Google Glass Detector Cuts Off Glassholes’ Wi-Fi

This is false
Depends on the circumstance, if the public location is actually a privately owned restaurant, for example, if the owner prohibits it with a sign or employee asking you to desist, then an expectation of privacy is in effect from that point on..
 
Yea because nothing bad could happen shooting a laser powerful enough to destroy a camera sensor, at a camera less than an inch from the users eye....
Not all wavelength that will detroy a sensor are harmful to the eye. Ask Mr. Spock.
 
Not to mention we already have glasses that you can buy witha camera in them that is no where near as obvious as the google glass is.
Just because something can be done or has been done before doesn't automatically make it acceptable. Take Murder for example, been done for thousands of year, happening right now, is it acceptable?

It just seems to me like a lot of people want to hate on google glass because it's the "cool" thing to do.
Seems to me a lot of people think because something has a major brand name stamped on it, that it somehow removes their culpability for wearing and using it.
 
Just because something can be done or has been done before doesn't automatically make it acceptable. Take Murder for example, been done for thousands of year, happening right now, is it acceptable?


Seems to me a lot of people think because something has a major brand name stamped on it, that it somehow removes their culpability for wearing and using it.

You are equating murder to wearing a piece of technology, come on.
Point is, people rail against murder. No one makes a peep about people with cameras on their cell phones, smart watches, etc. No one makes a stink when someone is at a concert like an idiot recording the show on their cell. But as soon as someone is wearing LESS capable technology on their face it's a social problem?

I think Stiler is right: it's cool to hate Glass, and the people using the term Glassholes are more likely envious because they can't afford the tech. This isn't about privacy, or anything more than butthurt.
 
One day, when I'm packing the next gen Glass product and I roll into a place that does this, I'm nailing them for a CFAA violation and the civil equivalent (trespass?), collecting a big check, and smiling all the way to the bank while I watch the idiot pay up to the feds at the same time.

I'm pretty sure a random person's google glass doesn't qualify as a CFAA Protected Computer, which is defined as:

a computer—

(A) exclusively for the use of a financial institution or the United States Government, or, in the case of a computer not exclusively for such use, used by or for a financial institution or the United States Government and the conduct constituting the offense affects that use by or for the financial institution or the Government; or
(B) which is used in interstate or foreign commerce or communication, including a computer located outside the United States that is used in a manner that affects interstate or foreign commerce or communication of the United States.
 
Depends on the circumstance, if the public location is actually a privately owned restaurant, for example, if the owner prohibits it with a sign or employee asking you to desist, then an expectation of privacy is in effect from that point on..

A privately owned restaurant is not a public location. A public location is a street corner, or a park, or some other similar area that is "owned" by the government (and thus, by everybody).
 
I'm pretty sure a random person's google glass doesn't qualify as a CFAA Protected Computer, which is defined as:

a computer—

(A) exclusively for the use of a financial institution or the United States Government, or, in the case of a computer not exclusively for such use, used by or for a financial institution or the United States Government and the conduct constituting the offense affects that use by or for the financial institution or the Government; or
(B) which is used in interstate or foreign commerce or communication, including a computer located outside the United States that is used in a manner that affects interstate or foreign commerce or communication of the United States.

Don't be that guy that selectively quotes the statute, chopping out huge swathes of the act and ignoring the parts that actually apply. Here's the full text, but I'll chop out the part that grants liability for my described behavior:
"(a) Whoever—
(2) intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains-
(C) information from any protected computer;"

Also, in some circumstances:
"(a) Whoever—
(5)
(A) knowingly causes the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer;
(B) intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, recklessly causes damage; or
(C) intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, causes damage and loss. [2]"
The first is more likely, but if you use Glass for business, or are doing business when the disconnect occurs, the second would also apply.
 
ALso,

(B) which is used in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce or communication, including a computer located outside the United States that is used in a manner that affects interstate or foreign commerce or communication of the United States;

Is every computer. So that's not a limitation. Use glass on Amazon? That's sufficient.
 
Still looks like it applies only to "protected computers", so unless the Google Glass affected falls under the definition defined by the paper, then no case:

(2) the term “protected computer” means a computer—

(A) exclusively for the use of a financial institution or the United States Government, or, in the case of a computer not exclusively for such use, used by or for a financial institution or the United States Government and the conduct constituting the offense affects that use by or for the financial institution or the Government; or
(B) which is used in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce or communication, including a computer located outside the United States that is used in a manner that affects interstate or foreign commerce or communication of the United States;
 
Still looks like it applies only to "protected computers", so unless the Google Glass affected falls under the definition defined by the paper, then no case:

As I mentioned, the second definition of a "Protected Computer" is so broad as to include essentially anything connected to the internet, and so is a distinction without meaning. Basically, and if you read the legislative history the drafters did it this way on purpose, definition A was created so there could be stiffer penalties for hacking a government computer rather than a private computer. B was created to encompass any other computer. The reference to "interstate commerce" is so that the law is not unconstitutional, and calls in the interstate commerce clause, the broadest possible definition of federal jurisdiction.
 
