a breakdown. Their unhappiness was being played out in public, though the cafe wasnŽÃŽÕ strictly a public space. If either used Twitter, they might have found themselves (or friends might have recognised them). And TwitterŽÃŽÔ content is retained and searchable through plenty of web services. Social media such as Twitter, and the ubiquity since 2003 of cameraphones (and now of smartphones that not only have still and video cameras, but can also upload their content immediately) means weŽÃŽÓe more used to the snatched photo or video that tells a story. Without it, we wouldnŽÃŽÕ know the true circumstances surrounding the death at the G20 protest of the newspaper seller Ian Tomlinson. What if everyone who had been there had been wearing Google Glass (or similar) and beaming it to the web? Would the police have behaved differently? Google doesnŽÃŽÕ want to discuss these issues. ŽÅŽ¸e are not making any comment, says a company spokesperson. But other sources suggest that GoogleŽÃŽÔ chiefs know that this is a live issue, and theyŽÃŽÓe watching it develop. ThatŽÃŽÔ part of the plan behind the ŽÅŽ¨lass Explorer scheme, which aims to get the devices into the hands or rather, on to the faces of ordinary people (and which enabled one member of the trial to putatively auction their Glass). ŽÅŽªt may be that new social norms develop with Glass, where people develop an informal way of showing that theyŽÃŽÓe not using it say, wearing it around their neck to signal they arenŽÃŽÕ using it or being distracted by it, said one person who has spoken to Google staff on this, but who has to stay anonymous. ŽÅŽ°ne of the reasons theyŽÃŽÓe doing Explorers is to get feedback on these things, as well as the devices. THE DISTRACTION ELEMENT The other big question about Glass is: how will we behave with each other? My own experience with a Glass-like system, of wearable ski goggles, suggests that distraction will happen quite easily. That system, from Recon, has a lens in the top right that shows data such as your speed, altitude, and even ski-resort maps (useful in whiteouts). It was very easy, while standing and talking to someone, to glance up and read something off the screen. Being present and not-present became almost reflexive, and that was with only one week of use. Yet at the same time, the display wasnŽÃŽÕ overwhelming. Concentrating on what was in front of me wasnŽÃŽÕ hard, when required. Carolina Milanesi, smartphones and tablets analyst at the research company Gartner, says: ŽÅŽªnterestingly this [distraction element] is the first thing I thought of not that Glass was giving you something that phones cannot give you, in terms of sharing or accessing content, but that they do it without letting others realise you are doing anything. In other words, with the phone, if I am taking a picture, the person I am focusing on will likely notice me; with Glass they do not. Despite her line of work, Ms. Milanesi is concerned about whether we get too deeply involved with our technology, to the exclusion of the real people around us. She has a different restaurant concern from Mr. YeeŽÃŽÔ. In June 2011, she pointed out how smartphones change us: ŽÅ*ook around a restaurant or coffee bar at how many people, couples even, are sitting across from each other and theyŽÃŽÓe both looking down at their mobiles. Glass might change that for the better though would you appear to be looking at each other, while really intent on your email or a video? Mr. Topolsky, who used Glass for some days, said: ŽÅŽªt brought something new into view (both literally and figuratively) that has tremendous value and potential the more I used Glass the more it made sense to me; the more I wanted it. He loved how text messages or phone calls would just appear as alerts, and he could deal with them without taking his phone out of his pocket to see who was calling. Walking and need directions? TheyŽÃŽÓe in view. ŽÅŽªn the city, Glass makes you feel more powerful, better equipped, and definitely less diverted, he said. But, he added, ŽÅŽªt might not be that great at a dinner party, or on a date, or watching a movie. Mr. Hurst