Sight from Sight Systems on Vimeo.
If you want to understand why people are both excited by, and fear, Google Glass, this short movie will give you an idea. I don’t know about the rest of you, but I already suffer from a terrible case of NADD (Nerd Attention Deficit Disorder) so as far as I’m concerned, this is the next step and I’m looking forward to it. Here’s an open thread.
Ridnik Chrome
One of the featured stories on Yahoo News right now is “Has Obama Hurt Race Relations?”. And the top story is an exclusive interview with Dick Cheney. Ten AM and already I’m in a bad mood…
Ridnik Chrome
@Ridnik Chrome: And that’s without even reading the comments…
PurpleGirl
@Ridnik Chrome: You know you shouldn’t read Yahoo comments… a bunch of idiots spewing junk and no real engagement between commenters, no dialogue.
Mark S.
Here’s some good news for all you Eeyores:
Comrade Mary
Cool, but I think I’d avoid any French McDonalds while wearing those.
different-church-lady
Mark my words: pedestrian fatality rates are about to skyrocket.
Maude
@Ridnik Chrome:
Cheney isn’t important and shouldn’t be a headline news story. Who cares what he says?
different-church-lady
Mark my words: pedestrian fatality rates are about to skyrocket.
Judas Escargot, Acerbic Prophet of the Mighty Potato God
Leave it to Google to figure out how to monetize your retinas.
maya
@Ridnik Chrome:
Cheney and Obama are related, you know. Lynne Cheney figured out that they were eighth cousins. So he’s obviously the go-to guy on this shit.
Edit: Even if they are two different stories.
Villago Delenda Est
@different-church-lady:
Not sure, but it seems that at least in Oregon, it would be unlawful to wear these things and drive at the same time, as it’s explicitly forbidden for a driver to be able to watch a TV screen while driving.
cathyx
This is a scary concept. I hope we don’t evolve to this.
For the trekies out there, this reminds me a little bit about the episode on TNG when Ryker brings on board a mind directing game similar to the one that this video starts with and its purpose is to get the user addicted and therefore under the maker’s control, for the purpose of taking over the ship. Only Wesley Crusher didn’t play it and then was able to defeat it.
cathyx
@Villago Delenda Est: Yeah, and it’s illegal to talk on cellphones while driving too but I see people doing it all the time.
Jay in Oregon
@cathyx:
That episode is quasi-memorable because the female ensign that Wesley has a thing for is played by Ashley Judd.
burnspbesq
Andrew is playing with some really creepy stuff this morning. Grab a bottle of brain bleach befor clicking the link.
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/07/framing-ideology.html
Cassidy
@cathyx: Ewwww….you got Trekkie all over the thread! :D
samson141
This sucks. Rose colored glasses that triple your insincerity and divorce you from the real.
Villago Delenda Est
@burnspbesq:
From the link:
These groups do not distinguish between religion and politics the way the authors of the Constitution itself did.
As far as I’m concerned, these people are the domestic enemies of the Constitution I swore an oath to defend.
Cassidy
@Villago Delenda Est:
I would drink heartliy in agreement if I wasn’t at work.
Xecky Gilchrist
Lawnmower Man did it better.
Ridnik Chrome
@Maude: Cheney is a war criminal, and if there was any justice in the world the only interviews he’d be giving would be from a prison cell.
And the idea that Obama is the one hurting race relations in this country is just…well, words fail me.
Jay in Oregon
@Ridnik Chrome:
I suspect that the “damage” he’s done to race relations has to do with him not “knowing his place,” ifyaknowwhatimean…
Cacti
@Ridnik Chrome:
Who better to weigh in on race relations than a white guy, from a state that’s 96% white?
Enhanced Voting Techniques
@Villago Delenda Est:
McNaughton been confronted by him using Patrick Henry in absurd because Henry was an outright atheist. McNaughton just hand waves it off by say he just likes Henry or in Henry’s hearts of hearts Henry was a TRUE beliver.
At someone point people should just start calling people like McNaughton for that they are; assholes
West of the Rockies (formerly Frank W.)
I’m throwing in with Samson141 @17… This technology concerns me. Part of what makes us human (I’m about to go all Captain Kirk-ish perhaps) is that we have to learn to face our fears on our own, not with the help of technology-ex-machina there to walk us through it all.
If we really need a diagram to show us how to cut a cucumber and then need to receive constant feedback and praise for our efforts, will we be ready for a challenge for which such technology can’t help us?
I know, I know… it looks fun and cool and all, and I’m probably a Luddite, but there ya go.
jayjaybear
@Cacti:
Actually, it’s 96% bison. 3% are very wealthy skiers.And 1% are just plain (white) folks.
RareSanity
@cathyx:
I wouldn’t worry about it too much, for the same reason the tinfoil hat wearers shouldn’t worry too much…
There are light years of difference between the technology to project an image onto something (eye glass in this case), and the technology that would be needed to take programmatic control of a human mind.
We are probably, at the very least, decades away from any technology that would allow the “contact lens” version of Google Glass. The technology that has made Google Glass possible, is merely the advances in the reduction in the size of pixels…and the ability to fit more and more of them, in smaller and smaller areas.
Not only that, there were several liberties that were taken in the movie, and it was extremely one-sided. Which is perfectly understandable when the credits started to roll, and the crew was all men.
