Google Glass: Confessions of a New Cyborg

Google Glass, Cyborgs, and the Singularity

Does Google Glass turn you into an awesome Terminator-like Cyborg with a web browser inside of your brain? Or does it just frighten the horses? Will you become a so-called “Glasshole”? Is the software still limited and flawed? Or is the built-in Chrome browser all the Cyborg software you need? In this article, we take a look at some of the pluses and minuses of Glass.

Frequent readers of this blog will note our fascination with theory of the Singularity, as exemplified in Ray Kurzweil’s series of books. (We’ll note that the forthcoming science-fiction movie Transcendence is one way the Singularity might play out. That is,  if it actually happens in the first place.) At least two decades ago, Kurzweil and others predicted Google Glass (“special glasses” as Kurzweil called them) would hit the market right about now. He based this prediction on nothing more than Moore’s law. (Google, of course, has read his books and is well aware of his decades-old predictions. It may even have become something of a self-fulfilling prophesy. Incidentally, they’ve hired him as a director of engineering.)

So naturally we jumped at Google’s April 15th invite to buy Glass. While we’re not certain about this specific device or form factor, we think that this is general direction of the future. Ultimately, the public might decide it prefers  something else: smartwatches, ear computers, or a full VR system like Facebook’s Oculus Rift. Consumers might reject “special glasses” and jump directly from smartphones to Kurzweil’s long-predicted “special contact lenses. (Of course, Google is already working on these as well.) For reasons we talk about in our article on alternatives to the Singularity, we think that increasing cyborgization (or a total bust of civilization, or both) are two future possibilities.

It’s not that we’re so crazy about either of these futures, we just think that the nature of humanity will most likely force one of these two these outcomes. Of course, however creepy, we’ll admit cyborgs sound just a little nicer than violent collapse of civilization. So … how could we turn down a chance to become an early cyborg?

Wearing Google Glass with make you a “Glasshole” utterly repugnant to humanity?

We ignored all sorts of doom and gloom predictions about Google Glass. One article that made Google News warned (apparently seriously) of a litany of dangers facing Glass Explorers. Google Glass users might be mugged or suffer physical violence due to increasing gentrification and the exclusivity of the device. Glass owners are (supposedly) more likely to be sued because the device can be distracting and also makes it too easy to accidentally overshare. The device might get hacked and provide embarrassing video footage to hackers or the NSA.  There was, as yet, little software. The device would almost certain repel any and all romantic interests. (Those already married would become divorced as a result of purchasing the device.) Last but not least the journalist explained he was against the device because he could not personally afford the $1500 price tag.

There many similar articles, at least some of which appear to be serious. There were the stories  documenting incidence of violence against Glass users. (“If it bleeds, it leads” and these Glass explorers were bleeding.) Further blog stories urged users not to buy, hoping the device would be a failure. Articles over several months documenting the “glasshole” phenomenon in which Glass wearers were supposedly socially ostracized. (There is a misconception that Glass is constantly surreptitiously videotaping or photographing everyone, or that the device can facially recognize strangers. This may have led to some of the reactions.)

Frightening the horses

All of this sounds a like the early publicity surrounding about the dangers of the Internet when it first came to widespread public attention in the late 1990s. Or perhaps even like the press the early automobile received: automobiles will frighten the horses.

Warren Buffet explained his contrarian advice to investing: “Be greedy when others are fearful and fearful when others are greedy.” This kind of doom and gloom press suggested widespread fear. “Invest when there is blood in the streets” was the motto of one 19th century investor. OK, physical attacks on Google Glass Explorers, check. Blood in the streets, check. Others fearful, check. So, by these criteria was time for our company to invest in the technology by buying a pair.

Google wasted no time shipping Glass to us. We expected the usual several days shipping time for items with free shipping. Instead, it arrived in Los Angeles the very next day. (Why so slow, Google? No same-day drone or self-driving car delivery yet? 🙂 ) Perhaps because there are still some glitches, Google technical support for Glass is (still) amazing (at this writing). There is a fast technical support hotline as well as on-line forums. And Google is constantly pushing software updates to Glass (no fewer than three the day it arrived).

Unpacking Glass

We did run into some problems. We were anxious to find out how Avril Lavigne sounded in monaural and through Glass’ bone conductivity speaker. It did indeed produce a slight skull massage. The human skull apparently conducts only a limited set of frequencies; bone conductivity is more than adequate for Glass’ chimes and CNN reporting but not so great for music.

Google does provide a mono USB earbud, which provides higher volume and much better sound quality, although still monaural. We assume the device supports stereo and 5.1 durround. It’s is just a matter of time before USB or bluetooth headphones are designed specially for Glass use.

The fact that the device is monaural and “monacled” (only one eye) is probably a significant defect in the device. It’s understandable, because Google needed to reduce costs in the early versions of the device. However, It’s a defect competitors have already noticed, with stereoscopic and stereophonic versions of the device. Putting images in both eyes also supports 3D, which would be both a curse and a blessing for Google. A significant fraction of the population has problems seeing in 3D through this kind of technology. Getting stereoscopic images to line up properly in both eyes would increase both hardware and software complexity. It would increase the risk of nausea and … lawsuits for Google.

Using Google Glass while operating a jackhammer

Indeed, Google warns in their humorous Q&A insert that the device may be inappropriate for the under-13 crowd because it may harm developing eyeballs. (Other questions included whether Glass was completely indestructible, and whether it was OK to wear Glass while operating a jackhammer, scuba diving, or driving. Readers can guess the answers to these questions. The insert’s title “You’ve got questions, we’ve got answers” might be an homage to an old Radio Shack tagline.)

Google Glass as a Virtual Reality or Augmented Reality device

Surprising, we found that the half-mirror caused little disturbance to our eyes when the device was off, especially if we used the supplied shades. But projecting an image into only one eye, and in field of vision, must have hazards. For starters, if we’re watching a video in the right eye using Glass, isn’t there a risk that the left eye will develop lazy eye syndromes? This is where stereoscopic vision might help, although it comes at risk of its own vision problems.

We found we could view video comfortably by closing the left idea. Alternatively, we could align the video so that it appeared to project against a wall, giving both ideas something to focus on. (The video those creates a ‘real hallucination’ of a TV screen that doesn’t exist.)

Health risks from Google Glass?

We’re probably exaggerating the potential vision and nausea problems somewhat here, but they are issues that should be considered in the product design. It might be good if the viewer could be folded out of the way entirely when not in use, so as not to disturb vision (but still allow for audible chimes and sensors to be active). Other devices in this realm have similar concerns. The Oculus Rift VR system has a very high video refresh rate specifically to reduce nausea, but even so it is a major concern with that device. In general, anytime the brain is suddenly receiving contradictory information from previously working senses it concludes it may be ill, and seems to send a nausea message that you might want to take things easy until you recover from your illness.

1 2 3 4