News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by excalibur on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @02:43PM (#15403148)
> It also doesn’t use any kind of network connection, so it’s not broadcasting the stuff it captures anywhere.

> Plus, it’ll alert you when its lens is blocked via intelligent notifications to your phone.

One of these statements is inaccurate.

(Comment edited to be more easily demonstrable.)

Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by joshuamorton on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @02:47PM (#15403201)
>It also doesn’t use any kind of network connection,

Bluetooth is not normally considered a network connection.

(I work at Google, but have nothing to do with Clips)

Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by excalibur on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @03:02PM (#15403390)
If you stick to that (misleading) definition, then even if the part about not broadcasting the stuff it captures is accurate, the phrase before the "so" does not imply the phrase that comes after, meaning the sentence still is not factual.
Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by joshuamorton on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @03:07PM (#15403440)
How is that definition misleading?

>the phrase before the "so" does not imply the phrase that comes after, meaning the sentence still is not factual.

This seems highly pedantic, unnecessarily so in fact. Sure if you take "so" to mean "implies" then your statement is reasonable, but "so" doesn't solely mean "implies".

The point seems to be that you're in control of the photos, and they aren't being sent off to a secret google dark site to mine for data about your toddler. Do you disagree with that, or just have further grammatical quibbles?

Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by excalibur on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @03:13PM (#15403509)
I'm not saying Google IS collecting everything the camera sees, I'm saying they COULD. This statement is meant to give the reader a sense that the device is safe from privacy concerns because it physically can't be accessed remotely, which is not accurate.
Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by joshuamorton on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @03:18PM (#15403579)
Can they? Bluetooth video isn't a thing (no really, it's not supported by the spec, I just looked). Whereas sending a boolean "my screen is blocked" is.

Edit: apparently it is a thing but not really, like very low bandwidth.

Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by dwighttk on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @03:25PM (#15403652)
I can see video from my phone’s camera on my watch via Bluetooth.
Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by maxerickson on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @03:25PM (#15403651)
Say someone compromised a clip and a nearby cell phone.

Can we be sure that the compromised clip isn't uploading images to the phone? Not the little video clips supported by the standard device, images created by additional software.

Of course this is pedantic, but is also a useful way of analyzing what internet of shit products might end up doing (that is, reasoning about the capabilities in addition to the advertised features).

Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by jszymborski on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @03:24PM (#15403646)
This Clip networks with your phone which presumably sends that to Google servers for AI purposes which also presumably means for data storage so that better models can be trained.

Listen, this statement clearly is made to address privacy concerns, and it does so in an irresponsibly misleading way.

Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by s17n on Thursday October 05, 2017 @04:32PM (#15412367)
They explicitly said that it doesn't sent the images to Google servers, AI is done locally on the phone.
Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by bentruyman on Thursday October 05, 2017 @12:10PM (#15410296)
You've made a lot of assumptions and came to a conclusion based on it. Does it send that data to Google for processing? Or does it happen locally on device. That's a big difference.
Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by vim_wannabe on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @03:20PM (#15403593)
My Apple Watch doesn't have a network connection because it communicates via Bluetooth and iPhone
Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by e12e on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @05:47PM (#15405003)
> The camera has a 130-degree field of view, Gorilla Glass 3 for durability, and has USB C, Wi-Fi Direct and Bluetooth LE for connectivity.
Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by mgraczyk on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @02:46PM (#15403195)
It's possible that by 'any kind of network connection' they meant cell and wifi, excluding Bluetooth or wifi directly to you phone.
Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by ehsankia on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @03:47PM (#15403869)
Honestly, it probably connects to wifi too. What they meant is that all the AI is done on the device and the photos themselves aren't sent out to Google (until you specifically tell it to from the app). Note that to view the photos, you have to use the app anyway, so it clearly can communicate with your phone and send photos.

The point he was trying to make is that the photo selection is done on the device and not by Google servers. Obviously the device has network connection, it just doesn't use it for that specific usecase which is analyzing images, but it can use it for other stuff.

Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by snarf21 on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @02:48PM (#15403213)
Well, it could be bluetooth and they might claim that that is not network in the sense of WiFi or a cell chip.
Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by cyclonetiger on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @02:45PM (#15403184)
It transfers files to your phone via Wifi. So technically it does have connection to the outside world.
Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by 1001101 on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @04:12PM (#15404131)
Personal Area Network != Network ???
Re:Google Clips is a new $249 wearable camera by BHSPitMonkey on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @04:20PM (#15404211)
That's not what is used here. In any case, the device itself does not send what it captures to any remote server. Its recordings are accessed locally and copied to your phone selectively when you decide to, and -then- the recording would only be uploaded/backed up if your phone is configured to do so (just like using the Camera app on the phone itself).