So....Google Glass is coming out later this year. My understanding is this, this is a wearable pair of glasses with built in computing capability using Android software. It is discreet and includes a camera with video, so I could envision someone wearing these at a range and intentionally or not, video gets uploaded to a Google cloud and facial recognition software determines who is at the range by correlating other databases like Facebook or other social media. Then TPTB can pin down when people were at the range and identify firearms used. Same thing for gun shows, protests, etc. Google Glass - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia I'm no lawyer, but to my understanding, Washington is a two-party recording state. Most are not. So, in Washington, it would be unlawful for someone to record me in a private setting without my consent. But in a public setting where privacy is not reasonably expected, I could be recorded without my consent. Most jurisdictions have laws against wearing a mask and jamming cell signal. One could work with owners of ranges and other favorite hangouts to make prohibit these. One could also work with local lawmakers to make laws against them. Do any of the tech-savvy Monkeys have any other ideas for personal countermeasures?
The real question here is: "What is the Comm Link that is used to connect these "Glasses" to the Internet?" If it is WiFi, or BlueTooth, that is one thing, but if it is a Cellular/PCS Link that is something else, altogether. There isn't much room for a Battery in the glasses, so I would seriously doubt that the connect Link, coming out of the Glasses, is Cellular/PCS, as any Battery small enough to fit in the glasses, wouldn't power a Cellular/PCS RF Device for very long. SO, what I suspect is that the glasses themselves, uses BlueTooth, or maybe WiFi, (but not likely Wifi for the same Reasons as Cellular/PCS) to connect to an Android PAD, or Cellphone, that then connects to the outside world. Should this be the connection, then it is trivial to scan the 2.4Ghz band, and snoop out such devices, as BlueTooth is only a 30 Meter Comm Link, and ALL Devices in BlueTooth MUST announce themselves to the local area, in order to negotiate a Pairing, with other devices, in the same space, and carve out some bandwidth, for that Pairing. So if you want to keep your Privacy, you just monitor the 2.4Ghz Band, and if an "Unusual" BlueTooth Connection pops up, you look around for a NEW person who just walked in, and go ask them to, either, turn the Link OFF, or Leave the Area. It is your responsibility to Protect your own Privacy.
Google Glass patent reveals design details Google shows what it's like to use Google Glass InSight – a Google Glass app that recognizes people by what they're wearing Beyond Google Glass: Creating next generation augmented reality the next generation. (this guy scares me) Google Project Glass now available for developers, to consumers in 2014 !
If the TPTB are so worried about people at the range that they want to get video and take pictures y not just use a cell phone they can do that with out you know also ... If all you have to worry about in life is the man taking your picture with a gun then i want to be in your shoes!!! sometimes it seems to that people look for things to worry about...
Wear a disguise at the range- confuses the facial recognition software a bit. Just don't get your beard to close to the action!!
if you look up google glass and all u can think about is TPTB taking pictures of u at the range YOU ARE WORRIED!!!!
I would be concerned about the slippery slope of our personal right to privacy. In time, your every action will be on public record. Look at how facebook and other media platforms are being used by employers in screening people and as an intel source for NSA and others. All of these neat gizmo's eventually are used as means of information collection by big brother and that is where the concern lies for me.
This country is rapidly moving toward becoming a closed society. 1984 and Hunger Games are becoming reality. Abortion is all too common and euthanasia will eventually be "mandated" as part of Obamacare (we already have the "death panels"). Mark my words. It will one day become a crime to hide your identity from facial recognition cameras (like wearing a mask or a burka). It will be a sad day, indeed.
Amazing. So many worried about "Big Brother' spying on us, yet now too many are more than willing to put the most personal of information on these 'social media' sites - like I care about that. As an author, I've had more than one person suggest that putting up a Facebook/whatever page could help with sales. It isn't worth what I would have to give up for access. No thank you, very much. It isn't Big Brother, it's your next door neighbor with a video system, ATMs, 'security cameras' , red light cameras and a whole host of other recording devices. This gadget is just another brink in the wall.
If I see someone wearing GoggleGlass, I will inform them, that they do NOT have my permission to photograph "Me" at any time, and if they do, and I find out that they have, I will sue their Literal Pants Off....
then, if he winks his right eye at you in reply, sue him. That is all it now takes for him to take your photo.
California motorist cleared in Google Glass case SAN DIEGO (AP) — A San Diego traffic court threw out a citation Thursday against a woman believed to be the first motorist in the country ticketed for driving while wearing a Google Glass computer-in-eyeglass device. Commissioner John Blair ruled that Cecilia Abadie was not guilty because she had been cited under a code that requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the device was in operation, which the officer did not provide. However, Blair did find that the language of the code specifically bars the operation of a video or TV screen or similar device on the front of a vehicle while it is moving — a provision that Blair said could be broad enough to apply to Google Glass. The device in a kind of glass-wear frame features a thumbnail-size transparent display above the right eye. Abadie said she was happy she won her case but hoped the court would have ruled that Google Glass is legal to wear while driving whether activated or not. "I believe it's an initial success but we have a long way to go," said Abadie, wearing the device outside the courthouse after the ruling. Legal experts say the lower court ruling does not set a legal precedent but marks the beginning of a number of cases they expect courts to confront as lawmakers struggle to keep pace with fast-evolving technology. "The fun is just starting," said Vivek Wadhwa, a fellow at Standford Law School. From driverless cars to wearable devices that can enhance human functions, Wadhwa said, there are a host of legal questions to be answered. For example, when a Google-operated car is on the road and hits someone, who is responsible — the passenger, car manufacturer or software developer? Abadie, a software developer, said she is among some 30,000 people called "explorers" who have been selected to try out Google Glass before the technology becomes widely available to the public later this year. Abadie was cited after being pulled over for speeding on a San Diego freeway in October and the California Highway Patrol officer noticed she was wearing Google Glass. Officer Keith Odle, a 10-year veteran of the CHP, testified Thursday that the "hardware for this device was blocking her peripheral vision on her right side," and that's why she sped by his patrol car at 85 mph in her Toyota Prius. Blair rejected that as speculation, noting that Odle had never worn the device. He also threw out Odle's documentation of her speed and found Abadie not guilty of that count. The commissioner also asked Odle to turn off his cellphone after it rang twice interrupting the proceedings. Abadie's attorney William Concidine said the device was not activated when she was driving and the code was irrelevant because it does not specifically state that drivers are barred from using Google Glass. He said Thursday he hopes the case will spur lawmakers to review legislation on the issue, otherwise the code will be open to interpretation by individual courts. The lightweight frames are equipped with a hidden camera and tiny display that responds to voice commands. The technology can be used to do things such as check email, learn background about something the wearer is looking at, or to get driving directions. Legislators in at least three states — Delaware, New Jersey and West Virginia — have introduced bills that would ban driving with Google Glass. Google officials did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment on Blair's ruling. Google's website contains an advisory for users: "Read up and follow the law. Above all, even when you're following the law, don't hurt yourself or others by failing to pay attention to the road."
I do not think think you have much to worry about unless whales, moose, deer or any other wildlife indigenous to your area start becoming technologically advanced.
Just remember, there is a non-technical solution. It's the soft squishy thing toting the tech. That is the weakest link.
