but surely no one will ever do anything nefarious with that information. You can trust Google. They say they're not evil.

It's not what we fear that'll enslave us but what we want, we are enslaved by our desires (many of which artificially created)

Google Glass was just the next inevitable technological step to an always connected and surveyed society.

Seems like evolution in technology to me.

escalation even. will people carry mini EMPs instead of pepper spray when they are getting g-ogled?

I would love to say that.

The right frequency, the right wattage. Sure you could fry these things.

At least it's a camera you control. Walk through any urban area and you're on several cameras already.

good point.

I am disturbed by Google Glass for sure. Even without facial recognition the idea that it would be socially acceptable to wear a video camera that can record individuals stealthily is enough to be concerned.

The same can be said for smart phones and Facebook. A smart phone can be compromised in a way that it can be activated to record audio, listen in real time and/or track an individual with GPS. I don't think anyone who carries a smart phone or posts their information on Facebook (even with small circles of close friends and even with privacy) is at more of a risk than they already are. The only major difference with Google Glass is the ease of recording steathily in public.

I don' t use Facebook, I got ducktap on every fuckin camera hole on every device I own, the apps on my phone are limited and I don 't use it for any other Internet purposes other than reddit sometimes. When I take pictures I have professional camera, I do everything on the internet on my pc computer with security and anonymity in mind. i try to avoid google at all costs.All those fuckin advances in technology are designed for the idiots such as banking from their apps and and wearing google glasses to destroy any personal privacy they have left. In a way I cringe because there are those who will do this to themselves.

A smart phone can be compromised in a way that it can be activated to record audio, listen in real time and/or track an individual with GPS

It comes already compromised. All you need to do is look. Heard of CarrierIQ?

This is why I don't have a Facebook and use fake names hahaha seriously disabling your GPS on your phone is easy, idk about the cameras sadly

That's the thing for me, you can turn the GPS off, use facebook , and do all lot of things with technology, but I won't do it.All of it has to do with how information is being used by these corporations. it has little do with the devices themselves. I am sure that other glasses camera exist for those requiring it for hands free filming.

What's next? Identifying people by being in proximity of their cell phones? Face + phone id = positive match.

Look up cellphone tower dumps. Already happening buddy. Just without the facial recognition.

You think you are disturbed now wait till a microchip costs less than one cent to produce, and every item you use or interact with will be digitized.

It's called RFID and it's already everywhere. You're sitting within range of at least a half dozen of them right now.

I implanted an RFID in my penis so that my GF knows where it is at all times. Seriously get over RFID people the range is stupidly small. RFID is used for marketing not government tracking. The government has much better ways to watch you. Anyone crying over RFID has absolutely no clue what tech is out there.

Now if they force you to put it in a drivers license and start putting up receivers at every intersection, then Id worry. Its not gonna happen it would cost far too much. Facial recognition technology is so much cheaper. Or what about body heat recognition tech?

Like I said you should update your opinion on RFID because its old and its not what they are using.

No one's 'crying' about RFID. I simply said the tech already exists.

soon this will happen

How is it a breach of privacy for the owner? The owner buys one, sets the controls, and chooses to wear it. That's like saying it's a breach of privacy for me to voluntarily wear a name tag.

Do you even understand what this product does? It's basically a digital camera and cell phone that you wear. Big fucking deal. It doesn't breach any privacy any more than any other camera a billion people carry with them.

I think the difference you are missing is that the camera is looking at whatever the wearer is looking at 100% of the time; as opposed to seeing inside a pocket most of the time.

Is the technology itself evil? Of course not, that would be silly.

Can this be misused? Horribly.

[deleted]

I think the difference you are missing is that the camera is looking at whatever the wearer is looking at 100% of the time; as opposed to seeing inside a pocket most of the time

Except when you're not taking pictures with it, which is the same as when you're not taking pictures with any other phone/cam combination.

Perhaps you have not learned very much about project Glass

It's a camera on your head which is ran by google. Google's CEO Erick Schmidt has no regard for privacy, "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." Let alone he went to the 2011 Bilderberg meeting and was rubbing elbows with the director of the NSA & the head of United States Cyber Command:

Enjoy a free internet while you can

Speaking of personality disorders – when Peter Mandelson, who pushed through the digital economy bill, sits down with Keith Alexander – the director of the NSA and head of United States Cyber Command to discuss "Social Networks: Connectivity and Security Issues" you can be pretty sure they aren't hammering out how best to preserve the freedom of the internet.

Add a liberal sprinkling of cyber power in the form of Mark Hughes (Facebook), Eric Schmidt (Google) and Craig Mundie (Microsoft) and you have the perfect formula for a lock-down. Let's hope Neelie Kroes, the European commissioner for digital agenda, got to push her "No Disconnect Strategy". I'd pay good money to have heard the head of the NSA's views on that one.

Source

the difference this is a camera connected to the Internet run by a corporation, with a Gps.In no time there will be ads and all kinds of shit. also, the right of ownership is changing as well, Microsoft is the leader in this, will you have a license to use or ownership?

the difference this is a camera connected to the Internet run by a corporation, with a Gps

The camera isn't on 24/7. Again, it's no different than any other camera except that it's worn on your face.

