There’s a bit of a freak-out about Google Glass at the moment, because one of Glass’ features is a camera attached to what looks like a pair of Star Trek spectacles (more here, with a positive review here). The concern at places like a dive bar in Seattle is that Glass will allow patrons to take video and stills of others in public places which are usually considered semi-private, like a dark bar.
My take on that is that privacy in public places went away as soon as everyone’s cellphone started sporting a camera. Even so, there’s apparently a fairly bright red LED that comes on when Glass is taking video, so it’s more conspicuous than a cell phone in a lot of cases. I’d imagine that if/when Glass becomes popular, someone will come up with some kind of conspicuous clip that will cover the camera portion of Glass in places where cameras are banned. (Of course, if you’re not using Glass as your pair of glasses, you can just take the damn thing off, but as an eyeglass wearer, I’m assuming if I had Glass I’d wear it as my regular glasses.)
As for Glass itself, I’m not willing to plunk down $1,500 for a first-generation device like that (in addition to the $500 it would take to put in prescription lenses), so I’m not in the market for it as an early adopter, but I could see how a next-generation Glass coupled with a reliable high-speed cellular network would be a powerful device. I could also see it becoming the next-generation douchenozzle a.k.a. bluetooth headset, which you used to see lots of people wearing but which tapered off during the last few years, probably in part because texting became a lot more popular, but also because it’s ridiculous and annoying for someone to be talking into what appears to be thin air in public.
(photo via this funny set of photoshops of famous people with Glass)
Tractarian
A private place people go? What kind of dive bar is this?
Here’s an idea: you want to get drunk in private? Do it at home.
The Moar You Know
I’m ruing the day I decided to take IT on as a trade, and really wish I’d decided to become a forest ranger instead.
Simulated reality is just not cutting the mustard. Ready to ditch the computers, the cell phone, all that shit, and just go sit in a shaft of sunlight in the woods for a while.
All my life I’ve been an early adopter and now I want to adopt out.
Tonal Crow
My take is that slavery became permanent when the Constitution enshrined it, so haters should just get over it and move on.
BGinCHI
So, I could sit in a dark bar and without a computer see the B-J page and read all the posts and comments?
It’s just like staying at home then.
James Gary
I could also see it becoming the next-generation douchenozzle a.k.a. bluetooth headset…
Ding ding ding! We have a winner! (or perhaps, loser.)
BGinCHI
In low-tech news, EL James will publish a book that pretty much has no writing in it. You do the work, bitches!
http://lunch.publishersmarketplace.com/2013/03/vintage-will-publish-el-james-inner-goddess-writing-journal-on-may-1/
RSA
At the Google faculty summit last summer, Thad Starner (a lead manager on the Glass project) gave a talk about wearable computing, though not explicitly about Glass. Someone in the audience asked why anyone should care, given that everything he was talking about could be done with a cell phone. Thad said, “Okay, let’s have a contest. We’ll take a picture of each other and see who can do it faster. Done!” as he touched his glasses. It was pretty funny.
Of course the point isn’t just that some things can be done faster; we’ll probably be surprised at how the technology changes what we do, if it catches on.
Gin & Tonic
“Privacy in public places”? WTF?
Luthe
When will these be available in green-square/red-circle style?
BGinCHI
@RSA: So the future is us taking pics of each other?
I thought we were getting jet packs and colonizing outer space. I guess Narcissus is our God after all.
Zifnab
@Luthe: I imagine you’ll have the mod out about 8 seconds before the product drops into public hands.
Still waiting for the bowel disrupter gun, though.
eric
@Gin & Tonic: the real boon will be to political trackers, who need not be so obvious that they are recording anything…good times ahead in the DC bars and steak houses for all
WereBear
@RSA: If you’re wearing your cell phone, you are less likely to misplace it.
In public, anyway.
Tonal Crow
@Gin & Tonic:
Once upon a time, your dinner conversation with your sweetie at the local restaurant would be unlikely to become known to more than a few people. Not so anymore.
Brain Hertz
I think the main reason you see so many fewer Bluetooth headsets these days is the proliferation of built in Bluetooth speakerphones in cars. Talking on the phone while driving was the biggest reason to have one in the first place…
NonyNony
@BGinCHI:
When you realize that augmented reality like Glass is just a baby step towards real virtual reality, it will depress you even more.
BGinCHI
@NonyNony: I’m still getting used to regular reality.
Tonal Crow
@NonyNony: Is “augmented reality” like “enhanced interrogation”?
jibeaux
don’t know about anyone else, but the reason I started texting more and talking on the phone less is that the iPhone + AT&T is an amazing computer and a really shitty phone. I don’t mind looking like I’m talking to myself in public, but I’m not going to yell at myself.
NonyNony
@Tonal Crow:
You must live in a large city. Because honestly, this is not true in any smaller town I’ve lived in. Go out on Friday night and by Sunday everyone in town knows where you were and what you were doing.
That’s the true power of the Internet – reducing the world into a small town when it comes to the spread of gossip.
Mnemosyne
I guess I’m officially an Old now, because I really don’t understand the appeal of Google Glass. And I’m someone who will read a book while walking.
Gin & Tonic
@NonyNony: Between “privacy in public places” and “real virtual reality” I feel like it’s oxymoron day today and I didn’t get the memo.
