Gives one considerable pause and cause to become a Luddite.
George Pal,
Sometimes I think there’s a Butlerian Jihad in the offing.
File this one in the “Facebook” file. Why would anyone consent to use either one?
George Pal Says:
“Gives one considerable pause and cause to become a Luddite.”
A constant theme of cyberpunk books is that to be left alone by tech you must out think them on a tech level.
Dont want to be on google glasses? Add some bright light, outside the spectrum people can see, to YOUR clothes. 🙂
Already worth it considering all the cameras mounted everywhere.
ziontruth Says:
“Sometimes I think there’s a Butlerian Jihad in the offing.”
The people are google seem be bad enough on their own. Lisa Simpson called it.
It’s a reference to Frank Herbert’s Dune. In the backstory, thinking machines had been perfected to such a level that humanity, led by a certain Jean Butler, reacted catastrophically by smashing them all. Following the Butlerian Jihad, no computing machines were allowed any longer; feats of computation were entrusted to specially trained humans (mentats).
To think this book was written in the 1960s, long before an inkling of the pervasive networking we have today…
Guerilla war countermeasure: Conceal carry an apple everywhere you go and as soon as you spot someone wearing google spy wear simply whip out your apple and hold it in front of your face.
At the end of the day, if this succeeds, it’s NOT because Google is evil, but because people are stupid enough to accept it.
Parker, an idea that might be fruitful. (sorry.) It worked for neo.
I refuse to use Google and Facebook. I use Bing but don’t trust them much either. I hate Amazon. They seem to think they know everything about me. “People with your tastes also bought these books. People who bought those sandals also bought these.” They think they know my mind and can cajole me into buy, buy, buy. They’re worse than door to door salesmen.
What’s to be done? The benefits of connectivity are plain to see, but when it comes at the price of having no privacy, the price is getting very steep.
J.J.: marketing tactics such as Amazon uses were also in part responsible for Obama’s 2012 win, according to some articles I read describing his cyber-campaign. Don’t have time to look it up now, but it was done by analyzing voters and designing appeals that were targeted to their tastes.
Right you are, neo. As I understand it Google sent them some cyber-geeks to help them design the programs. Thanks, Google!
I’m so torn! I love tech and think that living in this time is wonderful, but… Big Brother. Yikes.
Google Now is the sneakier cousin of Glass: it’s banking on your loving the timely convenience of its “cards” showing up just when and how you need them, but in order to work its best, you have to use Google to search for EVERYTHING. It’s so cool, but it makes users voluntarily work toward giving Google a monopoly on search.
When Google first came onto the scene, I was comforted by the whole “Don’t be evil” thing. Now I consider the fact that the Left generally (of which Google is a part, giant business or not) is so susceptible to projection and Newspeak, and it makes me want to throw my super-cool phone off a cliff.
Nothing good has ever come from Google or Facebook.
Re: “Don’t be evil”. It’s pretty obvious that the Google head honchos are leftists who assume that nothing they do that serves the cause of leftism can possibly be evil.
Folks, sorry, the power these things represent in the hands of USERS is just phenomenal. It’s incredible what can be done WITH these things in a positive light.
For example — most people don’t particularly like signage. It adds visual clutter, distraction, and so forth — there are all manner of locations where the local gestapo county commissioners have restricted the size of signage and even demanded a lot of input into what is put into the public view.
Further, on streets, the argument is that, and studies support, that reducing the amount of street signage (i.e., “Speed Limit” “Ped X” and so forth) actually IMPROVES driving and causes fewer accidents, on the notion that such signs actually distract the drivers too much.
Glosses offer an alternative — we could easily have a world where there were NO ACTUAL SIGNS. All signs could become virtual, and would only reflect information based on your current goals — Looking for a restaurant? All the buildings you look at that are restaurants have signs on them. All the auto body shops, the printing/copy shops, the book stores — they have nothing.
Driving down the street? The speed limit signs only show up if you’re exceeding the speed limit.
As to the privacy concerns, these are relevant, but they merely require that the glosses be properly designed to control what information gets passed back to Google … and, as long as Google does what it has done with Android — made the standard, then put it out for the tech people to utilize — this need not be a problem, as the VENDORS will provide the level of control that the USERS demand from them. The Glosses will not report back to GOOGLE, but to their own servers and analytical programs. Bingo. Privacy concerns solved.
I’m not saying such concerns are invalid, only that they’re being overblown as a problem. It’s good to voice concern, but there’s not going TO BE any major loss of privacy if you don’t want it.
“Yet that is the reality of Google Glass. Everything you see, Google sees. You don’t own the data, you don’t control the data and you definitely don’t know what happens to the data. Put another way — what would you say if instead of it being Google Glass, it was Government Glass? A revolutionary way of improving public services, some may say. Call me a cynic, but I don’t think it’d have much success.”
An interesting take on augmented reality science fiction.
However, you need hardware protections, like a firewall, that keeps the data for yourself. Of course, the same may be said about Facebook servers… but few seems to care about the risk of putting up their own intelligence profiles for kidnapping, assassination, blackmail, etc materials up there entirely voluntarily.
Google is run and controlled by Democrats, for the most part.
While the risk may be about as low as the media being Democrats in 1990s turning into a fascist propaganda arm…. that is not to say the risk is zero. It’s slightly more than 50% at this point.
