GOOGLE GLASS

Google’s Glass would keep an eye on all of us

 
 
300 dpi Jeff Durham illustration portraying Internet giant Google as both good and evil. Bay Area News Group 2012<p>

krtnational national; krtworld world; krt; krtcampus campus; mctillustration; 01027000; ACE; ENT; internet; krtentertainment entertainment; 13022000; computer science; information technology; it; krtscience science; krtscitech; krttechcomputer computer; SCI; TEC; angel; bay area news group; cc contributed durham; devil; google; 2012; krt2012; search engine
300 dpi Jeff Durham illustration portraying Internet giant Google as both good and evil. Bay Area News Group 2012

krtnational national; krtworld world; krt; krtcampus campus; mctillustration; 01027000; ACE; ENT; internet; krtentertainment entertainment; 13022000; computer science; information technology; it; krtscience science; krtscitech; krttechcomputer computer; SCI; TEC; angel; bay area news group; cc contributed durham; devil; google; 2012; krt2012; search engine

MCT / MCT

Edwardwasserman.com

Google’s launch of its dazzling Internet-connected eyewear, which it calls Glass, has been so understated that it’s tempting to mistake this wearable computer for just another cool plaything from Silicon Valley.

I think that would be wrong. Glass — its progeny, its successors, its imitators — is a very big deal, in my view, as big as anything that has come along since the PC and the World Wide Web a generation ago.

It’s not that Google’s eyeglasses are more powerful than today’s smartphones. At the moment Glass apparently does less, since the range and precision of instructions it recognizes are confined to what the wearer can convey through gestures, taps and limited speech.

What matters, big time, is that Glass layers a real-time Internet presence onto users’ normal visual fields — onto their everyday, curbside awareness, their routine comings and goings.

Glass looks like a pair of spectacles and works like a phone; what the user sees is a display that’s perched above the usual band of vision. That display accommodates a continuing crawl of Internet-fueled communications—text, images and sound.

Glass gets access to your world, it sees what you see. It can draw from your social networks, Internet queries, calendar, dining preferences, the bottomless resources of the Web, to furnish you with multiple levels of information and intelligence — customized for you — to inspire your choices and shape your life.

True, the technologically adept already get that via smart phones by heedlessly stroking at their tiny screens.

But Glass promises a brazen and routine simultaneity of experience, an ability to interact seamlessly with the here and now without losing rich Web-enabled connectivity — just as having the radio on never meant you couldn’t talk with a friend.

That’s the good news. Now the rest. For starters, Glass can record and transmit pictures and sound. It is, as privacy expert Shaq Katikala puts it, “a phone in front of your eyes with a front-facing camera.”

The user is already online, so there’s nothing to prevent his not just filming but posting too. That means people the Glass wearer encounters can be transformed effortlessly into amusements for the eager world beyond.

Those people don’t know Glass is being used as a publishing device, so unsuspecting folks — scolding a boyfriend, cussing at the umpire, picking their nose in a picturesque way — can become the next YouTube mega-star without knowing they were even auditioning.

Meantime, a flood of pictures and sound from many thousands of Glass users surges into a database of real-time surveillance, all images susceptible to face recognition technology — though Google says it has no current plans to do this. That would enable people the wearer ran across to be ID’d and tracked.

But it’s not just the privacy of others that’s at risk, it’s the user’s too. The visuals captured and posted, the places where the Glass wearer’s eyes linger — they all become part of the multi-dimensional behavioral track that users create for Google and other information brokers to harvest for advertisers or for whoever else wants to know.

Some of these issues are being raised, and the Congressional Bi-Partisan Privacy Caucus has asked for answers: Whether face recognition software is being considered, how Google will avoid collecting data without consent, what will happen to personal information if a device is resold, what Google regards as privacy infringements.

Perhaps the most disquieting possibility is that the expectation of being watched would become the norm. As techie blogger Jared Newman wrote: ““If there’s one thing we should really worry about, it’s that we’ll treat each other differently, and trust each other less, when Glass is around.”

Or as a reviewer for Engadget put it, the situation could evolve to where “nobody knows if you’re not taking a picture or video of them.”

The result: That people grow more guarded, less candid, less forthcoming, worried about how strangers might regard them — and a communications miracle ends up suppressing communication.

Read more Edward Wasserman stories from the Miami Herald

  •  
WASSERMAN

    NEWS MEDIA

    Behind a diplomatic tiff in the news business, a public duty

    In an unusual dust-up, the top editor of the Washington Post has complained to The New York Times that it failed to credit the Post for work that preceded, and nourished, important stories that the Times later ran. Why this should matter to you is worth exploring.

  •  
WASSERMAN

    NSA LEAKS

    The case the media should make for Edward Snowden

    The news media’s silence while some of its boldest sources are prosecuted or jailed is something I’ve been protesting for some time, so naturally I was pleased when The New York Times, in an eloquent editorial on New Year’s Day, urged the White House to show leniency toward Edward Snowden. He’s the former contract worker for the National Security Agency, whose leaks continue to expose the NSA’s monumental, intrusive and illegal monitoring of civilian communications here and abroad.

  •  

Crying children, including 9-year-old Kim Phuc, center, run down Route 1 near Trang Bang, Vietnam after an aerial napalm attack on suspected Viet Cong in 1972.

    MEDIA

    Media focus on ‘moral injury’ masks disregard of civilian war suffering

    Just before Christmas I heard a report on public radio concerning “moral injury” among Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans. That’s the psychic trauma caused by acting or witnessing acts that conflict with core values — brutalizing prisoners, for instance, or killing children.

Miami Herald

Join the
Discussion

The Miami Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

The Miami Herald uses Facebook's commenting system. You need to log in with a Facebook account in order to comment. If you have questions about commenting with your Facebook account, click here.

Have a news tip? You can send it anonymously. Click here to send us your tip - or - consider joining the Public Insight Network and become a source for The Miami Herald and el Nuevo Herald.

Hide Comments

This affects comments on all stories.

Cancel OK

  • Marketplace

Today's Circulars

  • Quick Job Search

Enter Keyword(s) Enter City Select a State Select a Category