Airlines Asks Woman To Remove Google Glass For “Security Reasons”

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Remember the lady that was ticketed for wearing Google Glass while driving? She's at it again. And Google wonders why its product is getting a bad name. Here's a hint: It rhymes with "retention stores."

In a post on — where else — her Google Plus page, she writes that she was told to remove her Google Glass before her United flight from San Diego to San Francisco took off “because of security concerns.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Steve said:
In a post on — where else — her Google Plus page
Lucky for Google, very few people will hear of this negative attention.

If you told me Google Plus was seeing a rise in usage, I would tell you it's only because they forced everyone on Youtube to use it and that no one actually cares about G+.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
The writer of this article isn't subtle with his bias is he?

On the one hand I think the airline was overboard with their application of policy.

On the other hand, this chick has a nack.

As for the author's bias, I think he has the cart way out in front of the horse when he says;
There will soon be a point when Glass and other wearable devices are seamless integrated into our everyday eyewear
Click to expand...
Some wearable devices perhaps, but video and audio recording on cue, maybe not so much.

And there was a difference in taking a photo of the magazine with her phone's camera, the policy says "personal events" are fine. Other passengers and such are not, so it's not that you can't take video and pics, it's just that some things are verboten.

The question I would want to know is whether the Airline's employees were correctly applying Airline Policy or are they in need of additional training. By now the Airline should have addressed this issue with their company's Legal Department and adjusted employee training to suite. If you continue down this line then the Employees either were or were not following that Policy.
 
security concerns?

give me a fucking break. Whoever reported her or first got the idea needs to be fired... we already have a big enough problem with "stupid" in this country, allowing it to continue is just pathetic.

I personally don't see the lure of glass -- then again if I had 1500 dollars just laying around doing nothing I'd give it a whirl.

How long till someone with Glass captures some crucial important picture or video of a major event that helps solve a crime? Will the whole world realize it's NOT a bad thing if someone else has a video camera on them?
 
"security" whatever

better take them off for "I am going to punch you in your stupid face" reasons
 
jojo69 said:
"security" whatever

better take them off for "I am going to punch you in your stupid face" reasons
Click to expand...

you realize you are photographed and video taped pretty much every day of your life right? Unless you just happen to be reclusive and *never* leave the house.

Sooner or later people will realize nobody actually wants a picture or a video of them... yes, you. You are just some random face in a crowd and nobody gives a shit who you are and what you are doing. (unless that something happens to be illegal or dangerous or purposefully drawing attention to yourself)

I'd love to see a glass like device *required* to be word by all cops. Required to be on and rolling anytime you are on duty. Imagine in a perfect future world where it's integrated with a criminal database and the cop would be able to find/capture people instantly who have a warrant out for their arrest. It would cut down on abuses by police as well. All footage shot is the property of the public and any holes/gaps/missing footage would be a SERIOUS offense.
 
There are already devices that police officers can wear while out of the car. Where do you think the audio from cop videos comes from. They're just expensive.
 
Well, I'm sure if you had a camera hanging around your neck you'd be asked to remove and store it due to privacy policy.
The only difference, is with a classic hand held camera, you can easily tell when its in use. With glass, its anyone's guess.
If there's a sign or policy that says no pictures, don't get pissed off or start crying when they tell you to remove your glass.
 
So this glasshole is at it again huh? I wouldn't be surprised if her ego had her convinced that she is the modern day Rosa Parks or something. I will agree that they overreacted to her, but the fact remains that we want at least some feeling of privacy. We do not want to end up on some glasshole or dirtbags MySpace or Facebook page.
 
If the airlines cared about security it wouldn't be so easy for a boy to hop a fence and climb into a planes wheel well.
 
BladeVenom said:
If the airlines cared about security it wouldn't be so easy for a boy to hop a fence and climb into a planes wheel well.
Click to expand...

The airlines don't own the security of the airport ... that is the responsibility of the government ... they dropped the ball on that one ... not the airlines ;)
 
collegeboy69us said:
How long till someone with Glass captures some crucial important picture or video of a major event that helps solve a crime? Will the whole world realize it's NOT a bad thing if someone else has a video camera on them?
Click to expand...

Shoot if that is your only criteria for acceptable recording then we should be like the UK and put cameras in every public venue ... we already have people running around with smartphones video taping everything ... not sure what benefit glass provides in that mix
 
westrock2000 said:
Steve said:
In a post on — where else — her Google Plus page
Lucky for Google, very few people will hear of this negative attention.

If you told me Google Plus was seeing a rise in usage, I would tell you it's only because they forced everyone on Youtube to use it and that no one actually cares about G+.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The day they forced it was the day I stopped reviewing apps at the play store, stopped commenting on YT videos, and erased my Google account and history. Fuck you Google, you corporate douche in sheep's clothing.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Lith1um said:
Exactly. The day they forced it was the day I stopped reviewing apps at the play store, stopped commenting on YT videos, and erased my Google account and history. Fuck you Google, you corporate douche in sheep's clothing.
Click to expand...

I might disagree with you on government stuff, but I give this a big kitty paw stamp of approval.
 
Megalith said:
Why are women who are "into technology" so fake.
Click to expand...

People like you are the biggest problem in the entire tech industry. There are plenty of women who are really into technology but a lot of them are scared to talk about it because of sexist opinions like that. We need to stop this now and just let them do what they want, be inclusive and not exclusionist.
 
