'Wearable Computing Will Be the Norm,' Says Google Glass Team 196
An anonymous reader writes "In an interview with Wired, Google's Steve Lee and Babak Parviz spoke about how they've come to use Project Glass in their lives, and where they expect the mobile computing industry to go in the near future. 'We've long thought the camera's important, but since we've started using this in public and with our family and friends and in real situations, not just hidden in the Google lab, we've truly seen the power of being hands-free. ... It's my expectation that in three to five years it will actually look unusual and awkward when we view someone holding an object in their hand and looking down at it. Wearable computing will become the norm.'"
already the norm (Score:2)
People with all the smart phones around, people with blue tooth headphones in their ears, it's already 'the norm', it's just it's not very convenient to have various electronic interfaces sticking out of your body, once the technology allows people to have all of this stuff on their bodies without the inconvenience of wires, weird gadgets that make you look like an Apocalypse Now character [wikipedia.org], then it will be part of daily life.
Re:already the norm (Score:5, Informative)
I find it convenient. If you buy a non crappy BT headset you don't even notice you are wearing it. I also find it convieient that I dont need the headset in the car and the car is a large speakerphone so everyone can join in on the call. Finally, my BT helmet completes the trifecta while I am on the motorcycle.
What is inconvenient, is that Car makers and helmet makers are too lazy to make a proper HUD system to show information in my line of sight.
Having a camera/webcam strapped to my head is not highly important in any way. I already have that in my secondary BT headset, a LooxCie camera/BT headset. It's actually quite worthless having a camera on my head all day long, unless I want to live cast boring as hell things... Which is what people do with these.
The biggest convenience is I can easily unplug by removing the headset and upgrades to newer tech at a whim. Silly people that want surgery to have their interface will always be using way out of date hardware.
Anyone using implants will be using tech that is at least 5 years out of date, the FDA approval of devices for implant will take at least that long. Let alone that the $199 premium headset will cost $999 plus $12,500 for insertion by a surgeon.
Re: (Score:2)
I would LOVE to have an HUD in my motorcycle helmet! Some bike makers' styling prefers to put a speedo and other pertinent information down on the gas tank (mainly cruisers, which are more popular in the US) and I find that to be disconcerting in high traffic areas. Keeping track of your speed shouldn't take you away from your main job - staying alert and aware of what's happening around you in traffic. Can you tell my current bike is a cruiser? My next one will probably be an adventure-touring bike sim
Re:already the norm (Score:4, Informative)
I am aware of 3 or 4 car models already with HUDs, including the Camaro. Honda Civic's in the last few years have a big digital speed display above the steering wheel. It is much easier to read and I am always bothered when driving another car with a regular speedometer...
I have also seen speed HUDs for skiers before with special glasses, aren't there any already for bikes?
Re: (Score:2)
So as a cyclist, you would love for people who are riding things that weigh a lot more than you do and which can hit a hole and fly in to you at any moment.. to take their eyes off of the road, look down, refocus their eyes on their gas tank, make sure they're going a legal speed, and then look back up.
You should explain why you would prefer this situation over having the information already available to the motorcyclist without moving the head/refocusing the eyes at all.
Re: (Score:2)
take their eyes off of the road, look down, refocus their eyes on their gas tank, make sure they're going a legal speed, and then look back up.
You check your speed often? Usually if I'm not flying by other vehicles and they're not significantly overtaking me I assume I must be going with the flow of traffic, which is usually approximately the speed limit. If I am alone, I reach the limit and don't exceed it (much) so there's no need to constantly check my speed, and on motorcycles you can tell the speed by the sound of the engine.
So no, there's usually no need to check your speed. Do you have a vehicle that is constantly speeding up and slow
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone using implants will be using tech that is at least 5 years out of date, the FDA approval of devices for implant will take at least that long. Let alone that the $199 premium headset will cost $999 plus $12,500 for insertion by a surgeon.
I believe you are sort-of correct. The (surgically implanted) interface will be ~5 years out of date, but the actual device connecting will be up to date. At least that is the way I envision it.
