PDA

View Full Version : Peaceful Resistance Towards Glassholes




BANNED
09-01-2013, 05:07 PM
Hi Ya'll! I was banned years ago b/c I run a business and employ SEVERAL Ron Paul fans and was banned for multiple identities. I also allow (ED) them to use their time as they wanted, meaning, posting to RPF! Anyway, that freedom backfired...
I am NOT bitter, and completely understand.
I DO want to ask a question now that I have the opportunity!
How would y'all handle spotting a GLASSHOLE sitting right NEXT to you in a restaurant?

I will be happy to tell you about my own personal response, but I would like to hear your reactions first, and if you have actually seen one of these Glassholes up front and close, how have you responded?

much respect! thank you for the guest forum!

JK/SEA
09-01-2013, 06:54 PM
I'm not an effin Ron Paul FAN.

I'm an effin Ron Paul SUPPORTER.

Learn the difference.

Oh...and welcome back.

pcosmar
09-01-2013, 06:56 PM
How would y'all handle spotting a GLASSHOLE sitting right NEXT to you in a restaurant?


Ha,, had to look that up.

Despite my curiosity at such an odd creature, I would probably do my best to ignore them. (like other man made freaks of nature)

while laughing insanely on the inside.

CaseyJones
09-01-2013, 08:02 PM
I really do not understand the fear everyone has over google glass if thats what you are talking about, seems lame if anything and not much different than a phone

Unregistered
09-02-2013, 10:47 AM
There are many different reasons why people "fear" the Google Glass. Here is an article about the kinds of establishments that have already banned them:
EDIT post rejected b/c of the link: Google Top 10 places that have banned the google glass...

If you read the comments from SoftwareGuy at the bottom of the article, it best describes my own personal fear.

My reaction to the glasshole: I asked to move. The glasshole has the ability to record me w/o my knowledge as well as my consent. I went to a restaurant to enjoy dinner w/ friends and family and ended up seeing my first glasshole. It made me nervous everytime he looked my way.

here is one of the comments from Software guy:

Software Guy says:
August 7, 2013 at 11:21 am

"What needs to be understood is the goal of Google Glass isn’t recording but the enhancement of the visual field. This means that you look at a headline on a paper someone is reading and can immediately read the article in question. It also means that with the right database available you look at a license plate and you see the name and address of the person it is registered to.

Another “reality enhancement” could easily be identification of people. You see someone and with enhancement can overhear an email address. Ding! You now have a picture, a voiceprint and an email address to go with it. Next time you meet this person you get a display of everything you know about them. With facial recognition in the system or shared photos you might get “public” information other people have collected as well. Suddenly, you are close friends with them and know all sorts of stuff about them. Might be a great thing, but think what this does for any sort of privacy… and think what it does for con artists.

This is an interesting lab experiment but Google Glass is an utter failure as a product. The ramifications of giving people this capability were not thought out at all."

Anti Federalist
09-02-2013, 03:30 PM
I had to "google" to find out that a glasshole is a person wearing a google product.

http://replygif.net/i/1036.gif

Unregistered
09-02-2013, 03:56 PM
Sorry for the confusion, apparently guests cannot post links at first, so I was unable to link to the topic I was addressing. Sorry!

Also, not sure if this is significant, but the beta tester was from India and he was with a group of about 8 other Indians. (It has not been released to the general public yet) This place is a world-wide tourist destination, so I cannot speculate on their citizenship, and I haven't decided if it even matters.
Call me paranoid all you want, but I don't know these people from adam, I surely didn't even want to pull out my credit card to pay b/c I am aware of the capabilities of the Google Glass taking a snap shot of my credit card. Yes, he was close enough...
Either way, it really creeped me out, so we moved. Our poor waitress didn't even know that they existed, and when I explained the capabilities, she immediately understood, apologized, agreed to move us.

I predict that more and more private business establishments (more than the article I referenced ) will eventually ban these devices.
When I saw one of these up front and close my mind started wandering to the capabilities and the potential for con-men, pedophiles, and thieves to take advantage of the publics ignorance as well as naivety when it comes to the user's intention.

