• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Seattle Restaurant Ejects Customer Wearing Google Glass

I can think of a few things Google Glass is capable of doing well right now: photography is high on the short list. Most of everything else does not work well.

The suspicion is warranted.

In the future, it will be a difficult discussion.

I see a market opening for a pocket sized EMP (electro-magnetic pulse) type function which pulses every 20 seconds or so to disrupt electronics, hopefully without burning them out. If its peoples rights to use Google glasses wherever they go the same rights apply to the shop owner who can disrupt the use of those devices once a user enters their establishment.
 
I see a market opening for a pocket sized EMP (electro-magnetic pulse) type function which pulses every 20 seconds or so to disrupt electronics, hopefully without burning them out. If its peoples rights to use Google glasses wherever they go the same rights apply to the shop owner who can disrupt the use of those devices once a user enters their establishment.

Oh it certainly is their right. I just think that eventually if it is that technology that becomes important to consumers, then businesses will probably have to give in much of the time. Eventually, you looked a little silly banning people from using a cellphone to look up more information on a product.
 
Oh it certainly is their right. I just think that eventually if it is that technology that becomes important to consumers, then businesses will probably have to give in much of the time. Eventually, you looked a little silly banning people from using a cellphone to look up more information on a product.

Agreed - I would just like the option you know? I'd like to have those islands of non-electronics for those rare Sunday's I'd like to walk down to a coffee shop or bistro, sit in a chair, sip coffee and a munch a biscotti in silence without laptops, pads, phones, texting and the rest of it. I find I need those unplugged days and places. It's near impossible for me to do that at home. But I'm off on a tangent.....
 
Agreed - I would just like the option you know? I'd like to have those islands of non-electronics for those rare Sunday's I'd like to walk down to a coffee shop or bistro, sit in a chair, sip coffee and a munch a biscotti in silence without laptops, pads, phones, texting and the rest of it. I find I need those unplugged days and places. It's near impossible for me to do that at home. But I'm off on a tangent.....

With Google Glass, I am immensely concerned about public sharing, or rather, public shaming. I think it's something the public (including business owners) ought to be able to have a meta-discussion on.
 
I want to eat at your restaurant. Do you own a restaurant?


That's about the last kind of biz I'd open. Loads of perishables and bad hours. If I were rich enough to set one up and hire a manger to run it I might consider it.

Back in Augusta ga I fantasized about turning this giant brick old police station that had been shut down into a theme retaurant. Have prison bar jail cells all along the walls with a table in each one. Some shackles on the cell walls. Servers wearing prison pin stripes or cop outfits.
 
Can you quote in the story where it says that? I just re-read the article and it didn't say anything like that and the user in question's facebook page is currently "unavailable". Please don't make things up...

Quote what it does from the story? No. But I am also mildly familiar with the item.

See this. What it Does ? Google Glass
 
So why can't a restaurant owner do the same? There are many things that people don't want videoed in a business setting?

There is personal information that can be used to steal identity.

Some control over information must be had to protect customers.

I would also add that you're going to have a harder time convincing people that their smart devices and Google glasses hinder the functionality of a restaurant-going experience as much as it would a movie-going experience.
 
I think the Google Glass is much worse as what you are videoing can be upload directly to Google and social media. No decision has to be made, it just happens.

Well, decision does have to get made. Pictures are uploaded into a private gallery, for them to be shared the user would need to make choices and take some kind of action. That's no different than if you were taking hte picture with your S4
 
It's, essentially, like a smartphone that's hands-free. There's no reason to think he was filming, but utilizing its computer-esque abilities.

The issue is that with cell phones, based on the way they're shaped and used, one can reasonably make an assumption when someone is taking a picture or recording you. While it can be done at semi-discreet angles, typically to take any kind of worth while image with a smart phone requires you to hold it up shoulder level or so and usually extended in front of you so you can actually see what it is the camera is capturing. These are all obvious and recognizable signs that people generally can see and know "they're using a camera"

With google glass, there's few good ways to truly know when someone is simply looking your direction or actively filming/taking a picture your direction. There's no clear and obvious visual cue or notion that clearly resignates with people to let them know. Because of this it's understandable that the default assumption is that recording would be happening, becuase there's no way to know either way and so you assume the worst. Where as with a cell phone, if they haev it out and facing down as they tap on the screen then there's no reason or expectation that they're using the camera.
 
Of course not, everyone hates cops.

I don't hate cops and personally, I respect the difficult jobs they do on a daily basis. But that doesn't make me blind to the reality that some police are down right criminal in the way they treat the general public and suspects in particular. We recently had here, just north of Toronto, where a police officer was called to a mall to arrest a person accused of vandalism by mall security. The "suspect" was brutally assaulted by the officer and the officer charged the suspect with resisting arrest and assaulting a police officer. But for the fact the mall had security in the back areas where this occurred, this "suspect" might have been convicted on the word of the officer. However, because of the video, the "suspect" had all charges dropped and the officer has been convicted and is appealling but will soon be serving a lengthy prison sentence.
 
I don't hate cops and personally, I respect the difficult jobs they do on a daily basis. But that doesn't make me blind to the reality that some police are down right criminal in the way they treat the general public and suspects in particular. We recently had here, just north of Toronto, where a police officer was called to a mall to arrest a person accused of vandalism by mall security. The "suspect" was brutally assaulted by the officer and the officer charged the suspect with resisting arrest and assaulting a police officer. But for the fact the mall had security in the back areas where this occurred, this "suspect" might have been convicted on the word of the officer. However, because of the video, the "suspect" had all charges dropped and the officer has been convicted and is appealling but will soon be serving a lengthy prison sentence.