I’ll go eat lunch. I hear they’re serving jumbo shrimp in the cafeteria today.
The Dangerman
Let’s talk to Mitt Romney about recording “private” activity (the poor Guy/Gal behind that recording best not ever be revealed).
NonyNony
@Mnemosyne:
I can actually see the appeal of using it to replace the screen on any device I might be using. The tiny screens on an iPhone/Android are annoying to me, and I don’t always want to carry around a pad or a laptop. So being able to replace a monitor with the glasses I already wear everywhere is an idea worth thinking about – if you could find some replacement for the keyboard/touchscreen that is.
But – yeah. No. Not beyond the thinking about point.
maya
Couldn’t the red LED light be covered with white bandage tape for that consummate geek-look?
James O’Keefe now has a new disguise.
Yutsano
I’m with Mnem. Still not really getting the point beyond ¿Quien es mas geeko?
Citizen Alan
Can’t wait to hear how an entire generation is going blind early as a result of wearing “perfectly safe” computer screens just two inches from their eyeballs. Also, the comment about bluetooth douchenozzles reminded me of this.
chopper
@Brain Hertz:
also they stopped being a status symbol for a lot of people, who recognized that they generally looked like buffoons wearing them.
cmorenc
What irony that the government’s ability to conduct the sort of ubiquitous surveillance of every citizen’s movements, thoughts, activities, and associations to the extent foretold in Orwell’s “1984” doesn’t even require the sort of totalitarian coercion and brainwashing presumed by Orwell. Instead, citizens gladly and voluntarily adopt (and purchase, at their own expense) the necessary tools enabling government surveillance in the form of their smartphones and computers, especially the smartphones. Not that the government is (yet) attempting to extensively eavesdrop and track more than a small fraction of the population, but it is already (in the supposed interest of sifting for terrorist threats) rummaging through the electronic snippets of a vast portion of us, looking for indications of activity worth zooming in on more extensively.
And yes, that activity can potentially include using your own phone cams or computer webcams, regardless of whether it’s being used on more than a very limited scale and purportedly with a warrant if the intended use is for courtroom evidence. However, even such spying without a warrant could be used to find promising avenues of inquiry for purported “legitimate” discovery of information leading to a valid warrant…the best “confidential informant” being the unwitting suspect his or her self.
BGinCHI
@Citizen Alan: Why does doing what we want to do always have to make us go blind?
What a world….
aimai
I literally just saw my first pair on someone at my local breakfast cafe. His high flying companion asked him point blank if these were google glasses and he said yes, but I couldn’t hear more than a bit of the rest of the conversation. They look beyond dorky–of course the guy also looked quite a bit like a thinner, weedier, John Malkovich so things were kind of going downhill in the looks department to start with. He also got up off the shared bench at the table and nearly fell over, taking the bench with him, but we probably can’t blame the glasses.
Culture of Truth
Will they be available as a contact lens?
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
@Citizen Alan:
Here is a picture of someone wearing the very first prototype of Glass. The original name was Octi-Glass.
PeakVT
Even so, there’s apparently a fairly bright red LED that comes on when Glass is taking video
Likely an easy hack (physically, at least, maybe less so via programming).
Anyway, everyone who really wants to take photos/videos surreptitiously has already figured out how to do so. I think what GoogleGoggles has the potential to do is make taking photos and videos ubiquitous instead of targeted.
Mnemosyne
@Brain Hertz:
I worked in Westwood (CA) when Bluetooth headsets first became popular and it was very disorienting because Westwood also has a lot of crazy homeless veterans who talk to themselves, and it was hard to tell who was a crazy homeless person and who had a Bluetooth headset.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@Mnemosyne: But, will you read a book on a Kindle/Nook/iPod/phone/tablet?
It’s funny, but electronic devices have created two types of readers: Book lovers and Word lovers. My mom and I are Word lovers: She absolutely loves the Kindle (epaper kind) we got her, and I can read a book on my tablet and computer as well as on paper. My wife and son, on the other hand, cannot easily read on any type of device, it has to be paper.
@NonyNony: Depress me. Hah. I have been developing my multiple personalities for this very purpose.
Chris
@cmorenc:
Who needs an all powerful government to strip you of your rights when the free market does just as well? 1984 as a vision of the future is an anachronism in the modern world. Cyberpunk, on the other hand…
The Moar You Know
@cmorenc: This is one of my biggest concerns about the “mobile revolution”, and I lead about the most white-bread vanilla life imaginable. Still, I see no reason for someone other than me to know what I ate for breakfast this morning. I’ve got friends on Facebook who post that kind of info.
Face
I see it more as a hatec#nt device.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@Culture of Truth: Only if you work for Torchwood.
Roger Moore
@Tonal Crow:
It’s like a cross between reality and virtual reality. You still see the real world, but you have a heads-up display that overlays your view of it with annotations. So you can look at a business, and your device will look it up online and display its Yelp rating. Or instead of getting the Map of Stars Houses, you just look at a house in Beverly Hills, and your glasses tell you about all the celebrities who have ever lived there. It’s kind of freaky.
@mistermix:
And I predict a proliferation of fake devices that make it look as if you’ve covered the camera but actually let it keep shooting anyway. Also, too, I predict that lots of people disable the light that lets people know you’re shooting.