Either way, I can understand why banks to casinos to strip clubs to Hospitals have already banned these devices, even before they are available to the general public.

Unregistered
09-02-2013, 04:01 PM
I'm not an effin Ron Paul FAN.

I'm an effin Ron Paul SUPPORTER.

Learn the difference.

Oh...and welcome back.

Sorry Jk, I should have known better! I am for sure a supporter, there is no "going back" as you well know. To me that is the difference between a "fan" and a supporter! I enjoy your posts as a lurker.

MRK
09-03-2013, 04:38 AM
Google Glass uses image recognition to identify objects, like license plates, and people's faces, or anything else. To refine the algorithms that are used to detect these objects, the objects themselves are necessarily stored and sent to Google's servers for storing and analyzing.

This well-known system in image recognition and artificial intelligence is called a neural network. To become more accurate, the neural network needs to build a large dataset. Google Glass is the perfect way to create this accuracy - there are potentially millions of categorizable and indexable objects that are being loaded onto Google's servers every moment the userbase is wearing the device. Google without a doubt will have the most refined and best image recognition algorithms in the world.

What this superior image processing and recognition ability gained from the Google Glass neural network means:

Google will be the first company to have visually-autonomous robots and the capability to develop them. Given that most lifeforms and indeed humans receive a critical if not essential amount of information about the world around them from sight, when Google produces algorithms that are able to self-identify new objects and categorize them automatically, Google will essentially have the tool to recreate lifeforms in massive quantities.

I dare say this capability will literally allow its owners to economically and militarily take over the world when combining this capability with mass production of currently-available mechanical robotics. To imagine the implementations of this, think of bots replacing and automating every menial labor task with little to no setting up, and automating all in-field military actions after being given an order. The vast majority of humans will by and large become obsolete.

I've been studying and applying image recognition and its potentials for over a decade now, and have written several research papers on the topic and have used its applications in my own business ventures. If anyone wants to know more, send me a PM.

Unregistered
09-03-2013, 09:31 PM
wow, that is a lot to take in, and thank you for the information.
If I understand correctly, Google (glass) will (eventually) be tied in to every PD/interpol/FBI etc. database?
Aren't they supposed to be the only ones able to access the databases that you describe? (license plates, etc)

I am not sure what to even think about the future capabilities that you describe, HOW can "privacy" even EXIST when it comes to the capabilities you describe? Face transplants? Eye transplants?

pcosmar
09-04-2013, 10:57 AM
I am not sure what to even think about the future capabilities that you describe, HOW can "privacy" even EXIST when it comes to the capabilities you describe? Face transplants? Eye transplants?

Well I do understand the concerns from a personal privacy issue..
The reality is,, once you are out in public, You have less expectation of privacy. Not just from cameras,, but just the people around you.. and any impression you may have on them,, being sight and sound.

Surveillance cameras,, and recording equipment that can be used for good or ill.. are nearly everywhere already.
and instead of gossip being local and confined to whoever saw what,, it can be viewed by many.
It is simply going to make more people aware of how they act in public,, actions will just be viewed by a larger audience.

Unregistered
09-05-2013, 09:27 PM
"It is simply going to make more people aware of how they act in public,, actions will just be viewed by a larger audience"

For me, it is much, much more than that. For the most part, I don't act any different in public than I do in private, give or take a fart or nekkidness... Knowing that the glasshole can find my address with a "wink of the eye", it will make me want to falsify everything from my address to my name. Children "admired" by pedophiles can track them down like bloodhounds simply b/c their parents have a license plate. Hopefully you understand where this is going, how one "acts" in public has nothing to do w/ how their children or anyone/anything they are tied to "appeals" to the glassholes.