In no time there will be ads and all kinds of shit.

What does this have to do with privacy? People will reject it if there are too many ads.

also, the right of ownership is changing as well, Microsoft is the leader in this, will you have a license to use or ownership?

Again, nothing to do with privacy. If the terms of ownership are unacceptable, consumers will not buy it.

the difference this is a camera connected to the Internet run by a corporation, with a Gps.

So it's the same as a modern smart phone?

Brain cancer. Everyone will end up with brain cancer.

Someone needs to perfect this technology to hide from facial recognition cameras.

to be fair, when you are out in public you have no expectation of privacy. however, you can bust out the make up kit.

http://cvdazzle.com/

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/discoblog/2010/04/05/bizarre-makeup-patterns-can-fool-face-recognition-software/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DiscoverBlogs+%28Discover+Blogs%29

The problem with the Google Glasses, for me, is that they're run through and by Google. If a person could have a similar device that wasn't attached to the services of a corporation that already controls to much information about everything, it would be much more appealing. It feels like putting on Google Glasses is the last step to bowing down before our Google masters, or something like that. Only then will Google see everyday life through everybody's own eyes.

Really it disturbs me in a different way. Like, the future of everyday technology is Kim Kardashian's twitter feed being beamed directly into my retinas. And this shit's gonna be so ubiquitous you literally can't contact other people without one, like cell phones.

my 2 cents

Privacy is going away for us ordinary folks no doubt. The way technology is headed the internet is going to eventually be telepathic (i know i sound crazy). when people are telepathic there will be no secrets. Privacy is on its way out and TPTB are clawing to keep this feudal power structure the same but we will eventually win because knowledge is power. I'm not too worried about this

Do Google Glasses make anyone else think about the movie They Live ?

would you like to know more?

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/30/google_teams_up_with_cia_

http://www.pcworld.com/article/217550/google_comes_under_fire_for_secret_relationship_with_nsa.html

https://www.democracynow.org/2012/3/21/exposed_inside_the_nsas_largest_and

http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2012/05/11/court-rules-nsa-doesnt-have-to-reveal-its-semi-secret-relationship-with-google/

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-17/google-judge-accepts-22-5-million-ftc-privacy-settlement.html

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2011/01/117_79291.html

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2012/01/google-streamlines-privacy/

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/04/opinion-singel-google-walls/

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/03/dugan-darpa-google/

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/07/darpa-wants-social-media-sensor-for-propaganda-ops/

http://phys.org/news/2011-10-darpa-master-propaganda-narrative-networks.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_Information_Awareness

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-02/your-119-billion-google-searches-now-a-central-bank-tool.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRO6CbmxYsM#t=13m19s

yes

Let me say something else. These will not be allowed in Texas. In Texas we have an improper photography law. If you take a picture or video of someones ass you are arrested. So if you look at someones ass with these you are technically committing a felony in Texas so I seriously doubt they will be permitted in my state. Just another thing I wanted to add.

http://www.sg-llp.com/sexoffense-types-improperphotography.php

It is considered a sexual offense. When this law was first passed a man was walking through a fair taking pictures of people. Some butt shots I guess. Everyone could see his camera. He was arrested and charged with the felony. So yeah you do have some expectations of privacy in public in Texas.

According to the Texas Penal Code 21.15 a person commits an offense if they person photographs or by videotape or other electronic means visually records another, without the other person's consent and with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/15404285

"You're committing an offense if, a) you're taking a picture of a person who hasn't given you consent to do so, and b) that picture is for the sexual gratification of any person," Douglas said.

Bring it Google, there will be a lot of felonies passed out in Texas and then it will be outlawed.

That's a violation of the first amendment.

The only reason that using google glass would qualify for this offense would be if the person was actually taking a photo or video (which google glass only does by voice command) of someone's ass or tits AND it could be proven that it is deliberately for the purpose of sexual gratification. Sorry but I don't think a few felony lawsuits on obvious perverts could justify outlawing a specific product.

When you're in public PEOPLE CAN SEE YOU . Deal with it.

So do you support CCTV efforts to make everywhere in public under surveillance?

Do you support the rights of citizens to photograph or record in public?

Do you suppose we could back and forth all night without answering each others original questions?

There were better things coming down the pipeline then Google glass. You are spot on buddy. Facial recognition is on its way through this product. Personal privacy doesn't bother me because you choose to use the product but the invasion of others privacy is what bothers me. First time some ass comes to my front door with a pair of those on I'm knocking him in the face.

Cyber hate crime? So be it. Google is just a off shoot of the CIA we all know what the tech Google comes out with is used for. Anytime the CIA needs something like a service, a CIA agent will quit and open that company and the CIA then pays them to do the job. Ala Google. Huge loophole. The CIA does this because they aren't allowed to operate on American soil. However they can pay a corporation to do something.

The CIA doesn't really scare me I am glad they work for us. What scares me is it always starts with the CIA then the tech is passed down to the FBI etc... You should see what they do with social networking good god. You'd be horrified. So yeah I don't use stupidbook because I don't wanna be tagged and tracked. I wont be using Google glass because of the same.

