Though Glass is amazing, it will give a whole new meaning to tracking user information.
As you get information regarding what you're seeing, Google is logging everything you see.
A map with with a line detailing everywhere you've been over the course of years. A video displaying everything you saw on your real trip to Paris or wherever else-- not based on what you saw that day, but based on the information Google has about that area, those landmarks, etc.
Privacy could cease to exist while you're wearing Google Glass.
Recording alone is doesn't equate to a loss of privacy. If you kept detailed written notes on everywhere you go, as long as those notes don't get disclosed to anyone else, you haven't lost any privacy.
Taking a paranoid and oversimplified approach to privacy makes it's more difficult to have the complex, nuanced discussions necessary to actually protect privacy in meaningful ways.
Keeping detailed notes on everywhere you go isn't something that would be done as lightly as putting on a pair of glasses. You would consider the implications of the existence of that data before keeping it. With something like Glass, that part of the process gets skipped.
The argument for trusting Google with your data is that their privacy policy keeps your data safe. I don't doubt that Google has the best of intentions, but that doesn't mean my data is safe. A snooping employee, a change in policy that isn't necessarily over the line but isn't comforting either, security breaches, subpoenas (in the spirit of http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/8/twitter-fight...). There are a lot of ways that having that data in someone else's pocket can backfire.
Yes, it would be fine if there were some guarantee that no one could ever see my data. There isn't. It was not my intention to oversimplify anything. The last thing I want is to cause damage to the cause.
It's not paranoid when you include the caveats, as you do here. But to simply say that "Privacy could cease to exist while you're wearing Google Glass" is fear mongering, or paranoia. That statement is both staggerly broad in nature and at the same time, unqualified.
At least Google Glass is an _opt-in_ form of monitoring and observation. If you don't want to wear it, you don't have to. If you want to take it off, you can. Those aspects alone mean it's a lot less worrisome than existing, and much more involuntary, invasions of our privacy.
Opt-in for the user, but not opt-in for the people around them. I don't get to choose to not be recorded. Compounded with modern law stating if you're in public, you can be legally recorded, and that it's already difficult enough as is to explain to people you'd rather they not tag you as being at a location or to take photos and instantly upload them... It's really worrisome. The only reason it isn't is because it's not popular.
If you "have nothing to hide", it's not a big deal. If you're fighting for custody of your child, transgender, gay, a targeted minority, visit a psychologist regularly, or even just happen to do a few things one day that could be misconstrued, all of a sudden, the potential of it taking off becomes a very big deal - sometimes much more so than current privacy issues.
In that respect it's no different from the hundreds of security cameras most of us pass by each day. If you're doing something in the presence of someone else's view, and you know they're pointing a camera of any type at you, it's hard to argue you have an expectation of privacy.
It's really hard to point at Glass and say it's materially different from the broad array of recording devices already out there. If you're someone trying to avoid being recorded, those are a much bigger problem - they're pervasive, generally have better viewpoints (can see more total area) and often have built-in illumination as well.
Privacy could cease to exist while you're wearing Google Glass
Sounds about right to me and I'd be extremely skeptical of any claims to the contrary. The default result of any data entering a computer system owned by someone else is that it is no longer private. Specifically the US, the government considers any data held by a commercial entity to be fair game.
Compare to:
Privacy could cease to exist while you're chatting on Facebook
My assumption was that it wouldn't necessary to outline the caveats. As I said in my response to your criticism, it wasn't my intention to be detrimental to my own cause. I'll keep in mind that I need to provide such details when voicing concerns in the future.
As for your second paragraph, I already voiced my concerns on that. The implications of opting-in are not well-considered by the average consumer. It's taken for granted that personal data is protected.
Privacy hasn't died yet. The problem isn't that Google Glass exists or that cell phones exist. The problem is awareness. The problem is the same for cell phones.
As you get information regarding what you're seeing, Google is logging everything you see.
A map with with a line detailing everywhere you've been over the course of years. A video displaying everything you saw on your real trip to Paris or wherever else-- not based on what you saw that day, but based on the information Google has about that area, those landmarks, etc.
Privacy could cease to exist while you're wearing Google Glass.