Re: (Score:2)
All these 'smartphones' are computers and they are worn on people. Some have computers in their watches, they are worn.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
All these 'smartphones' are computers and they are worn on people.
Uh, no. Nobody 'wears' a smartphone. They carry a smartphone, sure, but that's an entirely different word and meaning.
Watches are possible, but I haven't seen a single person wearing a watch in the past five years. I doubt pip boys are going to come into fashion, given that there's nothing that can be done on a watch-sized system that can't be done better on a smartphone.
Wearable computers simply aren't happening. What, your password is in your other pants? About the only rational possibility for th
Re: (Score:2)
> Watches are possible, but I haven't seen a single person wearing a watch in the past five years.
Hermit, prisoner or blind ?
Re: (Score:2)
Hermit, prisoner or blind ?
He is right. Wristwatches remain only as fashion items, often very expensive ones. From practical point of view, though, a cell phone is far more practical - it tells you the date and the time, has an alarm clock, a notepad, a calculator, a text message service, a Web browser, and if all that fails you still can call people.
I have a wristwatch, but I do not wear it. There are very, very few occasions when I must know the time constantly throughout the whole day (like when I t
Re: (Score:2)
Wearable computers simply aren't happening. What, your password is in your other pants? About the only rational possibility for them would be some sort of hilariously terrible glasses-equivalent. While that'd make DBZ geeks happy (WHAT DOES THE SCOUTER SAY?!?!?), such an interface would be a disaster from the usability - not to mention, sanity - standpoint.
This.
Just look at how poorly bluetooth does.
Bluetooth headsets have been around for what, at least 10 years now, long before phones were smart, and I still rarely see someone using a bluetooth headset, most people are still holding the phone to their ear, even at times when they shouldn't be like while driving. And at less than $20 they're not expensive, they're just not popular. [walmart.com]
So they claim we're all going to have wearable computers, any day now, when they can't even get the average person to use
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
What about flying cars? That should be #1 especially for me when I can't drive. We know Google is working on automated drivings.
It used to be that... (Score:5, Insightful)
... when you saw someone standing alone and talking, sometimes even getting animated and agitated, you thought they were crazy.
Now you look and hope they're wearing a bluetooth headset before making a judgement.
Soon, with the further miniaturisation of wearable computing, you won't be able to tell the difference between a gesticulating drunken bum, and a drunken, gesticulating businessman.
--
BMO
Re: (Score:2)
...you won't be able to tell the difference between a gesticulating drunken bum, and a drunken, gesticulating businessman.
One is a babbling idiot, the other is homeless.
Re: (Score:2)
... when you saw someone standing alone and talking, sometimes even getting animated and agitated, you thought they were crazy.
Now you look and hope they're wearing a bluetooth headset before making a judgement.
That's still not decisive... The headset might not be on.
Re: (Score:2)
What about when those things get very tiny or even invisible/cloaked? ;)
Re: (Score:2)
you won't be able to tell the difference between a gesticulating drunken bum, and a drunken, gesticulating businessman
I've never been able to tell the difference. What is it?
The typical drunk bum has a better idea what he's talking about than most businessmen (drunk or sober).
Nokia was first with this idea (Score:4, Interesting)
I once saw this concept video [youtube.com]video at Nokia Research Centre in Helsinki more than 3 years ago. Too bad Nokia failed to capitalise it on time and now they are failing big time.
Re: (Score:2)
the idea is much older than that.
what nokia did there was that it had the budget for the video.
3-5 years isn't going to cut for this stuff to breakthrough though.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
In commercials they always show these happy people who have nice houses, often on a beach, they have nice loans and other property, they have time to do nothing but laugh for some reason, their teeth are perfectly white and their clothing looks fresh and it's sunny.
Here is what they don't show [wikipedia.org].