Unregistered
09-05-2013, 11:55 PM
Just think of it=
a piece of jewelry. A car. A child. An address. A "situation" that is "blackmail ready", an affair, "reckless driving", sleeping late, etc, etc. THINK LIKE A CRIMINAL. Extortion possibilities are literally limitless, blackmail and compromise towards already CORRUPT "leaders" is absolutely LIMITLESS.
As far as I am concerned, the GLASSHOLES will rule the world (for a HOPEFULLY short time). It sounds really nice, just as long as YOU are the one that controls the glasshole network, and we all know how that REALLY goes down...

kcchiefs6465
09-06-2013, 11:27 AM
"It is simply going to make more people aware of how they act in public,, actions will just be viewed by a larger audience"

For me, it is much, much more than that. For the most part, I don't act any different in public than I do in private, give or take a fart or nekkidness... Knowing that the glasshole can find my address with a "wink of the eye", it will make me want to falsify everything from my address to my name. Children "admired" by pedophiles can track them down like bloodhounds simply b/c their parents have a license plate. Hopefully you understand where this is going, how one "acts" in public has nothing to do w/ how their children or anyone/anything they are tied to "appeals" to the glassholes.
If it makes you feel any better the "glassholes" will probably end up with an ocular tumor.

Low range microwave frequencies bombarding the eye can't be healthy.

I'm concerned about the capabilities. They've been hacked to make it when you blink one eye it takes a picture. There will apps for all sorts of things it was not thought to be able to do. Apps catering to perverts and pedophiles. People are in love with their technology. They cheer drone delivered pizzas and computer glasses. Not much you can do about it.

When the police have them, and they can take a picture of your license plate from miles away, log it and determine your speed, if you have a license, if you have insurance, if your registration is up to date, etc. don't say I didn't warn people.

Likewise when autonomous drones are preprogrammed a flight pattern over highways and other roads with laser radar and image taking capabilities, don't say I didn't warn people. They will eventually arm them for SWAT teams to use. There will be, or are, drones the size of flies that mimic insect movement. The DEA, NSA, FBI, police state will be flying bugs all around. Drinking unpasteurized milk? Well the FDA might just have to fly a mosquito sized drone onto the tree near your house to investigate. Building a shed without proper licensing?

People can't begin to see the precedent set. Health risks too. I bet in ten years of people using that BS there will be a sharp rise in ocular cancers. And somehow that will shock people.

Unregistered
09-08-2013, 01:35 PM
...etc. don't say I didn't warn people.
..., don't say I didn't warn people.

People can't begin to see the precedent set. Health risks too. I bet in ten years of people using that BS there will be a sharp rise in ocular cancers. And somehow that will shock people.

Yes, exactly. That is why I posted as a guest, b/c that is just what I am trying to do. You do have an optimistically doomsday view though, you've got me hoping for optical cancer. :()

I do believe that freedom techies have the capabilities to makes these kinds of technologies "obsolete", but yes, they need to be warned as well as informed so the "anti-glass" can begin its development.

guest
09-09-2013, 11:38 PM
Hate to "cheat" the system, but the article that Anti fed posted from slate is EXACTLY what I was trying to address here...


'We Post Nothing About Our Daughter Online'

More specifically from that particular article:

"Already developers have made a working facial recognition API for Google Glass. While Google has forbidden official facial recognition apps, it can’t prevent unofficial apps from launching. There’s huge value in gaining real-time access to view detailed information the people with whom we interact.'"

WHAT do you think this "whistleblower" is talking about?

Yes, whistleblowers BLOW THE WHISTLE right in front of our eyes...
unfortunately, THE GENERAL PUBLIC is BLIND...

Jackson
09-15-2013, 08:55 AM
I agree many people wear glasses to look smart because they are douchebags trying to be intelligent. I'm fed up of college liberals trying to shove their secular ideology down the throats of real Americans. Lasik eye surgery is what real men use just ask Rand Paul.