Depends on the circumstance, if the public location is actually a privately owned restaurant, for example, if the owner prohibits it with a sign or employee asking you to desist, then an expectation of privacy is in effect from that point on..

The post I quoted specifically stated a PUBLIC location and not a private location.
 
As I mentioned, the second definition of a "Protected Computer" is so broad as to include essentially anything connected to the internet, and so is a distinction without meaning. Basically, and if you read the legislative history the drafters did it this way on purpose, definition A was created so there could be stiffer penalties for hacking a government computer rather than a private computer. B was created to encompass any other computer. The reference to "interstate commerce" is so that the law is not unconstitutional, and calls in the interstate commerce clause, the broadest possible definition of federal jurisdiction.

Ahh, cool beans.
 
This is just getting fucking irritating

I would like to know the difference between google glass and smart phones, other than one you wear on your face, the other you hold in front of your face

And some people might as well have their phone strapped to their face with how much they use it and record everything.

How many embarrassing videos and pictures do we see on the internet every second? At least with Glass, the camera is mediocre.
 
You are equating murder to wearing a piece of technology, come on.
Point is, people rail against murder. No one makes a peep about people with cameras on their cell phones, smart watches, etc. No one makes a stink when someone is at a concert like an idiot recording the show on their cell. But as soon as someone is wearing LESS capable technology on their face it's a social problem?

I think you're quite mistaken that people don't react or have negative opinions when people use those devices to invade their space.

I think Stiler is right: it's cool to hate Glass, and the people using the term Glassholes are more likely envious because they can't afford the tech. This isn't about privacy, or anything more than butthurt.

The person with the camera doing something that could negatively impact another person's life, is the victim/hero of this story. Right....
 
The person with the camera doing something that could negatively impact another person's life, is the victim/hero of this story. Right....

Wait, what could I POSSIBLY do to harm some stranger's life with Glass?
 
Do you guys even READ articles when they're linked to? This guy lives in New Zealand. US laws don't apply there.

A lot of the discussion is in general, not super specific to the article. Just going off into other directions. :)
 
Smartwatches and things like Google Glass will soon become common place, and all of you will own one, and your gonna look like dumb ass hypocrites (the ones that hate Glass, which isn't all of you, but most of you).
 
Wait, what could I POSSIBLY do to harm some stranger's life with Glass?

Catch some guy picking his nose and upload it to youtube where he would be shamed for life and preventing any chance he ever had of getting laid.
 
Smartwatches and things like Google Glass will soon become common place, and all of you will own one, and your gonna look like dumb ass hypocrites (the ones that hate Glass, which isn't all of you, but most of you).

Unlikely. I still have a standard dial/text phone.
 
Smartwatches and things like Google Glass will soon become common place, and all of you will own one, and your gonna look like dumb ass hypocrites (the ones that hate Glass, which isn't all of you, but most of you).

I don't have cell phone service of any sort and I haven't owned a watch since I was a CreepyChildGoogle. Also, I think that in the long run, Google is doomed to follow Walmart into becoming less and less relevant as competition and their reputation for invasive data collection catch up with them.
 
This is something glassholes need to watch:
http://www.break.com/video/how-would-you-react-to-a-random-guy-filming-you-2617644

The problem with google glass is the camera, and fact you can't tell its recording or not and its often at eye level right in your face.

Remove the camera from google glass or just use the camera with a bright red blinking light in public spaces not up in people's faces like standing next to them in a bus while they are having a conversation, and no shits would be given.

Unfortunately, I think a LOT of glassholes are going to have to be punched in the face a few times before they learn basic etiquette.
 
This is something glassholes need to watch:
http://www.break.com/video/how-would-you-react-to-a-random-guy-filming-you-2617644

The problem with google glass is the camera, and fact you can't tell its recording or not and its often at eye level right in your face.

Remove the camera from google glass or just use the camera with a bright red blinking light in public spaces not up in people's faces like standing next to them in a bus while they are having a conversation, and no shits would be given.

Unfortunately, I think a LOT of glassholes are going to have to be punched in the face a few times before they learn basic etiquette.

If someone is staring at you, is it not the same thing? Pretty obvious if someone with google glass is recording you. With a phone I could just hold it in my hand or put it in my pocket while pointing the general area and capture everything. Google Glass resolution isn't even that high, it looks like shit IMO.
 
This is something glassholes need to watch:
http://www.break.com/video/how-would-you-react-to-a-random-guy-filming-you-2617644

The problem with google glass is the camera, and fact you can't tell its recording or not and its often at eye level right in your face.

Remove the camera from google glass or just use the camera with a bright red blinking light in public spaces not up in people's faces like standing next to them in a bus while they are having a conversation, and no shits would be given.

