by
Mark Ollig
Early
last Wednesday morning, while driving to the office, I did the usual stop at my
favorite coffeehouse.
The
outside air was a bit chilly, and it was still dark.
As
I got out of my car, I looked up to the west and saw the last quarter of the
lunar eclipse, and what they called the “blood moon.” It appeared large and
bright in the sky.
There
was still a bit of reddish hue on the moon’s surface.
Yours
truly wears bifocals, and so I was squinting to get a clearer view. “I wonder
if they make a high-tech set of bifocals with a zoom feature in them,” I
thought to myself.
After
getting my wake-up juice (a large depth charge, light roast, with cream), I
walked back to the car remembering how Google had made a sensation last year
with their high-tech, “smart eyewear” product called Google Glass, which are
worn like regular eyeglasses.
My
readers may recall the column from May 6, 2013, when I asked the question:
“Will you wear Google Glass?”
So
far, I have not seen many folks wearing them.
One
reason might have to do with their price.
The
Google Glass Explorer Edition (Sky) is listed at $1,500.
One
concern I had with Google Glass frames, was how they would adapt them for folks
like me, who wear prescription glasses.
Checking
Google’s Glass store, for an extra $225, they can be made with an individual’s
eye prescription.
Still,
I’m curious on why Google Glass hasn’t caught on with the public.
On
the Internet blogospheres and other social media sites, I read some people are
not wearing them because of the confrontations they receive from others who are
uncomfortable about being in the presence of Google Glass wearers.
Some
feel wearers of Google Glass could be recording them, or engaging in some other
devious invasion of their personal privacy.
Others
have labeled wearers of these expensive Google glasses (yes, I am calling them
glasses), as being part of the “affluent tech-elite.”
Tech-enthusiasts
who enjoy using the newest technology, may be feeling vulnerable and
uncomfortable wearing Google Glass in public.
One
news outlet reported on an incident of a man wearing Google glasses, while he
was walking home.
The
man said he was not using any of the features on the Google glasses, when all
of a sudden a woman ran up to him and angrily shouted “Glass!” then grabbed his
glasses, and ran.
While
the chase ensued, the Google glasses ended up being shattered into the ground.
In
San Francisco, a social media consultant, while wearing a pair of Google
glasses in a local establishment, encountered patrons who began shouting at her
because they believed she was filming them without their consent. They became
enraged. One patron grabbed her Google glasses, and ran out of the
establishment with them.
I
also read about businesses banning the use of Google glasses.
One
establishment has a sign on their front door showing a red circle and diagonal
slash over an image of Google glasses, with the message: “Kindly remove before
entering.”
Google
glasses have apparently become the target of privacy advocates, who feel its
wearers are stealthily recording them, or taking their picture without their
permission, and then using “facial search” or other applications.
Perhaps
an improved visual indicator on the glasses frame, such has a red LED
(light-emitting diode), could activate when it is recording; instead of the
small cubed screen, which illuminates when a Google Glass feature is in use.
While
Google glass is yet to be popular, millions of us are using our smartphones to
record and share breaking news and events with the entire world.
We’re
uploading our videos to social media sites such as YouTube, and other online
networks.
Today’s
ever-growing population of independent citizen journalists, are using their
smartphones as a reporting tool.
It’s
now commonplace to see citizen-captured news video on mainstream and social
media sites.
People
are using their smartphones to record and broadcast local community civic and
social events, political protests, and social unrest in this, and in other
countries, in order to increase public awareness, and in some cases, to bring
about change.
Many
engaged citizens, who desire to communicate with the public their activism in
the causes they believe in, are sharing their video in real-time by using
live-streaming social media networks.
Examples
include organized citizen journalists and the public who live-streamed and
recorded videos of the recent protests held in Ferguson, MO.
Some
of the more popular videos have been taken of law enforcement interactions with
citizens recorded by passers-by.
After
George Orwell’s book “1984” came out, people began worrying about “Big Brother”
using video cameras to watch our every move, invade our privacy, and, more or
less, take control of our lives.
Many
envisioned a future where the authorities would have us under constant
surveillance; monitoring us like rats running around in a maze.
Well,
that was then, and this is now.
As
Sherlock Holmes once said, “The game is afoot.”
It’s
2014, and we live in a society where it’s not just Big Brother with the video
cameras – us “rats” have video cameras, too.
How
we use video recording technology, without infringing upon each other’s First
Amendment and privacy rights, remains the subject of much debate.
