If Google wanted to sell it to the world, they should have first made it without the camera. Later on when people are comfortable with the form factor: add the camera.
This is how we have ended up with mobile phones with cameras that nobody seems to mind about. Phones only got cameras halfway through their life. By then, it was too late to stop.
I think cameras in phones had a lot to do with the limitations of the tech. Even so, it's a conscious action to hold your phone and take a photo, and while there's plenty of idiots on Reddit that don't care, it's not socially acceptable to take photos of strangers without permission. Everytime I've spoken to someone wearing Glass, I was so paranoid that a photo of my mouth in the wrong pose would be used for someone's karma.
Not only the actual inclusion of the camera itself, they would have marketed this way different, too.
Instead of marketing the benefit of HUD form factor, they have mainly shown off the device as a photo taking device. I remember when it was first appeared at I/O, their marketing video was mostly, if not only, about taking photo and video.
Completely. I hadn't thought about the camera-phone analogy but you're absolutely right. There were a few years there of hand-wringing over th new ability of snapping photos in locker rooms and people filming concerts.
I think the screens will lead the way. Seems "the screen" will migrate from the phone to the watch, and maybe then to glasses. Apple's move here seems smart.
Google glass jumped the gun, going after what was possible over what society was ready for.
Allowing customers to look like they are surveilling other people was a radically Orwellian-seeming move. It amazes me that Google was OK with this from the beginning.
It amazes me that people still worry about this when humans already walk around with two cameras connected to better resolution and light-level management hardware than the glass camera embedded in their skulls, and the input of those cameras, converted to audio, is generally admissible in all courts of law.
It may be sharable through speech, but a picture is worth a thousand words. Even the most detailed prose leaves much to the imagination. I don't think I'd even care if someone told a story about accidentally seeing me naked, but I'd be pretty pissed off if they were sharing a video.
What if they had photographic memory and a lot of drawing skills and were able to produce a drawing of you naked that was indistinguishable from a photo? Should we ostracize those people from society?
This is how we have ended up with mobile phones with cameras that nobody seems to mind about. Phones only got cameras halfway through their life. By then, it was too late to stop.