Google on Glass Backlash: 'Messy' But Worth It

Re:Google on Glass Backlash: 'Messy' But Worth It by XorNot on Wednesday July 16, 2014 @10:10PM (#8045646)

...uh no? If the camera is physically not pointed at you, it can't record you. It's clear and concise.

EDIT: My exact thought on this subject has been that the camera needs a mechanical shutter. But I'd say thinking of Glass like sunglasses is probably also the way to go - a way to "take it off" without having to take them off (i.e. like when you put your sunglasses on your heard to talk to someone indoors).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google on Glass Backlash: 'Messy' But Worth It by tritium on Wednesday July 16, 2014 @10:21PM (#8045686)

I think the failure of this idea starts with the assumption that it's perfectly reasonable to have a trigger-happy camera constantly at the ready, strapped to your forehead, "just in case" but "trust us because we swear we won't point it at you in your most compromised, yet entertaining moment" only everyone else.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google on Glass Backlash: 'Messy' But Worth It by psbp on Wednesday July 16, 2014 @10:45PM (#8045771)

This sounds exactly like the bygone panic over cameras on mobile phones.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google on Glass Backlash: 'Messy' But Worth It by pavement on Wednesday July 16, 2014 @10:58PM (#8045820)

But, ma'am, I swear these mirrors on my shoes aren't for looking up ladies skirts. I just have them because I'm in a gang and I need to check underneath my car for car bombs every morning.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google on Glass Backlash: 'Messy' But Worth It by andrewflnr on Thursday July 17, 2014 @02:04AM (#8046257)

It can still record sound, which may be just as significant in the right (or wrong) circumstances.

[ Parent | on HN ]