Leave a Reply
HTML tags allowed in your
comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
Gives one considerable pause and cause to become a Luddite.
George Pal,
Sometimes I think there’s a Butlerian Jihad in the offing.
File this one in the “Facebook” file. Why would anyone consent to use either one?
George Pal Says:
“Gives one considerable pause and cause to become a Luddite.”
A constant theme of cyberpunk books is that to be left alone by tech you must out think them on a tech level.
Dont want to be on google glasses? Add some bright light, outside the spectrum people can see, to YOUR clothes. 🙂
Already worth it considering all the cameras mounted everywhere.
ziontruth Says:
“Sometimes I think there’s a Butlerian Jihad in the offing.”
The people are google seem be bad enough on their own. Lisa Simpson called it.
It’s a reference to Frank Herbert’s Dune. In the backstory, thinking machines had been perfected to such a level that humanity, led by a certain Jean Butler, reacted catastrophically by smashing them all. Following the Butlerian Jihad, no computing machines were allowed any longer; feats of computation were entrusted to specially trained humans (mentats).
To think this book was written in the 1960s, long before an inkling of the pervasive networking we have today…
Guerilla war countermeasure: Conceal carry an apple everywhere you go and as soon as you spot someone wearing google spy wear simply whip out your apple and hold it in front of your face.
At the end of the day, if this succeeds, it’s NOT because Google is evil, but because people are stupid enough to accept it.
Parker, an idea that might be fruitful. (sorry.) It worked for neo.
I refuse to use Google and Facebook. I use Bing but don’t trust them much either. I hate Amazon. They seem to think they know everything about me. “People with your tastes also bought these books. People who bought those sandals also bought these.” They think they know my mind and can cajole me into buy, buy, buy. They’re worse than door to door salesmen.
What’s to be done? The benefits of connectivity are plain to see, but when it comes at the price of having no privacy, the price is getting very steep.
J.J.: marketing tactics such as Amazon uses were also in part responsible for Obama’s 2012 win, according to some articles I read describing his cyber-campaign. Don’t have time to look it up now, but it was done by analyzing voters and designing appeals that were targeted to their tastes.
Right you are, neo. As I understand it Google sent them some cyber-geeks to help them design the programs. Thanks, Google!
I’m so torn! I love tech and think that living in this time is wonderful, but… Big Brother. Yikes.
Google Now is the sneakier cousin of Glass: it’s banking on your loving the timely convenience of its “cards” showing up just when and how you need them, but in order to work its best, you have to use Google to search for EVERYTHING. It’s so cool, but it makes users voluntarily work toward giving Google a monopoly on search.
When Google first came onto the scene, I was comforted by the whole “Don’t be evil” thing. Now I consider the fact that the Left generally (of which Google is a part, giant business or not) is so susceptible to projection and Newspeak, and it makes me want to throw my super-cool phone off a cliff.
Nothing good has ever come from Google or Facebook.
Re: “Don’t be evil”. It’s pretty obvious that the Google head honchos are leftists who assume that nothing they do that serves the cause of leftism can possibly be evil.
Folks, sorry, the power these things represent in the hands of USERS is just phenomenal. It’s incredible what can be done WITH these things in a positive light.
For example — most people don’t particularly like signage. It adds visual clutter, distraction, and so forth — there are all manner of locations where the local gestapo county commissioners have restricted the size of signage and even demanded a lot of input into what is put into the public view.
Further, on streets, the argument is that, and studies support, that reducing the amount of street signage (i.e., “Speed Limit” “Ped X” and so forth) actually IMPROVES driving and causes fewer accidents, on the notion that such signs actually distract the drivers too much.
Glosses offer an alternative — we could easily have a world where there were NO ACTUAL SIGNS. All signs could become virtual, and would only reflect information based on your current goals — Looking for a restaurant? All the buildings you look at that are restaurants have signs on them. All the auto body shops, the printing/copy shops, the book stores — they have nothing.
Driving down the street? The speed limit signs only show up if you’re exceeding the speed limit.
As to the privacy concerns, these are relevant, but they merely require that the glosses be properly designed to control what information gets passed back to Google … and, as long as Google does what it has done with Android — made the standard, then put it out for the tech people to utilize — this need not be a problem, as the VENDORS will provide the level of control that the USERS demand from them. The Glosses will not report back to GOOGLE, but to their own servers and analytical programs. Bingo. Privacy concerns solved.
I’m not saying such concerns are invalid, only that they’re being overblown as a problem. It’s good to voice concern, but there’s not going TO BE any major loss of privacy if you don’t want it.
“Yet that is the reality of Google Glass. Everything you see, Google sees. You don’t own the data, you don’t control the data and you definitely don’t know what happens to the data. Put another way — what would you say if instead of it being Google Glass, it was Government Glass? A revolutionary way of improving public services, some may say. Call me a cynic, but I don’t think it’d have much success.”
An interesting take on augmented reality science fiction.
However, you need hardware protections, like a firewall, that keeps the data for yourself. Of course, the same may be said about Facebook servers… but few seems to care about the risk of putting up their own intelligence profiles for kidnapping, assassination, blackmail, etc materials up there entirely voluntarily.
Google is run and controlled by Democrats, for the most part.
While the risk may be about as low as the media being Democrats in 1990s turning into a fascist propaganda arm…. that is not to say the risk is zero. It’s slightly more than 50% at this point.