Google's wearable
computer, the most anticipated
piece of electronic wizardry since
the iPad and iPhone, will not go on
sale for many months.
But the critics are already in a
lather.
The glasses-like device, which
allows users to access the internet,
take photos and film short
snippets, has been pre-emptively
banned by a Seattle bar. Large
parts of Las Vegas will not welcome
wearers. West Virginia legislators
tried to make it illegal to use the
gadget, known as Google Glass,
while driving.
"This is just the beginning," said
Timothy Toohey, a Los Angeles
lawyer specialising in privacy
issues. "Google Glass is going to
cause quite a brawl."
As personal technology becomes
increasingly nimble and invisible,
Glass is prompting questions of
whether it will distract drivers,
upend relationships and, above all,
strip people of what little privacy
they still have in public.
A pair of lens-less frames with a
tiny computer attached to the right
earpiece, Glass is promoted by
Google as "seamless and
empowering." It will have the
ability to capture any chance
encounter, from a celebrity
sighting to a grumpy sales clerk,
and broadcast it to millions in
seconds.
"We are all now going to be both
the paparazzi and the paparazzi's
target," said Karen L Stevenson, a
lawyer with Buchalter Nemer in
Los Angeles.
Google stresses that Glass is a work
in progress, with test versions now
being released to 2,000 developers.
Another 8,000 "explorers," people
handpicked by Google, will soon
get a pair.
Among the safeguards to make it
less intrusive: You have to speak or
touch it to activate it, and you
have to look directly at someone to
take a photograph or video of
them.
"We are thinking very carefully
about how we design Glass because
new technology always raises new
issues," said Courtney Hohne, a
Google spokeswoman.
Developers, however, are already
cracking the limits of Glass. One
created a small sensation in tech
circles last week with a programme
that eliminated the need for
gestures or voice commands. To
snap a picture, all the user needs
to do is wink.
The 5 Point Cafe, a Seattle dive
bar, was apparently the first to
explicitly ban Glass. In part it was a
publicity stunt - extremely
successful, too, as it garnered
worldwide attention - but the bar's
owner, Dave Meinert, said there
was a serious side. The bar, he
said, was "kind of a private place."
The legislators in West Virginia
were not joking at all. The state
banned texting while driving last
year but hands-free devices are
permitted. That left a loophole for
Google Glass. The legislation was
introduced too late to gain traction
before the most recent session
ended, but its sponsor says he is
likely to try again.
In Las Vegas, a Caesars
Entertainment spokesman noted
that computers and recording
devices were prohibited in casinos.
"We will not allow people to wear
Glass while gambling or attending
our shows," he said.
Glass is arriving just as the courts,
politicians, privacy advocates,
regulators, law enforcement and
tech companies are once again
arguing over the boundaries of
technology in every walk of life.
The Senate Judiciary Committee
voted last month to require law
enforcement to have a warrant to
access email, not just a subpoena.
The FBI's use of devices that mimic
cellphone towers to track down
criminals is being challenged in an
Arizona case. A California district
court recently ruled that private
messages on social media were
protected without a warrant.
"Google Glass will test the right to
privacy versus the First
Amendment," said Bradley Shear, a
social media expert at George
Washington University.
Google has often been at the
forefront of privacy issues. In
2004, it began a free email service,
making money by generating ads
against the content. Two dozen
privacy groups protested.
Regulators were urged to
investigate whether eavesdropping
laws were being violated.
For better or worse, people got
used to the idea, and the protests
quickly dissipated. Gmail now has
over 425 million users.
In a more recent episode, the
company's unauthorised data
collection during its Street View
mapping project prompted
government investigations in a
dozen countries.
Like many Silicon Valley companies,
Google takes the attitude that
people should have nothing to hide
from intrusive technology.
"If you have something that you
don't want anyone to know, maybe
you shouldn't be doing it in the
first place," said Eric Schmidt, then
Google's chief executive, in 2009.
Glass is a major step in Google's
efforts to diversify beyond search,
and potentially an extremely
lucrative move. Piper Jaffray, an
analyst firm, estimates that
wearable technology and another
major initiative, self-driving cars,
could ultimately be a $500 billion
opportunity for the company.
In the shorter term, IHS, a
forecasting firm, estimates that
shipments of smart glasses, led by
Google Glass, could be as high as
6.6 million in three years.
Thad Starner, a pioneer of wearable
computing who is a technical
adviser to the Glass team, says he
thinks concerns about disruption
are overblown.
"Asocial people will be able to find
a way to do asocial things with this
technology, but on average people
like to maintain the social
contract," Starner said. He added
that he and colleagues had
experimented with Glass-type
devices for years, "and I can't think
of a single instance where
something bad has happened."
An incident at a Silicon Valley event
shows, however, the way the
increasing ease in capturing a
moment can lead to problems -
even if unintentionally.
Adria Richards, who worked for the
Colorado email company SendGrid,
was offended by the jokes two men
were cracking behind her at the
PyCon developers conference. She
posted a picture of them on Twitter
with the mildly reproving
comment, "Not cool."
One of the men, who has not been
identified, was immediately fired by
his employer, PlayHaven. "There is
another side to this story," he
wrote on a hacking site, saying it
was barely one lame sexual joke.
"She gave me no warning, she
smiled while she snapped the pic
and sealed my fate," he
complained.
Critics lashed out at Richards,
using language much more
offensive than the two men used.
SendGrid was hacked. The company
dismissed Richards, saying there
was such an uproar over her
conduct, it "put our business in
danger."
"I don't think anyone who was part
of what happened at PyCon that
day could possibly have imagined
how this issue would have exploded
into the public consciousness,"
Richards reflected later. She has
not posted on Twitter since.