The most glaring “hole” being that there did not exist a Wingman Detection app for the woman. It would analyze the man’s “eye screens” hundreds of times per second, and detect when screens from a dating app are being displayed.
For a single woman, that app would be as much a “must have”, as Angry Birds was when it first came out.
Technology will always progress in a predictable manner, and people adjust their behaviors to compensate for it.
For example, people were more than a bit put off, when in the late 80s, it became possible to know who was calling you before you answered the phone. However, the only people that experienced any real adverse affect of caller ID, were those people you didn’t want to talk to anyway…along with telemarketers and bill collectors.
However, it also enabled boyfriends/girlfriends/husbands/wives the world over, to know when their partner was getting calls from a “secret admirer”. The telemarketers, bill collectors, and cheaters just adjusted their behavior to account for the new technology.
This same cycle has been repeated with cell phones, email, text messages, social network websites, etc. When “disruptive” types of technology are first introduced, it is only a matter of time before there is better understanding of the technology, and then methods and behaviors develop to counter it.
Spaghetti Lee
Looks wretched. You couldn’t force me into one of those things.
West of the Rockies (formerly Frank W.)
You make some excellent points, RareSanity. I feel a little better for having read your observations.
different-church-lady
@RareSanity:
And there’s your mistake: you don’t need technology to take over a human mind. You only need psychology.
Riilism
From the beginning of the video, it appears that these extended wear contacts have an unfortunate side effect – glowing gaseous emanations from the posterior. I assume he took some GASx before his date….
RareSanity
@different-church-lady:
Well psychology, and manipulative uses thereof, have been a part of human life…since humans have had life.
Technology is only a tool, just like the first time prehistoric man took hold of an otherwise inanimate object, and turned it into a weapon. Then used that weapon to force others to do things against their will.
The tools have gotten more advanced over the years. But unfortunately, man’s need to manipulate still exists in it’s primitive form.
Xecky Gilchrist
@RareSanity: There are light years of difference between the technology to project an image onto something (eye glass in this case), and the technology that would be needed to take programmatic control of a human mind.
Exactly. This reminds me of a Piers Anthony short story from the 1960s that featured an interactive form of television, letting viewers vote on things. It was used for a TV show where viewers would vote, in the end, on whether contestants should be tortured to death and it was all excused because the victims would then be brought back to life so no real murder happened.
The intro was, of course, some ooooo-scary boogaing about how an interactive TV system was being prototyped in England at the time of the intro’s writing (early 70s or so.) So yeah, I guess that’s pretty terrifying because for the story to come true all we have to do IS CURE DEATH.
I’m not much worried about this little vid either.
RareSanity
@West of the Rockies (formerly Frank W.):
Kind words..thank you.
I’m one of the small subset of “techies” (engineer by trade) that actually enjoys making technology less intimidating to “non-techies”. I don’t like the stance that having knowledge of technology, should allow someone to feel some sort of intellectual superiority to others.
Just because someone’s mind has aptitudes for subjects different than your own, does not mean that, in any way, either one of those minds is somehow “better” than the other.
You just have to figure out how to express your expertise, in a language that people not well versed in that language can understand, and not be condescending about it.
Original Lee
I just got back from a trip visiting wingnut relatives in a red state. We spent a lot of time sitting in front of the TV (a normal activity for the older relatives) and talking around it. Usually the TV was on mute, but if something looked interesting or if the conversation lagged, the sound was turned on for a while. There was one Rmoney anti-Obama ad that used a clip of Obama speaking that I think was altered to make it look as if he were a bobblehead. I’m pretty sure Obama does not move his head that much when he’s speaking. Anyway, every other commercial was a Rmoney commercial, and the fam paid about as much attention to them as they did to regular commercials – wallpaper.
The whole weekend, I only saw one Obama ad. And because of the novelty, I think, everybody stopped what they were doing and watched it. No commentary (even snorts or head-shakes), just silent attention and then going back to the matter at hand.
So now I’m wondering if Rmoney’s plan is to treat votes like toothpaste. Is there marketing research that shows voters will go with whoever has the most ads?
Wouldn’t that make a great little video for YouTube, though? “Romney: Treating Your Votes Like Toothpaste”.
burnspbesq
Another diving medal for the USA.
Congrats to Nick McCrory and David Boudia for winning the bronze in syncro 10-meter platform.
Duke now has more medals than most countries. And, more importantly, more than North Carolina.
West of the Rockies (formerly Frank W.)
Hey, RareSanity @36… I sure miss Carl Sagan, who could make some pretty heady stuff very accessible. Would he had more scientists who could express some complex (and sometimes dire) issues with ease — would it make some of the global-warming naysayers pay attention?
Original Lee @35… I hope that saturating the airwaves with pro-Romney bullshit does not make the public vote for him. So far, his Mitt-mentum seems pretty much stuck in the mud, and with the general election being not too far away, maybe he’ll stay there.
I think Obama has one of those voices that make people listen. I could listen to Jeremy Irons, Audrey Hepburn, Alan Rickman, Morgan Freeman, et al, reading the yellow pages.
Ruckus
And mittens has a voice/delivery that borders on fingernails on a blackboard. Or maybe it’s the content
I’m going with C, both of the above