comments, ŽÅŽºour one-on-one conversation with someone wearing Google Glass is likely to be annoying, because youŽÃŽÃl suspect that you donŽÃŽÕ have their undivided attention. And you canŽÃŽÕ comfortably ask them to take off the glasses (especially when, as it inevitably will be, the device is integrated into prescription lenses). Finally and hereŽÃŽÔ where the problems really start you donŽÃŽÕ know if theyŽÃŽÓe taking a video of you. Mr. Stokes points out that weŽÃŽÓe already seeing body language change as smartphones with their glowing screens become more pervasive: the hunched walk that 10 years ago marked out a financial whiz with a BlackBerry is now seen on every pavement. ŽÅŽª think there will be a pushback, Mr. Stokes says. ŽÅŽ®aybe youŽÃŽÃl have to have a lens cover to show youŽÃŽÓe not filming. He points out though that the present model seems to require voice control ŽÅŽ°K, Glass, shoot video and that this might discourage some users in public. ŽÅŽªŽÃŽ×e been watching for people using Siri [AppleŽÃŽÔ voice-driven iPhone control]. I just donŽÃŽÕ see people using it in public places. Maybe itŽÃŽÔ too gadgety. ŽÅŽ±eople will have to work out what the new normal is, says Mr. Stokes. ŽÅŽª do wonder whether speaking and gesturing might be essentially banned in public. ŽÅŽ¢t home my husband already jokes about me checking into [location service] Foursquare from the piece of carpet I am standing on, Ms. Milanesi says. ŽÅŽ©ow much more will we have of this now that it is made so simple for us? And the other side of the coin: how much are we going to share with others, and at what point will we have a backlash? When will it all be too much? ¼« Guardian News Service The Hindu
Crookbond Posted March 9, 2013 Posted March 9, 2013 Seattle Dive Bar bans Google Glass inside its premises https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151453972244277&set=a.246926294276.132600.138639539276&type=1
DomainK Posted March 9, 2013 Posted March 9, 2013 Does it only take voice commands or it also comes with some kind of remote control? One can't issue voice commands all the time.
Old guy Posted March 9, 2013 Posted March 9, 2013 Does it only take voice commands or it also comes with some kind of remote control? One can't issue voice commands all the time. well not only that but voice commands have never been 100 percent accurate for me 1 out of 5 times they dont work for me on my phone :haha: i guess it has to do with indian accent or something also some words are just not there like names of people :dontknow: how will u search about that :hmmm:
DomainK Posted March 9, 2013 Posted March 9, 2013 Seattle dive bar becomes first to ban Google Glass - http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57573387-93/seattle-dive-bar-becomes-first-to-ban-google-glass/ The Google glass gives the user the ability to secretly record video footage. This is scaring some people. I guess it's a matter of time before other organizations and even home owners start banning it.
DomainK Posted March 9, 2013 Posted March 9, 2013 well not only that but voice commands have never been 100 percent accurate for me 1 out of 5 times they dont work for me on my phone :haha: i guess it has to do with indian accent or something also some words are just not there like names of people :dontknow: how will u search about that :hmmm: Does not work well for me either. I hope they give a blue tooth remote control that can be secretly operated from inside a pocket.
anotherhawkeye Posted March 10, 2013 Posted March 10, 2013 I'm interested to find out whether it'll help in navigating while driving. I hate to take my eyes off the road to look at the map in the dash. Something that projects the map into my field of view without obstructing my driving would be pretty neat.
Sidhoni Posted March 11, 2013 Posted March 11, 2013 well not only that but voice commands have never been 100 percent accurate for me 1 out of 5 times they dont work for me on my phone :haha: i guess it has to do with indian accent or something also some words are just not there like names of people :dontknow: how will u search about that :hmmm: This!