Starfish
@Mnemosyne: The concern is that certain people will use these to take pictures of the breasts of every woman that they encounter on a given day and then share them on the internet. That may also be the appeal.
PeakVT
@Starfish: That’s hardly the worst thing certain people might do.
Mnemosyne
@Belafon (formerly anonevent):
I will on my Kindle, but the screen is too small on my iPhone to read while walking. I’ll text on my iPhone while walking, but I try to be careful, because I’m the kind of person who will walk headlong into a bush if I’m not paying attention.
Tonal Crow
@cmorenc: Well said. One might almost wonder whether cellphone technology was seeded by the surveillance agencies with the long-term hope that citizens would use it to spy on themselves.
WereBear
@Belafon (formerly anonevent): I am ambi-dextrous; I like both.
And while I am second to no one in my love of paper (and have the storage unit to prove it) I do not have any more room in my 1 1/2 bedroom apartment. eBooks it is.
Tonal Crow
@Roger Moore: The question was snark, meant to imply a relation between surveillance and security agencies and the companies that make augmented-reality products.
BGinCHI
@Face: Win.
BGinCHI
This kind of technology implies that nearly everyone will be un- or under-employed in the future.
Full Metal Wingnut
A bathroom, definitely. But privacy in a bar, however dark? Eh I don’t think so.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@WereBear: That means you’re a word lover. We have lots of books in our house. It’s just that with the eReaders out, I now tend to prefer adding it to my portable devices rather than having the paper.
Jay in Oregon
@Starfish:
It’s the next iteration of this:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/rat-breeders-meet-the-men-who-spy-on-women-through-their-webcams/
If you want a picture of the future, imagine Google Glass taking upskirt and downblouse pictures forever.
gbear
@Mnemosyne: If I was a crazy homeless person who talked to myself, I would try to find an old non-functional blue tooth to wear so that people would be less afraid of me.
I’ve been on busses where I thought someone was screaming a question at me and I answered before I realized they were talking on their phone to someone who wasn’t there. I really kind of hate cellphones.
Paul in KY
@The Moar You Know: I work in DP & only got a cell phone 3 years ago. I have existed to contadict your proclivities ;-)
NotMax
Now if they could just jigger up a combo of Google Glass and X-ray Specs…
Apparently the Johnson Smith company, (in)famous for the X-ray Specs ads (among others) is still in business. (The “Dixie Boy clock” pictured in one of the ads at that link is particularly repugnant.)
Suffern ACE
@Citizen Alan:
Speak up, sonny. I can’t hear you. My walkman ruined my hearing in my late teens. At least the kiddies will lose their eyesight doing worthwhile things like trying to sneak porn shots of each other. I lost mine over a fondness for the high pitched stylings of the band Asia.
Paul in KY
@BGinCHI: If I went back in time to tell my 1969 self what the future in 2013 would really be like (and leaving politics completely out of it), my kid self would have been so depressed/disappointed.
max
Mr. Gary is correct. Glass == douchenozzle. Call me when they get cornea implants.
@BGinCHI:
…. still better than Windows 8, I expect.
I wonder if they’ll have AN APP FOR THAT?! BAHAHAHA.
max
[‘Honey, why don’t you get out the virtual handcuffs?’]
StringOnAStick
@James Gary: I have a bluetooth, but I only use it at home because I don’t want to be that idiot walking around talking to the world about tonight’s dinner menu.
I will say this though, I can actually hear and understand the conversation through the bluetooth, as opposed to trying to understand everyone’s crappy cell connection without it. Between not wanting to share our calls with everyone around us and the fact that most cell calls sound like crap, I can see why text is becoming the favored thing.
Winston Smith
There’s a reason why Google needed to invent a car that could drive itself before inventing the face-afixed-distracto-tron.
I can’t wait for people to start driving with these.
rb
@Roger Moore: You still see the real world, but you have a heads-up display that overlays your view of it with annotations.
Like the Terminator, basically.
Cops using this to stop and frisk (“I had cause to search him, your honor, as my glasses told me he reads aclu.org”) is gonna be so wonderfully awesome. Don’t gaze me, bro.
Paul in KY
@maya: I bet you could physically disable the light itself (i.e. break bulb or remove it).
Paul in KY
@cmorenc: The Hyperion books sorta focus on that, in a very futuristic/in super technologically advanced society kind of way.
Higgs Boson's Mate
@Mnemosyne:
I suggested, back then, that the state of California give away dummy Bluetooth headsets so that people’s consciences would no longer be troubled by our treatment of the mentally ill homeless.
Trollhattan
Right, there’s no presumption of privacy in public spaces–a significant issue for photographers for more than a century. Commercial use of recognizable images of people, however, is a whole other story. You’d best have a signed photo release.
I’ve become very frustrated at the impossibility of taking a camera into music and even sports venues–as a fan and hobbyist this is HUGELY maddening. The new technology may break down that barrier as well, as the means to eliminate amateur photography become ineffective. This is like Russian dash cams, only attached to ourselves.