Unfortunately, I think a LOT of glassholes are going to have to be punched in the face a few times before they learn basic etiquette.
Oh please. And yet NO ONE has answered the repeated question of how this is any different than cell phones. Get on ANY city bus/train/subway, and everyone has their pheons pointed at everyone else as they check email, surf the web and play candy crunch saga. An NO FUCKS ARE GIVEN.

Why is it different when it is strapped to a pair of $1500 glasses?
 
Oh please. And yet NO ONE has answered the repeated question of how this is any different than cell phones.
I just showed a video of a guy recording someone with their cellphone. There is no difference whatsoever to holding a cellphone up to someone's face to record them at eye level, and wearing google glasses that at least makes it appear you are doing the same.

Its extremely rude, most people will be offended, and eventually you will get it slapped off your face.

What is so difficult to understand about that? And no, its not the same as holding your smartphone up to your ear or punching away on it facing down on the table while waiting for your food. Why? Because it just looks like you're using your phone, it doesn't look like you're shoving a camera into someone's personal bubble to record them. This isn't rocket science.
 
I just showed a video of a guy recording someone with their cellphone. There is no difference whatsoever to holding a cellphone up to someone's face to record them at eye level, and wearing google glasses that at least makes it appear you are doing the same.

Its extremely rude, most people will be offended, and eventually you will get it slapped off your face.

What is so difficult to understand about that? And no, its not the same as holding your smartphone up to your ear or punching away on it facing down on the table while waiting for your food. Why? Because it just looks like you're using your phone, it doesn't look like you're shoving a camera into someone's personal bubble to record them. This isn't rocket science.

You could also, I don't know, WALK AWAY? That's an option too. If someone's cellphone/Glass/GoPro/Gear/Red use gives you some kind of weirding-out, you could walk away...
 
Its extremely rude, most people will be offended, and eventually you will get it slapped off your face.

And I'm sorry, but assigning your particularized sensitivities and paranoia to "most people" is disingenuous and silly.
Bottom line: If you don't want someone with ANY new piece of tech to be a dick, don't be a dick to them. Glass is no different than ANY other device with a camera on it. The difference is YOUR perception and paranoia.
 
You could also, I don't know, WALK AWAY?
So I'm at the bar enjoying myself and well lubricated, you shove a camera in my face (gopro strapped to their forehead or google glass or pointing a cellphone at me in a way that looks like they are watching the screen and recording), and you expect me to walk away? Yeah, good luck with that. Even if nineteen out of twenty people just up and leave the bar, that leaves that last guy to take it off your face, step on it, sit back down, and enjoy his beer.
 
I see. So I should pander to the inane sensitivities of a drunkard.

Makes sense. :rolleyes:

So if one day, you and I meet, and I'm wearing Glass, PLEASE try and drop me. I'll lose that fight. But then me and my hired gun will take you for everything you're worth. Bank account, house, and future wages. No more college fund or vacation savings.
All mine.
When all you had to do was ask.

Now, to be clear: I don't mean ME me. ANd I don't mean YOU you. But you get the point. Your suggested response is immature and not a great life choice. You don't know who that guy is wearing Glass, and getting physical because he happens to wear Glass/the wrong color shirt/a watch from the wrong brand/whatever prarnoia that peaks your sensitivities is a really silly thing.
 
Yes, because having a few alcoholic drinks makes one instantly a drunkard. Logic, for the win.
 
The phrase used was "well lubricated." I interpret that as a euphemism for drunk.

So getting 'well lubricated' every once in a while (say like once or twice a month) means they're automatically equivalent to a drunkard which implies one is close to hammered drunk everyday?

Your logic is strong. This guy wins the science award.
 
WOW. You are adding a lot of words that the original post didn't include...
But you're ignoring the point: Drunk patrons of a given bar with random sensitivities and paranoia cannot be anticipated.
 
I see. So I should pander to the inane sensitivities of a drunkard.
If you really believe that it will be extremely rare for someone to experience any negativity from people around them in certain settings wearing google glass, please, withdraw the $1500 from your account. .

I'm just curious, what enjoyment do they get out of a large portion of the population thinking they're an ahole? Personally, it would make me feel like a douche, and it would bother me that a 1/3rd of the people are uncomfortable, another 1/3rd think I look like a retard, and .... actually, hold on, I think I figured it out. Its the Harley Davidson with open pipes syndrome!!!

Not breastfed or hugged enough as a child, and desperate to stand out and get attention, even if its negative, as its better than being ignored. And just like the open pipe Harley guys, they are willing to shell out big bucks to stand out. *shrugs*
So if one day, you and I meet, and I'm wearing Glass, PLEASE try and drop me. I'll lose that fight. But then me and my hired gun will take you for everything you're worth. Bank account, house, and future wages. No more college fund or vacation savings.
All mine.
Just curious, how old are you approximately?
 
Back
Top