Not long ago I wrote a blog
about Google’s foray into wearable computing, called Google Glass. In the blog,
I was enthusiastic about what I saw as the groundbreaking functionality of this
very close-up, almost intimate technology experience. A computer screen
embedded in your glasses, a microchip in the frame, a forward-facing camera, a
speaker close to the ear, a human language speaking interface and access to the
net built in. What would have seemed like science fiction just a few years ago,
was on the drawing board now and just might be in our hands soon. And the cool factor – well, I found the idea irresistible.
Well, now I’m summoning up
the power to resist. Read on so I can tell you why.
Google Glass has moved from
the prototype to the beta stage. Two thousand developers now have their hands on
a test version of the device, and the glasses will soon be released to 8,000 beta
testers (Google calls them ‘explorers’ and they’ve been picked from an avalanche
of applicants). The glasses are very close to reality now.
In the early hype about the
concept, reaction to Glass (including mine) failed to consider some of the
legal, ethical and social impacts of the these devices. The potential for changing
the social encounter and the way we interact with the world around us – and people
around us – is not trivial. And that goes for the wearer but also for anyone encountering
someone wearing them.
The glasses have a forward
facing camera that can be used to take photos and videos just by looking and
issuing a command. Developers have already demonstrated ways to bypass the
spoken interface and, for example, take photos simply by winking. Posts to
online sources and social media are just as easy. Interact with a Glass wearer
and you could be online in seconds, or even be streamed live. And you won’t
necessarily know it. I am not making this up.
You see the potential for
privacy incursions. You see how this encourages the voyeur within us all, and
also gives us, I think, well-founded concerns about being photographed without
our knowledge. We could all be the victim of paparazzi, and not even know it –
until later.
Another concern is
distraction. You may be looking forward, but you can also be watching a YouTube
video – or a full-length movie for that matter – in a small corner screen of
your glasses. Not so good if you’re walking down a crowded street; even worse
if you’re driving down a crowded highway.
Considerations like these are
now surfacing in a big way and I hope the protests continue and we all become
aware of the issues. The West Virginia legislature has already introduced a
bill to ban Glass while driving; texting is already illegal, but using a ‘hands
free’ device is not, and Glass slips through this loophole. But clearly the
distraction factor is an order of magnitude higher with this device than with a
smartphone. Las Vegas casinos have summarily banned wearing Glass while
gambling – obviously use of recording and video devices are forbidden in the casinos
and the gambling industry is not going to be fooling around with the niceties.
I think many more restrictions and prohibitions are on the horizon.
The potential for Glass to change the social contract in virtually every environment and encounter – from the locker room at the gym, to the classroom, to a business meeting, a date, a sales counter, a party or the street – is tremendous. I’m not sure we’ve even imagined the full impact yet. We may not be able to, until it happens.
The potential for Glass to change the social contract in virtually every environment and encounter – from the locker room at the gym, to the classroom, to a business meeting, a date, a sales counter, a party or the street – is tremendous. I’m not sure we’ve even imagined the full impact yet. We may not be able to, until it happens.
So would you wear a pair of
Google Glasses if offered? In my previous blog I said that I would, but now I’m
leaning the other way. I am also not going to be comfortable interacting with
someone who is, presuming I could spot the difference. How do you feel now?
Cool new gadget of the future, or dangerous example of technology going the
wrong way?
Concerns about Glass were well-covered in a New York Times article called "Google Glass Picks Up Early Signal: Keep Out".
5 comments:
I agree with you that this technology opens up an entirely new can of worms from a privacy and from a distraction perspective. But I also think there is another issue not noted here. It's about simply the idea of wearing glasses at all. Those you do not need glasses will wear sunglasses but only for a specific purpose and for a relatively short time. After all, why would you wear glasses at all if you don't have to.
As for those who do wear glasses, well now you're getting into the whole prescription or not arena. How do you wear these if they're not your prescription? Do you put them over your existing glasses? Well that looks stylish!
My personal opinion is that glasses are the reason movies and TV haven't really converted over to 3D. No one like wearing the glasses!
Technology in this case has gotten way out of hand or perhaps out of sight! It is a distraction, adds to the already social interaction issues we face with all the various social tools available and used. It's a wonder we ever speak to someone face to face and not via email and voice messages.
The invasion of ones privacy is already out of control. This will just add to it.
CJC
My personal opinon is... GET A LIFE and get out from behind the technology looking glass.
I also was very enthusiastic about the Glasses. At first blush they looked like a fantastic way to "see" the world. Well, upon similar reflection to yours, I have to agree that there is more to dislike than like about this technology. I'll pass!
New technology is usually marketed to a youthful demographic. Imagine these glasses in the hands of kids who are already easily distracted and whose ethical boundaries are still evolving. The glasses will also attract some unsavory personality types who will be drawn to the ease of covert use. On the plus side, what a fantastic assistive technology for the physically disabled. While there is surely ample opportunity for abuse of any technology, I agree that this one opens a whole new set of worrisome issues for our society to confront.
Like many other technologies, this will be one that can be used for good and bad purposes. Clearly, driving with these should be banned along with all cellular use for safety reasons. Beyond that, however, it becomes a matter of common courtesy and common sense, which I know are sorely lacking for some people, but it's really not realistic to resist their use. It's going to happen, one way or the other. It probably won't be that long before they make contact lenses with similar capabilities, along with chips embedded in wrist watches, etc. It's unrealistic to think we can legislate against these kinds of advances in technology, other than when they put others at risk.
Post a Comment