Seriously though, all these ear buds and other types of earphones that go inside the ear - I can't use them. None of them, they fall out, I would like to be able to use them, but I think my ears are too small or somet
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
'capitalis' means somebody who uses savings as investments to build up private means of production and increase his production capacity. Only in a ass backwards society somebody can think that a 'capitalist' means a consumer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
A reseller has his own means of production, reseller is part of the distribution channel, do you think it is more efficient for every company that produces widgets (or whatever, food, energy, etc) to take care of all of the logistics and distribution channels, to set up their own stores, or can you understand that specialisation allows for best results (as long as this specialisation is something that market values)?
Clearly the market proves that having separate companies that handle logistics, delivery, sh
Re: (Score:2)
Second: the producers do not get the WRONG signals about consumption patterns, so it's possible to grow or slow down the production capacity. In an economy it's important to have all the CORRECT signals about prices. With the wrong signals the resources in the economy get mis-allocated.
The main counterpoint to this, is that speculation and arbitrage also has an inherent price in that the speculator is taking a cut of the transaction. This is based upon the difference in prices as perceived by the buyer, seller and speculator. Over time, these differences may get fairly small but when multiplied by the size of the entire market, it still effectively acts as a tax on the entire market, rather than remaining in the collective hands of the normal buyers and sellers. (This assumes that the spe
Re: (Score:2)
"speculator tax" is nonsense, as again, there are speculators on both sides of the transaction. When you buy spot for delivery, to you what is important is that you are not overpaying, not that there are a bunch of speculators betting against each other. OTOH those who sell for delivery want speculation to occur today as they want to bet on the futures market themselves to hedge, it is basically insurance, so they can smooth out possible price spikes or price falls, they want to know more precisely what t
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, and since the question was: are resellers capitalists, the answer (based on my previous response to your question) is yes.
Of-course resellers are capitalists. Distribution channels, suppliers, storage, shipping, handling, logistics, stores, all of this requires using savings and building up the tools needed for production (in their case the production means services) they have tools - from storage facilities and trucks, to shelf space and stores, shipment lanes, and knowledge.
Knowledge and means to org
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For example Me it seems.
Both of my posts were modded down for daring to not worship the holy google.
Here's hoping (Score:3)
they patent the heck out of it, share it with their Android partners, and kick Apple to the curb for violating the unstated rules of the tech patent game.
Re: (Score:2)
they patent the heck out of it, share it with their Android partners
You mean competitors, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Cooptitioners.
They're both competing and cooperating.
They major reason for buying Motorola was for the patents; the reason for that being Apple's move.
Re: (Score:2)
That's from a year ago. Before Google bought Motorola.
In fact, that's part of the reason Goog bought Motorola--so they could share the patent love.
Re: (Score:2)
What are the unstated rules of the tech patent game? We can copy you, but if you try and stop us we will attempt to sue you with FRAND patents?
Re: (Score:2)
The unstated rules were that the patents were merely defensive.
You noticed the Motorola patents but not Apple trying to stop Google and Samsung sales?
There was plenty of black, rounded corner, icon tech before Apple's iBlahs:
Knight-Ridder Tablet
Space Odyssey
LG Prada
Samsung picture frame
Joojoo tablet
Prizm software stack
Bauhaus
Re: (Score:2)
And the patents ARE being used defensively as in "We will defend ourselves using our patents from you copying our research and development efforts"
And the vast majority of the patents are for things other than the physical look. For example the data detector patents are from old Mac OS and Newton tech, way before Google and Motorola even started work on Android. (Admittedly I think blocking import of a phone over a data detector patent is crazy, but thats the way its played out)
To violate a "design patent
Re: (Score:2)
Still sticking to the black-rounded-corner argument? I guess you don't get out much.
Re: (Score:2)
It is cute how naive you are. They are not going to share it with their Android partners,
Re: (Score:2)
Chii?
Don't forget about the end purpose of all that (Score:5, Insightful)
Wearable computing will continue, since modern smartphones are pretty close to the desired ideal.