NotMax
@Paul in KY
Or just paint over it with nail polish.
dollared
Just an FYI for the BJ crowd: The dive bar in question is the real deal (and I’m from Wisconsin, so I speak Dive). It’s been around for 80 years, in a seedy little corner almost directly below the Space Needle. At the height of the grunge craze, it was where the grunge crowd went to get hammered on gigless nights, which is probably where they developed their militant sense of privacy. One more note: the men’s can has a little frame in front of the urinal, with black glass. The black glass connects to a series of mirrors that run up a three story internal well, which points up the Space Needle. Why and how this was done is a mystery to me.
RSA
@Mnemosyne:
You’re not alone in texting while walking (TWW):
These kinds of issues interest me professionally; human-computer interaction has long left the desktop, and it’s pretty challenging to figure out how to make systems safe, knowing what people tend to do.
Some years ago I was reading the cognitive science literature on distractions while driving, and I mentioned in one of the classes I teach that talking on a cell phone can degrade driving performance significantly, even hands-free. (The issues are more about attention and multitasking than physical actions.) One of my students said, “How about texting while driving?” I just laughed, assuming it was a joke. And later that semester a student came to class with bandages on–he said he’d been texting while bicycle riding and had gone over the handlebars.
So I expect that Glass will inevitably be involved in some serious accidents.
StringOnAStick
How old are the people developing this Glass thing, because as someone who is now dealing with the the need for glasses for every possible distance, there is no way in hell I could read something that close to my eyeballs.
Cassidy
@The Moar You Know: The Dept of Interior and US Forest Service are always looking for Park Rangers. Not all of them are LEO’s.
Ruckus
@NonyNony:
That’s what I want to do, wear glasses once again. Bad enough I need them to read. Spend 30+ years wearing them just so I could find my hands before laser surgery and never want to go back.
Roger Moore
@Mnemosyne:
Given where you live, a bush is the least dangerous thing you might walk into while texting.
burnspbesq
Suck my tiny white dick. I use a Bluetooth headset so that I have my hands free to take notes while talking. If you have an issue with that, it’s your issue. I’m not going to stop using it because of your stupidity.
Roger Moore
@StringOnAStick:
I assume that they have some optics on the thing so that the image appears to be projected at infinity. That’s how heads-up displays work in airplanes and other vehicles.
Ruckus
@Mnemosyne:
There’s a difference?
Amir Khalid
@BGinCHI:
A few thoughts:
1) I wonder if EL James’ publishers plan on seeing this, ahem, book make any bestseller lists. Seeing as they actually announced its publication and everything.
2) This must be the first notebook to have a foreword. What will the foreword be about?
3) Writing tips from the writer of Fifty Shades of Grey? Excerpts from her masterful prose? I can hardly wait.
4) Should I look for this book in the stationery section with the other journals and notebook, or in the New Titles section with the other books that are already filled up with words?
Paul in KY
@NotMax: I’m a dude, so it has to be broken, preferably ;-)
I guess nail polish would theoretically work as well…
Paul in KY
@burnspbesq: Was that a stipulation, counsel?
burnspbesq
@cmorenc:
AFAIK, the Supremes haven’t completely done away with the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine. At least not yet.
minutemaid
Another mindless masturbation piece about a product that hasn’t been released yet about what problems it might create written by people who haven’t used it much less seen it in public.
And mistermix’s take. Too expensive. A product that hasn’t been released yet is too expensive.
The stupid it burns.
burnspbesq
@Paul in KY:
Stipulation of (or to) what exactly?
I’m perfectly willing to stipulate that I don’t give the first flying fuck what mistermuck thinks about technology issues. Beyond that, we’re going to be in a negotiation.
As far as stipulating as to the size and color of organs, no point in denying reality. It ain’t what you got, it’s how you use it.
Paul in KY
@burnspbesq: dick size, silly.
Good point on the using it correctly…
Ruckus
@Paul in KY:
Just spent a year without a cell phone after about a decade with it strapped to my hip like an additional body part.
What a delight.
I have since reactivated it but only a pre-paid. No data, no web, it’s a minimal use telephone only. I likey.
? Martin
Yeah, the underlying tech behind Glass is very cool and very useful, but I think a roving HUD is not going to carry with people.
These things are immensely useful in specific applications – maybe like a surgeon who wants to consult a medical image during an operation but doesn’t want to walk across the room at that precise moment. Or even jobs as simple as being a line cook, or order fulfillment for Amazon, etc. There’s likely a big benefit to an active HUD in a car, but putting it the glasses seems like the wrong fit. I’m not entirely convinced of the smart watch idea either, but it seems a better intermediary. It’s almost as convenient as the glasses, without the always-in-your-face nature. Gives you less information, though.
There are lots of things that hit the market that you look at and say ‘close, but not it’, and Glass falls in that category for me. Very cool, no question, but I think the social negatives kill the product. Maybe in 5 years.
The self-driving cars is a no-brainer, though. That’s revolutionary on a scale that people just don’t get yet. It’s not just the residential car – and it’ll be difficult to resist as the insurance costs will almost certainly get covered by manufacturers to launch this, providing people with a powerful incentive to hand over driving. But it’s package delivery and other such services. Combined with a reliably way to target a mailbox or package locker, and that’s a million postal and package carrier jobs that shift from recurring to fixed costs. I’m not eager to see those jobs go, but they are non-value-add jobs. It’s inevitable that they will be eliminated, and those industries are going to push hard to eliminate them. Amazon’s order fulfillment robots are part of the same trend.