Sachin=GOD Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 Developer Warns Of Google Glass Security Risks Following His Jailbreak Exploit If the notion of an intruder hacking into your smartphone or PC seems disturbing, just imagine an even more personal sort of privacy breach–a hacker who gains full access to your sight. That’s the warning voiced Tuesday by Jay Freeman, the iOS and Android developer who last Friday discovered that he could use an Android hacking technique to compromise Google’s Glass headset, gaining complete control of its operating system. While Freeman had initially described his hack–a previously known attack on Android 4.0.4–as a “jailbreak” intended to give users the ability to remove restrictions Google placed on the device, Freeman noted in a blog post describing his Glass crack that it could have more serious repercussions, allowing the installation of surveillance malware on the device. In his blog post, Freeman notes that the “Explorer” version of Glass, which he obtained through a developer program, doesn’t have any sort of PIN code or other authentication. So any time it’s turned on and left unattended an attacker could attach a USB cable to the headset and immediately gain full “root” access to install a surveillance program that could upload a user’s images, video, or audio to a remote server. “Once the attacker has root on your Glass, they have much more power than if they had access to your phone or even your computer: They have control over a camera and a microphone that are attached to your head,” writes Freeman. “A bugged Glass doesn’t just watch your every move: it watches everything you are looking at (intentionally or furtively) and hears everything you do. The only thing it doesn’t know are your thoughts.” Freeman, who created the popular Cydia app store for jailbroken iOS devices, isn’t the first to complain about Glass’s lack of security. The blogger Tim Stevens at Engadget, who has been wearing Google Glass for nearly a week, has also pointed out Glass’s lack of a lockscreen. ”There’s no way to prevent someone from picking up your headset, putting it on, and reading your email,” he notes. “They could also reply, make a call, take a lewd photo and upload it to Google+ … you get the idea.” Freeman goes further, arguing that a hacked headset could compromise more than just those online accounts to which Glass has default access. “It knows all your passwords, for example, as it can watch you type them. It even manages to monitor your usage of otherwise safe, old-fashioned technology: it watches you enter door codes, it takes pictures of your keys, and it records what you write using a pen and paper,” Freeman writes. “Nothing is safe once your Glass has been hacked.” While Android-based devices like Glass aren’t targeted nearly as often as Windows-based PCs, attacks on Google’s mobile operating system are on the rise. The malware family known as BadNews was found earlier this month to be infecting as many as nine million Android devices, though it largely targeted Russian users. And there’s increasing evidence that the Chinese government has launched targeted attacks against Android phones for surveillance. It’s not at all clear, of course, that the kind of attack Freeman describes will work on the final implementation of Glass made available to consumers next year. When I ran Freeman’s attack past Android security researcher Jon Oberheide, he pointed out that Google will likely fix the security bug that Freeman used to hack his Glass device and also institute some sort of authentication in the final product. “Making assumptions about the eventual security model of Glass based on the current limited knowledge put out by Google of app distribution, platform security, screen locks, etc. is purely academic at this point,” he writes to me in an email. Glass is also already protected against the possibility that it’s lost or stolen–a website called “MyGlass” allows users to control what accounts it can access and cut off that access if the device disappears. The attack that Freeman imagines would only work if a hacker were able to get physical access to the device without alerting the user. A Google spokesperson writes to me in an email that the company “recognize the importance of building device-specific protections, and we’re experimenting with solutions as we work to make Glass more broadly available.” At last check, however, Google didn’t seem particularly concerned about Freeman’s security exploit. “Yes, Glass is hackable,” Googler Tim Bray wrote on Twitter in response to the jailbreak. “Duh.” Even if the security vulnerabilities of Glass only exists in the headset’s experimental version and will be fixed in the device before it hits a wider market, Freeman argues Google should have been more careful to safeguard the privacy of its thousands of current users. “It’s just kind of sloppy and negligent for Google to release a device to a bunch of early adopters that is missing a basic security function and even has a known bug on it that was disclosed eight months ago,” Freeman writes to me in a text message. “Like, someone could be inside of [tech pundit and blogger] Robert Scoble’s glass right now.” Considering that Scoble apparently showers with his headset on, that’s a scary notion indeed. http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/04/30/developer-warns-of-google-glass-security-risks-following-his-jailbreak-exploit/?utm_campaign=forbestwittersf&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social
Recommended Posts