Google Considers Adding Cameras To Contact Lenses

[FalloutJack]

New age voyeurism. Just what we need.

*Sarcasm chip overloads*

You people at Google need to get a life.

 

[SilverStuddedSquirre]

That's the point at which I stop leaving the house.

I've had quite enough of this surveillance society crap, thanks. If it's not my government, it's random creeps on the street.

I can never understand this mentality.

So, you don't go outside because you don't want people to see you? I mean, every time someone looks at you they're recording your face in their memory and cross-referencing it with other times they may have seen you.

Sure, 99% of the time they immediately forget you, but the same thing will be true of any incidental video recordings of you that someone might get while using their contact lens camera.

The difference is you can't upload your memories to the internet for the whole world to see. Ya, sure, there's always word of mouth, but that has a more limited range and isn't considered very reliable.

Frankly my main question when it comes to these things is why? Outside of augmented reality games, which are kinda lame and gimmicky if you ask me, I can't really see the value of having a screen overlaying your vision. Your eyes are really only capable of focusing on one thing at a time, so even when using google glass/lenses you're still not paying attention to what's in front of you, you might as well just be looking at an actual screen. It just seems to me like a solution looking for a problem.

And you thought TEXTING and driving was bad....

 

[Agayek]

The difference is you can't upload your memories to the internet for the whole world to see. Ya, sure, there's always word of mouth, but that has a more limited range and isn't considered very reliable.

I have a better question: Why do you care if the whole world can check and see you were on a specific street at a specific time or whatever else?

I mean, I get the idea of being concerned over government spying and abuse of information and all that kind of thing, that much I understand, but what I don't is why it's a problem for the world to know you were in a public space at a certain time. It's a public space, by definition, there's no privacy on the streets. You're there and anyone who can be bothered to look can find out, with or without these cameras. Especially since everything these cameras do can be done with a cell phone. Why is it suddenly a concern now?

I've never understood the logic about Google Glass, or this thing, being some kind of massive privacy violation when it comes to complete strangers. You're out in a public space, participating in public activities. If not, said complete stranger wouldn't be able to see you do it. Therefore, it's a public act and you'll just have to live with being seen on Youtube or whatever. If it's some kind of embarrassing reveal, then maybe you shouldn't have done it in public in the first place.

 

[FPLOON]

Oh cool! Now shaky cam footage can FINALLY be so authentic and realistic to how a normal person would react to a scary situation!!

But seriously, now it's just sounding like another idea that has more "negatives" than "positives"...

 

[Elvaril]

As a person who does a lot of film background work, I am not excited about this. We already have enough trouble with people sneaking cell phones onto set to take pictures and this will make the problem so much worse.

 

[Strazdas]

The difference is you can't upload your memories to the internet for the whole world to see. Ya, sure, there's always word of mouth, but that has a more limited range and isn't considered very reliable.

Frankly my main question when it comes to these things is why? Outside of augmented reality games, which are kinda lame and gimmicky if you ask me, I can't really see the value of having a screen overlaying your vision. Your eyes are really only capable of focusing on one thing at a time, so even when using google glass/lenses you're still not paying attention to what's in front of you, you might as well just be looking at an actual screen. It just seems to me like a solution looking for a problem.

Its only a matter of time till we CAN upload our memories. And yes, memory isnt always reliable, this is why we invented a way to remember better - videocameras. now i can remmeber what i see without my mind distorting it, hurray? but no, apperently some people are afriad of other people looking at them.

As far as overlay, the way google glass did it was awful, but if you could have a semi-transparent desktop in front of you that you could control with your mind, thats a godsend. it would definatelly make me like running more, now i could run and watch a movie! not to mention the "i need to find my keys, oh here they are, highlighted for me" when your hurrying in the morning, ect.
Humans can only focus on only one thing at same time. however humans can switch that focus extremely fast. this is why multitasking on large monitors WORK. i easily manage to both play a game and watch a movie, because i can see both at same time. and yeah, i would love to be able to see that movie whiel standing in a crowded bus where i cant bring my monitor and make it levitate in front of me.

I'd give it about a week before someone uses this illegally. And that's being generous.

Porn companies would probably appreciate it though.

just like they use smartphone cameras illegaly, lets ban smartphones!

They'd have to seriously compensate for the amount of movement your eye does, even when you're staring at something stationary, or focusing on some specific, unmoving thing, your eye makes tons of rapid movements.

well, we got cameras that stabilize hand shaking, maybe they coudl do the same for looking at static objects, ignore the small rapid eye movement.

My issue, as Olas pointed out, is that the described technology is not equivalent to being seen by a human eye or recalled by human memory. Google Glass and this proposal are recording devices that allow perfectly preserved images of you to be taken without your consent, and shared without your consent.

This is an extreme example, but hopefully it will help you understand my point:

The other day I was walking into work when a well-endowed woman ran out. Considerable bounce was involved. I looked away because I try to be polite. But someone who was wearing these contact lenses could have covertly recorded this and uploaded it to a porn site somewhere.

That's what I'm concerned about. Casual, constant, permanent violations of privacy. Going out the front door should not be construed as implicit permission for random strangers to record every action you take and share it with the world.

Yes, these recordings are better than my memory. which is why i will prefer them to my memory. i want to remmeber "perfectly preserved images". however my brain seems to be incapable of doing that, so i turn to videocameras.

Oh, and for your example, the answer is "so what?". nobody cares to see some random video with smartphone of somone walking (there are plenty on porn sites already). noone will care to see this either. Btw, filming in public is not a violation of privacy. only filming in your home is. and your situation does not point that out.

going out the door is going into public space. in public space, others can see and remmeber you. cameras is a way of remmebering without failure of human memory. if you cant handle that, dont go out the door.

I mean, I get the idea of being concerned over government spying and abuse of information and all that kind of thing, that much I understand, but what I don't is why it's a problem for the world to know you were in a public space at a certain time. It's a public space, by definition, there's no privacy on the streets. You're there and anyone who can be bothered to look can find out, with or without these cameras. Especially since everything these cameras do can be done with a cell phone. Why is it suddenly a concern now?

the logic is probably similar to those cosplayers at PAX that complain about being taken photos of. they post for somone to take a photo, but another person also takes the chacne to take a photo. then the cosplayer goes into a rage that someone took a photo of her at a convention without her explicit permission. basically a bad case of grandeur.

As a person who does a lot of film background work, I am not excited about this. We already have enough trouble with people sneaking cell phones onto set to take pictures and this will make the problem so much worse.

see, now this is an actual true argument against it. i think its the first in this thread. you will probably have to do same things as CIA does, they banned flash drives and actually search the workers so they wouldnt be carrying one, youll have to look at the people eyes i guess. but yes paparazi becoming even more agressive can be a thing with this.