Mnemosyne
@Roger Moore:
Man, we get one bear wandering our streets and we just can’t live it down!
Paul in KY
@Ruckus: I also have a dinosaur flip phone with no internet, no full keypad, etc.
I still don’t like them, but they are a convenient way to stay in touch with friends/paramours (why I finally broke down & got one).
Just hope the damn thing doesn’t give me cancer.
Ruckus
@Paul in KY:
Using it correctly is the entire point of the negotiation.
Paul in KY
@? Martin: Would think they would have to have specific highways for computer driven cars. Hard to see how they would co-exist with people driven cars. Would fry their software if they had to process the potential actions of the idiots on the road.
Paul in KY
@Ruckus: I will stipulate to that!
Yutsano
@minutemaid: Herp de Durf. Keep trying though, you’ll defeat that evil DougJ yet!
Haydnseek
@Tonal Crow: Yes, in much the same way that death might be characterized as “enhanced sleep.”
Cassidy
I think this is kind of neat, but I’m also a big Shadowrun fan.
Higgs Boson's Mate
@Cassidy:
Shadowrun Returns
Ruckus
@Paul in KY:
Cancer, alzheimer, getting hit by a drunk, having another rethug president, these are all things that can kill us(or at least make us wish we were dead, but only one we can really come close to controlling.
scav
@Ruckus: Using it correctly rather than being it in any fashion should ideally enter the negotiations too, especially if medium to long term timeframe is on the table.
Ruckus
@scav:
Are you saying that it is better to own a dick than to be one?
Cassidy
@Higgs Boson’s Mate: I saw some of the playtesting. I think I’ll end up getting it. I’m really hoping it ports to Xbox, though; I don’t buy computer games anymore.
scav
@Ruckus: well, if a dick has to enter the equation at all, it seems a reasonable ordering of priorities. I may be hopeless gauche and out of the swim, admittedly.
? Martin
@Paul in KY:
Hate to break it to you, but there are already computer driven cars on the road now. The first permit was given out over a year ago, and both CA and NV will permit them. TX either has or will soon permit them. There’s already about half a million miles booked on them.
The combination of high-quality digital maps and GPS, plus LIDAR and object detection cameras (much of which was pioneered through DARPA initiatives) means that they work remarkably well around pedestrians, detecting street signs, erratic drivers, and so on.
cmorenc
@burnspbesq:
True, but the kind of “poisoned” use of warrantless surveillance for government bird-dogging I was referring to is of the sort that leaves no traces to undermine the government’s claim that they came by a purportedly legitimate avenue to obtain the necessary evidentiary grounds for a warrant. There’s often enough evidence out there that’s in principle legitimately available from which to build the set of evidentiary links needed as the basis for a search warrant…IF ONLY you know where to look, who to ask, where to start. Or, if you’re going to cheat, what sort of information you need to build a convincing portrayal of the fictitious existence of an alleged confidential informant needed to supply any missing link.
The problem with successful invocation of the “poisonous tree” doctrine is that there have to be detectable signs that the evidentiary chain is indeed constitutionally poisoned. But how do you show that if the government is able to craft a plausible explanation for how they discovered a legitimate path leading to the critical evidence? And you lack any proof that they might instead have employed a poisoned route to discovery of that evidence rather than the claimed legitimate one?
Roger Moore
@Amir Khalid:
They want people who buy the thing to feel good about their writing, so they’ve included some E.L. James to make it look good by comparison.
Ruckus
@scav:
Actually sounds about right to me although it seems that being one doesn’t stop the use of it…
Which seems, very unfortunately, to give credence to the continuation of being one.
Rafer Janders
I don’t know if someone’s mentioned it upthread already, but think about this in locker rooms. As technology advances, in a few years these Google glasses will be indistinguishable from normal glasses. How comfortable will people be undressing and showering in locker rooms knowing that anyone walking by wearing glasses may be doing a live stream to the Internet?
Not to mention that this, combined with facial recognition technology, is ruining orgies and play parties….kind of a bummer when everyone has to wear a mask to ensure that their exploits don’t live forever on the Web….
Arm The Homeless
@Zifnab: I want the temporary gene therapy that allows me to grow feathers. Also, too, where is my damn Transmetrooitan movie!?
Ruckus
@? Martin:
Wonder if google maps/street cameras is a long range project to enable the cars to work reliably? That we get benefits along the way is maybe a side issue?
Is the avoidance technology better than the average person’s? Or the bottom 25%? I’ll bet it is. That alone would be a huge boon to driving.
Tonal Crow
@Rafer Janders: You are a paranoid DFH, plus the cat’s already out of the bag, plus privacy is hugely overrated, plus too also there has never been a guarantee of privacy in locker rooms.
/typical BJ commenter
Tom_23
100 comments in and no one mentioned the borg and the unicomplex? How else are we going to be assimilated into the collective?
Signed Locutus
Ruckus
@Rafer Janders:
Maybe if we as a culture didn’t seem to have puritanical interest in others lives, the cameras wouldn’t be a problem.
danah gaz
@Tractarian: You’ve obviously never visited the 5-point.
Cassidy
@Rafer Janders: personally, I’ll get naked at the drop of a hat anyway. You remember that movie with Terry Bradshaw wher his some moves out finally and he gets naked time. That’s me. Once the kids are gone, I’ll keep a pair of shorts next to the door to not scare the Mormons.