I am not worried. Besides, this is pretty much inescapable.

Then again, I did write this article: http://blog.khanneasuntzu.com/?p=4898

It's only going to be recording when you tell it to. If that's not the case, the poor battery life will be an immediate giveaway and it'll flop anyway.

Yep! Just like the GPS in your phone is only on when you turn it on!

And the microphone is only in operation when you are using it directly! Same with the camera! No way to remotely operate those things through the software at all!

Carry on citizen, nothing to see here.

You might well be right. Sources?

The GPS thing I learned first hand. Worked in the industry back when they were first being implemented and lots of handsets didn't have options to turn them off or had a gui toggle (that did nothing in actuality) to ease consumer concerns about the tech. Also, you can google any number of stories where police were able to track someone with the GPS in their phone. Doesn't even have to be the GPS, really. Your phone has to communicate with a cell tower to get data. That information can be used to locate you down to a city block or two. And from there, it's elementary.

Here's the FBI using cellphone mics.

Here's some public domain tools to do it yourself, including turning an Android phone into an IP webcam

I saw in an interview with an ex-employee from the NSA that all land line phones could also be listened in on, even when hung up, unless disconnected from the wall jack. Also, I have heard of cameras being found inside cable boxes (supposedly there's a Youtube video of a guy opening his box up to show where they are), and that not just webcams, but entire computer monitors are also camera lenses. Sorry I don't have any source for this, just some interesting stuff I've heard.

Actually, it came from Kerry Cassidy's interview with Jim Stone . And yes, I hate it too that I just posted a link to a Kerry Cassidy interview. I can not STAND her. But the info is interesting.

Paranoia much?

It's only paranoia if they aren't out to get you.

[deleted]

[citation needed] :3

Do you realise what subreddit you're on here? Everybody on here is a paranoid teenager

Including you?

Name: ReptilianFreemason
ID: ajslk
Gold: false
Mod: false
Redditor since:
20:47:12 10/2/2013
Redditor for:
-1y 12m 14d 16h 26m 37s

Subreddits

conspiracy: 95
conspiratard: 12
unitedkingdom: 3
videos: 3
pics: 2
WTF: 1
science: 1
AskReddit: 1
hockey: 1

Most downvoted comment

Interesting footprint for a paranoid teenager, wouldn't you say?

No, that is anything but interesting. Infact, It's perfectly expected considering this account is called 'ReptilianFreemason' and was made just to reply to conspiracy theorists...

Then again, you are a 'free thinker' and a 'truth seeker' so you can probably see deeper than most members of the public, after all, you are one of Alex Jones' enlightened flock. Tasked with spending your life looking for triangles in music videos, and finding vague references to something from videos around the internet. God speed. Keep buying his DVDs and his silver, he's definitely not scaming you, the global elite are just around the corner bro!

Alex Jones is worthless, I never watch him and I despise all the deceptive links to him in this sub. I like how you put things like free thinker and truth seeker in quotes to negate any positive definition of the terms, very cute. I'm sorry you don't find those with a thirst for knowledge palatable. Have a better day.

No, you don't seem to understand. Being a free thinker is perfectly fine, pretending you're a free thinker is not. Believing things without evidence is not free thinking.

You aren't a truth 'seeker' either, you quote mine and find tiny video clips of things that could possibly support your position, and drive it home like it's fact.

You are not thirsting for knowledge, because you deny evidence, you deny facts, you deny anything if it gets in your way.

You don't know anything about me. I'd thank you to remember that, person who admitted openly this account "was made just to reply to conspiracy theorists".

Believing things without evidence is not free thinking.

I agree.. there's evidence, and then there's 'evidence' I imagine you believe the standard sept. 2001 fairy tale then. Ironic isn't it?

I, along with every engineering and scientific body in the world accept the current understanding of 9/11.

You have no academic body supporting your claims, you have no peer reviewed research to back up your claims etc

accept on belief maybe. what scientific evidence convinces you? the free fall acceleration of WTC7 confirmed even by NIST?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=U0GW6QXKyp0# !

Go to 1:47 and watch that video. Look at the left hand side of the top penthouse, you'll see it collapses seconds before the rest of the building goes. So while that penthouse is collapsing for those few seconds, all the internal structure of the building is giving way, then eventually the rest of the building follows.

For that to be true, you'd need the 'internal structure' of the building to be completely fallen away to allow the free fall acceleration.

You claim this happens when the penthouse goes down... so tell me, without an internal structure, why does the entire facade come down as one piece? Did all the attachments of beams fail at once and become isolated from the standing facace (with no support?) Even NIST's model can't reproduce this. Have you seen their animation of it? The facade crumples with the loss of support, and the model stops before the measured free fall acceleration.

I think you are handwaving.

Wow, that sure sounds contradictive

escalation even. will people carry mini EMPs instead of pepper spray when they are getting g-ogled?

I, along with every engineering and scientific body in the world accept the current understanding of 9/11.

You have no academic body supporting your claims, you have no peer reviewed research to back up your claims etc