This is why I have no problem with security cameras.
 
This is why I have no problem with security cameras.

People have no problem with security cameras, in general, because we pretty much all agree with the purpose of the surveillance and we know the video is not being used or made accessible to millions of people over the internet. Nobody is going to be checking me out with Google Glasses, so I'm not personally all that concerned, but it seems pretty creepy to me that a person would want to watch, video and record strangers they see in a restaurant setting.

Seems to me young people and tech savvy individuals have allowed themselves to be "captured" in many ways, from Facebook to now these glasses. Guess I'm on the other extreme - I refuse to use social media and I try to have as low a profile as possible on the internet. Those who promote new technology are waiting for the day when people like me die away and resistance ends.
 
People have no problem with security cameras, in general, because we pretty much all agree with the purpose of the surveillance and we know the video is not being used or made accessible to millions of people over the internet. Nobody is going to be checking me out with Google Glasses, so I'm not personally all that concerned, but it seems pretty creepy to me that a person would want to watch, video and record strangers they see in a restaurant setting.

Seems to me young people and tech savvy individuals have allowed themselves to be "captured" in many ways, from Facebook to now these glasses. Guess I'm on the other extreme - I refuse to use social media and I try to have as low a profile as possible on the internet. Those who promote new technology are waiting for the day when people like me die away and resistance ends.

Resistance is futile.
 
Shop owners, who are inviting the public into their establishment to do business, owe various legal duties to those who enter their establishment. The agreement between the owner and the public at large includes obligations to admit whatever part of the public wants to do business. There are circumstances under which an owner can eject people, but this is not one of them.

What you call a fairy tale, the rest of us call American law.

this is absolutely one of them, just like "no shirts, no shoes, no service"
 
The issue is that with cell phones, based on the way they're shaped and used, one can reasonably make an assumption when someone is taking a picture or recording you. While it can be done at semi-discreet angles, typically to take any kind of worth while image with a smart phone requires you to hold it up shoulder level or so and usually extended in front of you so you can actually see what it is the camera is capturing. These are all obvious and recognizable signs that people generally can see and know "they're using a camera"

With google glass, there's few good ways to truly know when someone is simply looking your direction or actively filming/taking a picture your direction. There's no clear and obvious visual cue or notion that clearly resignates with people to let them know. Because of this it's understandable that the default assumption is that recording would be happening, becuase there's no way to know either way and so you assume the worst. Where as with a cell phone, if they haev it out and facing down as they tap on the screen then there's no reason or expectation that they're using the camera.

It would seem fairly obvious to me if someone was recording, i.e. their head turned at an odd angle, targeting and following, etc. This article also states that there are way to check and see if someone is recording:

To check if that super nerd is recording you as you go about your daily business, look them in the eye and check if the lens is lit up.
First, the device's screen is illuminated whenever it's in use, and that applies to taking a picture or recording a video.
Second, Glass requires the user to either speak a command - "Ok Glass, take a picture" or "Ok Glass, record a video" - or to take an explicit action by pressing the button on the top of Glass's frame. In each case, the illuminated screen, voice command or gesture all make it clear to those around the device what the user is doing.

EDIT: Also found this.
 
Do you realize that recording someone's conversation does not require their knowledge or permission?

The app developers are just covering their ass - it is not illegal.
Yes I do, and you're off point.
 
In Florida it is a criminal offense to do an audio recording of anyone unless they first give express permission to do so.

Florida Recording Law
Florida's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. Florida makes it a crime to intercept or record a "wire, oral, or electronic communication" in Florida, unless all parties to the communication consent. See Fla. Stat. ch. 934.03. Florida law makes an exception for in-person communications when the parties do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the conversation, such as when they are engaged in conversation in a public place where they might reasonably be overheard. If you are operating in Florida, you may record these kinds of in-person conversations without breaking the law. However, you should always get the consent of all parties before recording any telephone conversation and any in-person that common sense tells you is private.
As I said before, if you are sitting in a restaurant, you do not have "a reasonable expectation of privacy", and recording you does not violate your right to privacy.
 
What other reason exists for wearing them?
That's how you use them. You wear them. There is no other way.

Google can defuse the situation by incorporating a manual shutter, a cover door over the camera.
 
I wonder why the customer chose to leave instead of putting them away?

What was he doing with them?

Was he there to eat or video?
I suspect he wasn't taking video at all. Probably just arguing Obama's extension of troops in Afghanistan on DebatePolitics.com.

He probably left because he was embarrassed. I've felt the same when asked to leave for OC'ing my handgun.

Personally I'm waiting for this tech to get down to contact lenses, where the lenses is a peripheral device and the real computer looks like a hearing aid or bluetooth on the ear. I would love to have that. As it is I love having a Motorola Sliver speaking audio books and using voice commands to the phone in my pocket. If I would have a contact lenses to accompany that....




tumblr_m5mmlpJWDy1qcnzjbo1_1280.jpg




...sooo many apps in waiting for the 'Google Lens' or 'Google Eye' or whatever the call it....the iEye....ultimate HUD experience, GPS, speedometer, music without looking away from the road...a firearms training app that can help you learn proper sight picture and actually knows where you're focusing while aiming (a lens could detect your actual lens flexing to focus)...detect flinching in anticipation of the shot and send a custom stimuli to train you out of it...hell even display how many rounds you've fired.

Imagine the alarm clock app on a lens displaying progressively funny pictures to wake you up....or grose pictures to kick you out of bed...
 
Last edited:
Florida Recording Law

As I said before, if you are sitting in a restaurant, you do not have "a reasonable expectation of privacy", and recording you does not violate your right to privacy.

The property owner may still bar the devices.
 
Back
Top Bottom