In all seriousness, though, while you’re not wrong, that sounds like an attempt to absolve the participants of being smart about their own security and privacy. If you’re going to go play, make sure your host confiscates cell phones and is saavy enough to protect their participants. And yes, you’re right, they shouldn’t have to do that, but that’s the world we live in.
E
@Martin
Yep. There are so many jobs tied to our cars, and to our tendency to wreck them. Commercial truck drivers and cabbies may be the first to go, but soon everything from body shop employees to personal injury attorneys and insurance adjusters, even highway patrol will get pinched.
Cars will become bigger because they will essentially be limos, and once we get the electric thing figured out there will be fleets of robotic cars shuttling us and our commodities everywhere. Sprawl will get worse. It is going to be a very different world. I think this will be more disruptive than the Internet was.
Arm The Homeless
@Cassidy: I can easily imagine certain spheres of the public domain just placing jammer to prevent any digital signals, or communication device signals from penetrating much like the move towards non smoking bars. Sure there will be people who complain, but there will be a non insignificant portion of the populace who just won’t care that they can’t surf in certain places.
? Martin
@Ruckus:
Unquestionably. And street view is in many ways a live test of the software. Street view captures and recognizes street signs, intersections, and so on. They can remove people and cars via software (which means they can reliably identify people and cars). They’ve captured road rules and speed limits. They’re capturing construction zones and signage and identifying those things. It is the best such database of that information that exists anywhere. When FedEx wants to automate trucks, they’re either going to have to recapture all of that data, or just pay Google (or someone else).
It’s better than the bottom 99%. It has 360 degree LIDAR. It’s not burdened with the limitations of mirrors. It has no blind spots. It calculates every fraction of a second the position, speed, and acceleration of every vehicle around it. It can predict based on acceleration and velocity where each vehicle will go in the next second plus where it will go in the next second. A lot of cars already have technology avoidance. Many high-end cars have cruise control that will also pace the vehicle ahead and stay in the lane. Lots of cars self-park. The bits and pieces of this are pretty mainstream now. They just don’t talk to the GPS (which is also mainstream). It’s all software. The hardware is baked.
It’s good enough to find parking spaces in a lot. The roaming algorithm for finding a space at the mall at Christmas would be hilarious to see implemented en mass. Though, our local malls now all have sensors under the spaces and will tell you how many open spaces there are on each level of the structure. If that data can be beamed to the car and the car beam back what space it intends to take, they’ll never hunt for a space – they’ll know where every open space is, claim one, and go straight to it.
The technology that will be implemented in response to this will be fascinating. We have on-ramp meters here in SoCal to keep the freeways from getting congested. What if the meters and the cars coordinate and self-driving cars automatically move left and stack based on how far they’re going before their exit so there’s never a slowdown in the right hand lanes and no congestion from excessive lane changing? What if traffic lights can be told how many cars are coming from each direction at what distance and speed? When the lights and the cars are talking to each other – do you even need the lights any more? Couldn’t the cars just freely whizz past each other and stop politely when a pedestrian hits the crossing button? Would firemen be able to instruct all cars ahead of them to pull over? Will we even need police to patrol roads? Do we still need bus drivers? Trash collectors? Our garbage trucks are almost fully automated in terms of picking up the can. The driver just positions. Put a reflective bar code on the can and the truck could drive by and do it automatically. When street sweepers come by, it could tell all of the parked cars to move, and then move back. If your car needs service, do you need to go with it? Or could you schedule something with the mechanic and they ‘fetch’ your car while you’re at work, and return it later. Could you get off an airplane and ask your car to meet you at the terminal? Could it drop you off and then drive itself home?
People worry about self-drving and regular cars sharing the road. It won’t last long. The economic incentives to self-driving cars will be so unbelievably massive that it’ll be damn hard to hold onto what we do now.
gogol's wife
Evgeny Morozov is my new hero.
Roger Moore
@? Martin:
Very important additional point: even very good drivers have occasional lapses of attention or judgment. Humans get distracted by conversations with other people in the car. They get pissed off at another driver and do something stupid to retaliate. They get overwhelmed with information and miss important traffic signs. They try to drive when they’re sleepy or otherwise incapable of doing their very best. Maybe a self-driving car isn’t as good as the best humans, but it never has a bad day, and that’s when you’re most likely to get into an accident.
? Martin
@Roger Moore: Indeed. They are never rushed for time. Never not feeling well. Never struggle to see in the dark or when the sun is in their eyes. Never struggle to see through a dirty/rainy/snowy/icy windshield. They should never overdrive for conditions.
There are also road markers that exist now, with a solar panel on top for power that can read whether the road is icy or too wet. The idea was to put LEDs in them to instruct drivers to slow down before they hit those areas, but that can just be beamed into the GPS system and into the cars now. Again, just software.
I don’t say that to trivialize how hard the software is – much of it is insanely hard – rather to say that it’s more of an issue of establishing standards and putting people onto the task rather than some discovery awaiting to be dreamed up.
Paul in KY
@? Martin: Would think that on an Interstate (say Atlanta bypass at 1700 on a Thursday) there might be crazy human stuff go on that would be the equivilent of the cat jumping up & down on your keyboard.