Quix said:
We need to stop this now and just let them do what they want, be inclusive and not exclusionist.
Click to expand...
Woah, I think he's referring to the fact that there are many girls that want to tell everyone they're "geeky" or super nerds as a fashion statement, just because they bought some random piece of electronic gear or watched Star Trek once... thus fake.

fakegeekgirl__span.jpg
 
collegeboy69us said:
How long till someone with Glass captures some crucial important picture or video of a major event that helps solve a crime? Will the whole world realize it's NOT a bad thing if someone else has a video camera on them?
Click to expand...

Yes we should have cameras recording everyone 24/7. Just think how many crimes we will help solve.
 
Jospeh said:
Yes we should have cameras recording everyone 24/7. Just think how many crimes we will help solve.
Click to expand...
It works in the UK. They have government surveillance cameras on virtually everyone, and yet the lowest crime rate of any Western nation.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ry-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html
In the UK, there are 2,034 violent offences per 100,000 people, South Africa has 1,609 per 100,000 residents, the U.S. ranks at 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, and Canada at 935.
Click to expand...

Crap, my bad, its actually the most violent country. I knew it was one of the two. It appears that craploads of video cameras don't make for a more peaceful or law abiding society.
 
Quix said:
People like you are the biggest problem in the entire tech industry. There are plenty of women who are really into technology but a lot of them are scared to talk about it because of sexist opinions like that. We need to stop this now and just let them do what they want, be inclusive and not exclusionist.
Click to expand...

Because a lot of men are pretty emotionally fragile along with being territorial and when a woman gets involved in something they think is theirs, they lash out without at all thinking about how they can overcome their ingrained mindset.
 
Ducman69 said:
It works in the UK. They have government surveillance cameras on virtually everyone, and yet the lowest crime rate of any Western nation.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ry-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html


Crap, my bad, its actually the most violent country. I knew it was one of the two. It appears that craploads of video cameras don't make for a more peaceful or law abiding society.
Click to expand...

Cameras are meant to help catch criminals not stops them. How do you expect a camera to stop somebody?
 
DPI said:
:D
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who feels that way about Google Glass owners. Just go to San Francisco and you'll see what sorta damage Google products can do to society and why the company should just get absorbed by the NSA where it'll at least be doing something useful for the world with all the data collecting.
 
Ducman69 said:
Woah, I think he's referring to the fact that there are many girls that want to tell everyone they're "geeky" or super nerds as a fashion statement, just because they bought some random piece of electronic gear or watched Star Trek once... thus fake.
Click to expand...
Easy way for an otherwise plain or even slightly homely girl to become a big fish in a small pond.
 
Regardless of the douchebaggery involved with wearing Google Glass everywhere, it is indeed a slippery slope when officials start limiting your freedom of movement because of it.

However, in this case, the person in question was on a private vehicle, owned by a business, with a written customer agreement. She should have complied rather than being a pain in the ass, because her movement was not being impeded, nor was her personal or journalistic right. The issue of "could take a photo of passengers" is a cyclic argument and neither side will win it. It would have been nice of the airline to put it in writing before the purchase of the ticket, rather than pointing out some magazine. Sort of like a trespassing notice on property enabling people to be notified and take another course of action.
 
collegeboy69us said:
security concerns?

give me a fucking break. Whoever reported her or first got the idea needs to be fired... we already have a big enough problem with "stupid" in this country, allowing it to continue is just pathetic.

I personally don't see the lure of glass -- then again if I had 1500 dollars just laying around doing nothing I'd give it a whirl.

How long till someone with Glass captures some crucial important picture or video of a major event that helps solve a crime? Will the whole world realize it's NOT a bad thing if someone else has a video camera on them?
Click to expand...

Thanks for reminding me I'm not alone. I agree with 100% of this. The amount of stupidity in our world is going to destroy it.
 
collegeboy69us said:
security concerns?

give me a fucking break. Whoever reported her or first got the idea needs to be fired... we already have a big enough problem with "stupid" in this country, allowing it to continue is just pathetic.

I personally don't see the lure of glass -- then again if I had 1500 dollars just laying around doing nothing I'd give it a whirl.

How long till someone with Glass captures some crucial important picture or video of a major event that helps solve a crime? Will the whole world realize it's NOT a bad thing if someone else has a video camera on them?
Click to expand...

Yes security concerns. No, there is no secret going on in the plane that if the terrirists knew would make it drop out of the air. However, dealing with pissed off customers trying to beat the shit out of each other at 50,000 feet is a security concern for the airline.

What probably triggered this is that someone complained and the staff did not want anything escalating.

When will google glass catch something that vinidicates it? Never. Why? because wer are already surrounded by surveillance cameras that have a useful feature for that task in that they are on all the time, and actually physically located someplace and generally organized and searchable by time. With ubiquitous personal video you have to make a massive effort to get useful information. Look at the boston bomber situation. The labor involved was HUGE and that was with a large cooperative bunch of people with data. For glass type things to eb useful it would have to be tagged, archived and made searchable by whoever hosted the info, stored centrally, and then be able to be accessed in broad swaths for any kind of warrant or subpoena. I'd really rather not thank you. I mean if you want to make some google glass porn in your apartment building, and let the auto insurance lawyers have free access to it because your apartment was within 60 feet of the accident in the street outside, go ahead. Myself I'd rather avoid that and myriad other issues with trying to make drinking form the firehose easier.
 
This women has issues, however so does Airport security. The "security" excuse is way overused ... security touching and patting down my scared, crying toddler has nothing to do with "security" no matter what BS they make up on the spot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top