Unregistered
12-01-2013, 02:31 PM
-Google employee goes on Facebook rant after cafe bans him from wearing Google Glass - and demands the manager be fired
-Nick Starr refused to take off the glasses when he was asked by the manager at a Seattle restaurant
-Restaurant owner said the glasses, which take photos and videos, are invasive
-Starr ranted on Facebook hoping for sympathy but most users seem angered by his demand for restaurant manager to lose their livelihood


wwwdotdailymail.co.uk/news/article-2516417/Nick-Starr-rants-Seattle-cafe-bans-wearing-Google-Glass.html#ixzz2mFzq9juB

A Seattle restaurant has chucked out a customer who refused to take off his Google Glass.

Nick Starr was at the Lost Lake Cafe in the city and was wearing the glasses, which allow users to take pictures and record audio or video, when he was asked to remove them.

After refusing to take them off, he was eventually asked to leave.

He complained about the incident on his Facebook page and suggested the restaurants' owner considers the employment of its night manager.

The Lost Lake Cafe has refused to apologize, saying that they have other customers' interests in mind. They shot back at Starr with their own Facebook post, outlining its policy.

'We recently had to ask a rude customer to leave because of their insistence on wearing and operating Google Glasses inside the restaurant,' the statement said.

'We kindly ask our customers to refrain from wearing and operating Google Glasses inside Lost Lake. We also ask that you not videotape anyone using any other sort of technology.

'If you do wear your Google Glasses inside, or film or photograph people without their permission, you will be asked to stop, or leave. And if we ask you to leave, for God's sake, don't start yelling about your 'rights'. Just shut up and get out before you make things worse.'

Carson
12-01-2013, 03:46 PM
I'll bet the funny thing about the GLASSHOLE's (?) is they probably aren't allowed to utilize much of the data they are collecting.

The ■■■ on the other hand more than likely have a copy and can run it through lots of data bases.

Unregistered
12-02-2013, 11:50 AM
Yes, I bet you are right Carson. Apparently the Glasshole's pictures are less than impressive. People were commenting about how horrible his profile pic is. He used to have a public facebook page, but ironically he has privatized it after the blowback from his glassyfit. He got taken to the woodshed. I guess privacy isn't so bad, is it Mr. Starr??

The owner's reply to the Glasshole's threat to boycott (after he already demanded the manager be fired) is priceless:

"Oohh nooo..... you mean we won't have a flock of google glass wearing man children stinkin up the joint? Shoot!!!!! What are we going to do! The Google Glassers boycott is actually hilarious. jason-owner"
wwwdotcrosstalk.kinja.com/crosstalk-court-restaurant-owner-vs-google-glass-1472409187

Epic.
The word "Glasshole" in the techie dictionary should have a picture of Nick Starr and a reference to this story in the footnotes.

fr33
12-02-2013, 11:57 PM
One effective peaceful resistance is to compete in the marketplace with a product that takes customers away from Google.

oyarde
12-07-2013, 12:48 AM
Hi Ya'll! I was banned years ago b/c I run a business and employ SEVERAL Ron Paul fans and was banned for multiple identities. I also allow (ED) them to use their time as they wanted, meaning, posting to RPF! Anyway, that freedom backfired...
I am NOT bitter, and completely understand.
I DO want to ask a question now that I have the opportunity!
How would y'all handle spotting a GLASSHOLE sitting right NEXT to you in a restaurant?

I will be happy to tell you about my own personal response, but I would like to hear your reactions first, and if you have actually seen one of these Glassholes up front and close, how have you responded?

much respect! thank you for the guest forum!

I would leave if it even came close to looking at me. I do not eat out much , there would be none of those where I eat. I would not allow them on my property.

RickyJ
12-07-2013, 01:11 AM
I would have told them that they could get cancer from wearing a portable computer on their head.

Unregistered
03-20-2014, 09:34 PM
I would have told them that they could get cancer from wearing a portable computer on their head.

Not a bad idea at all. Specifically, "octicular cancer".
We kid ourselves that 1) They care 2) They "believe" you

Unregistered
03-20-2014, 09:36 PM
should read "Occipital cancer"... see what I mean?