Good on em if they have the technology to point where human craziness can’t blow the processors.
Rafer Janders
@Cassidy:
Well, I’m German, so so will I. However, at present I get naked at the drop of a hat only for those whom I want to see me naked.
I’m not so wild that every time I get naked, I create a forever archivable and searchable identifiable record for my relatives, friends, present and future employers and various state and federal governments and agencies to access.
Will being smart about privacy and security require us to confiscate everyone’s glasses? So gyms will now have to enforce a “no glasses in the locker room” rule?
And no matter how savvy the host, there’s always going to be one jerk who’s bound and determined, to, well, be a jerk and subvert the rules.
Paul in KY
@Rafer Janders: Maybe there might be a way to jam those things?
Paul in KY
@? Martin: Will we be wizzing down the highway at speeds & distances from one another that would have freaked us out if we were doing that (like a NASCAR draft)?
Mnemosyne
@Rafer Janders:
Is it really mean for me to say, welcome to what it’s already like to be a woman who just wants to use the bathroom?
That’s just one of hundreds of stories every year.
Tonal Crow
@Roger Moore:
Er, mission-critical software never has significant bugs?
Joel
Can’t blame the Five Point for getting free press when it’s just out there for the taking…
Amir Khalid
@Roger Moore:
Mark my words: if he hasn’t done it already, Jeremy Clarkson is going to denounce the self-driving car of the future as the destruction of the manly joy of motoring, i.e. burning fossil fuels while going 250mph in million-dollar Italian superdupercars. In-short, nanny-statism at its emasculating, killjoy worst.
Cassidy
@Rafer Janders: Hey if someone wants to pay money to watch me shower in the locker room, I odn’t mind :). Kidding.
All I’m saying is that we’re far beyond the point where one can maintain an expectation of privacy and it sucks, but is what it is. Someone mentioned it earlier that we’ll need to stop being so voyeuristic and puritanical about sex. OTOH, mothing sells better than “amateur” porn, so good luck. People have to be smart. If a couple is playing, per your example, and someone walks in with glasses, then yes, they should probably think about leaving and going elsewhere. It really sucks they can’t enjoy themselves without being paranoid. Maybe they’ll have to change their habits and only invited people they’ve personally vetted. I don’t know.
Personally, and I have zero experience with that kind of activity, if I was going to someone’s house to swing and I didn’t have a warm and fuzzy about the host protecting my privacy, then I’m out. Plain and simple. The hosts owe it to the participants to be vigilant about technology and surreptitious photography/ video. You’re right, there are determined assholes everywhere. We can’t change them and we can’t shoot them.
? Martin
@Paul in KY:
Most likely. Speeds will probably be a function of efficiency, not capability. It’s damn hard to build a fuel efficient car when you can’t regulate how the operator will use it. Mash on the gas, and all of that effort is wasted. But if you know exactly what the acceleration curve and top speed of the vehicle will be, you can design specifically to that – from aero, to HP, to transmission. You can also simplify a number of things. No need for dedicated ABS – just let the computer do that part. No need for dedicated traction control, build that in too.
They’ve had coordinated speed regulation in locomotives for ages, so applying that to cars isn’t technologically difficult – it just requires regulation. Everyone needs to use the same standards and have compatible software. That’s really the big hold up here – we suck at that stuff in this country. Just look at the unbelievable inefficiency in our mobile phone market – poor coverage, poor throughput, high prices. It’s like the engineer’s dilemma: Fast, good, or cheap. Instead of just picking two, we picked zero.
? Martin
@Amir Khalid: Clarkson already has, but Jay Leno made a proper observation: these things will remain, but they’ll remain as enjoyable pastimes rather than daily necessities. We no longer travel by horse, but we have a ton of horse related activities that people participate in. Human driven cars will fall in the same category. Motor racing won’t go away, and in fact it may flourish. And with all of the necessary activities for which cars are designed, it may open up a market for properly fun cars dedicated to that task. Everything will be an Arial Atom.
Calouste
@? Martin:
I will believe that self-driving cars are near when they are doing tests in places that have less than 364 days of sunshine a year.
Ruckus
@? Martin:
Thanks for the enlightenment.
The questions were intended to be some what rhetorical. The acceptance of technology is what will be the big issue. Those of us who like to ride motorcycles will still have issues of course but to me the biggest is will enough people be able to give up the need to be/feel independent? Next would be how many people can afford the technology? I see(and am one!) who drive an old 4 wheeled POS because it is what I can afford. Given the world around me I don’t see that changing during the time I have left to continue driving, although I can see oldsters having a car that can drive far better than them and therefore having a far greater level of independence, which would be a great thing.
E
Ruckus, I don’t think you will be permitted to drive your old beater on the streets in another 10-15 years, because it will be dangerous to yourself and confusing to the mass of robotic cars that will be communicating with each other.
However, you also won’t have to pay for auto insurance, so you will be able to rent a very efficient robot whenever you need to go anywhere.
My big question is whether people will give up owning their own cars in favor of paying google a monthly fee, sort of like your cable bill now. Or if everyone will want his very own customized robotic car, complete with its 96 inch flatscreen and play-station.
At least, that’s how it will be for the few of us who still have jobs.
E
Ksmiami
@jibeaux: totally! I hate talking on my iPhone but this little computer is powerful enough to launch a rocket
Ruckus
@E:
I’m old enough that in 10-15 years I may not be able to drive a car without computer assist/control. I don’t see being able to drive any new technology car, because I don’t see me being able to afford it, short of winning the lottery. If renting an autodrive car for a day or two was within my retirement budget, IOW less than all the gas, registration, insurance costs now, that would be great. Go to the store/mall/friends without worrying about hitting/killing anyone through my, not quite here, yet, oldster incompetence, that sounds nice. And much less restrictive than waiting for the seniors van, which probably doesn’t even go where I want.
Ruckus
@E:
My big question is whether people will give up owning their own cars in favor of paying google a monthly fee, sort of like your cable bill now.
Many will be glad to, many more will fight it for all they are worth. I’ll bet a lot of it depends on if one can afford to own or rent for part time use. Those who only think of a car as transportation and not a lifestyle would probably be more accepting.
? Martin
@Calouste:
Tests? These aren’t tests. There are vehicles licensed to private citizens out here now. And the Bay Area is hardly renowned for their constant sunshine. These are working now in daily rain and fog. The Germans are not far behind on this and have plenty of hours booked in snow. The technology for this is being driven as much on off-road applications as on-road, so perfect conditions are far from necessary.
@Ruckus:
Acceptance will be challenging, but cost should not. The technical costs are held back now by economies of scale. They need volume, so once that comes, it comes. But there are significant potential cost savings in this. You need not be insured, for instance, with the automakers covering the liability of accidents initially – and the need for it simply disappearing later (or at least the cost being a function of how hands-off you are willing to be – let the car do it all, and no or little cost). With cars that obey traffic rules, license and taxes will likely be reduced as well. I can imagine that congestion lanes will be turned over to vehicles that are able to convoy even with single passengers to encourage the practice.
I think the economics will turn quickly in favor of these vehicles, to the point that they will in short time wind up being no more expensive than the cars we buy now, mainly because the computer will close up the design envelope considerably (who gives a shit about horsepower and acceleration if you never use it) allowing for cheaper production (offsetting the cost of the computer and sensors) and because the recurring costs of the vehicle will prove to be particularly appealing. It won’t justify replacing a car early, but just as a lot of people moved into a hybrid in their upcoming replacement cycle, I can see these going the same way – but even faster as there will be more economic incentive for it.
Ruckus
@? Martin:
I agree in principal, but…
Where I live, SF valley, southern CA, the average economic level is pretty far down the scale. A very large number of people around here can’t afford even a new small econobox, they are driving 10-15 year old cars, like I am. Until that changes it will take decades for the new technology to reach any kind of mass. Hell we can’t even maintain our roads, how do you expect to pay for the new technology? And who is going to push it? It needs a wide spread acceptance to make much of a difference, I don’t see that happening any time soon. Wish and hope I’m wrong but betting against stasis in large groups of people has mostly been a losing bet.
bago
@dollared: Yeah. I’m a bit of a regular to the 5 point as well. Given that the 6-9 happy hour is when I tend to show, give a shout out to Kat and her brother.
mclaren
This is unbelievably retarded, as we’d expect from the United Snakes of Amnesia, since anyone can covertly record anyone and anything using a smartphone.
If you don’t believe me, take a look at the video that ended Romney’s presidential campaign. Waiter. Smartphone. End of Romney.
Eric U.
@Amir Khalid: Jeremy Clarkson would probably arrange to have the thing crash itself by rigging something. Like they did with the Tesla. I really don’t like the idea of self-driving cars. Infrastructure for buses/light rail/rail are what we should be spending our money on now.
Barry
Mr. “Mix”:
Why do you consider the 5-Point to be a dive bar?
rollSound
Since “what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas”, I assume these things will be confiscated at McCarran airport.
? Martin
@Eric U.:
The cars will prove cheaper. The problem with rail is and has always been the last mile problem. You need multiple layers of mass transit for it to work with any kind of urban sprawl. This isn’t NYC or Chicago of 1900 any more.
We have the road infrastructure now and it does the last mile. It’s inefficient because we put meatsacks in charge of it, and in charge of the purchase for what runs on it. With self-driving cars, you can start to change that. You can go to self-driving on-demand buses. Where there’s more demand, more get deployed, and they can go where the people need to be.
We got relatively close with doing that with air charters. Doing it with small buses/taxis might be the better route. They can still be constructed around clean technology, and such an endeavor can even rely on opportunity charging.
It’s easy to predict these things won’t come to pass because of political incompetence, but the technology and services underlying them are coming to fruition a lot more quickly than people realize. Uber has already backed somewhat into this space. As has ZipCar.
Jay in Oregon
@Paul in KY:
There was an article somwhere about clothing that was studded with infrared LEDs to disrupt being recorded by CCTV.
There’s this, too: http://boingboing.net/2008/02/20/infrared-leds-make-y.html
dollared
@bago: Sadly, haven’t been there in five years, since the second monkey girl arrived and my carousing visa was suspended for ten years. But ’tis a fine place, and I don’t mind at all that they are working to maintain its peculiar charms.
See you at happy hour one of these days – I hope.
Paul in KY
@E: I think that is more like 40 – 50 years away, IMO.