However many proponents of wearable computing are explicitly associating it to wearing headsets, Borg-like heads-up displays, cameras, GPS, implanted compasses, and whatnot. These, IMO, will not be popular just because there is no need for them. Even the heads-up display is a distraction for most people. A cell phone form factor is with us since the days of ancient clay tablets. It is something that we are well equipped to operate - we can take it, give it, leave it, look at it, and work with it. I can imagine a communicator from ST:TNG as well. But even those communicators, as shown, are pretty limited. They had no video, for example - and many an away team would benefit from that. They would be better off with a modern smartphone, actually, as long as it can communicate with the orbit.
At most I can imagine a heads-up display that is wirelessly linked to the smartphone in your pocket. That would have some use. Beyond that I don't see anything obvious; perhaps future developments give us other hardware that is worth wearing.
Also in all these cases we must remember that the battery technology is still not good enough. Replacing batteries in all these wearable gizmos is a hassle - and a visible expense.
Re:Don't forget about the end purpose of all that (Score:5, Insightful)
At most I can imagine a heads-up display that is wirelessly linked to the smartphone in your pocket. That would have some use. Beyond that I don't see anything obvious; perhaps future developments give us other hardware that is worth wearing.
Every year or two somebody comes up with something that "could replace the mouse". It never does. I'm not saying never will, but I don't see anything coming. Why? Because the mouse is pretty close to perfect. It allows for fine manipulation from the wrist and/or fingertips without fatigue - in fact the arm is almost at rest. Only the nipple, trackball, and touchpad have ever really come close, and I'd argue that most people consider them to be acceptable compromises.
Kinaesthetic peripherals such as the Kinect, the Wiimote, the Move, Gyroscopic mice, heck, even the Gloves of Love from Minority Report - none of them are never going to become ubiquitious input devices like the mouse, because none of them are better than the mouse for general purpose input, in these really fundamental ways. If you want fine motor movement, you generally don't want to get the whole arm involved.
All novel ways to interact with the world are up against similar issues. They can't all be directly compared to the mouse, but for genuinely novel ways of interacting with the world, consider these three questions: 'is it a hassle to use?', 'can you forget it is there?*', and eventually, 'do you look for it, when it is not there?'.
A lot of wearable computing devices won't even pass the first test - you're right about the batteries being a likely issue. Keeping five or six items charged is going to be a pain. But also consider fatigue, fineness of control, etc.
* under 'can you forget it is there?', consider also 'are you always looking for the thing you know exists, which would be simpler to use'... such as a mouse, or sometimes a keyboard. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Glass isn't designed to replace anything. It gives you a new heads up display and an always on camera.
Re: (Score:2)
No one expects wearable computing to replace desktops. No one expects tablets or smartphones to replace them either, but that hasn't stopped them from becoming popular.
Wearable computing, like smartphones/tablets, is about providing seamless access to technology when you're away from the computer. It seeks to supplant the smartphone, not the desktop.
Re: (Score:2)
"Why? Because the mouse is pretty close to perfect. It allows for fine manipulation from the wrist and/or fingertips without fatigue - in fact the arm is almost at rest."
Yet hundreds of thousands of people get injuries from using the mouse.
As for you refusing to accept other and future input devices is not insightful, thats just you being old enough to be a Luddite stuck in your ways.
Lets hope you can live with the future others design for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Or do you have a single pair of shoes you wear to the beach, to the mountain, to work, to a wedding, etc?
Why yes, they are called Tevas. Why yes, I am from California, why do you ask?
Re:Don't forget about the end purpose of all that (Score:5, Funny)
Oddly, I wear a dead heads up display panel all day long every day, they are called GLASSES. it's just the projector display section is defective, but the image enhancement section still works.
Re: (Score:2)
Yah, I totally agree. I think this will be a mostly Google thing and maybe extreme nerds. Sorta like how the Segway was gonna take over the world and it never did. I already wear glasses and I don't necessarily want some thick rimmed things with a hud messing w/any of my vision. My goal with wearing 'real' glasses is to have the frames as lightweight as possible and as little metal as possible - glass only almost. And, unfortunately, I have 2 prescriptions - 1 for close, 1 for distance. So I'd have to have
Re: (Score:2)
what about a low profile heads up display that overlays something in the form factor of a tablet over ANY object in your view and allows you to interact with it the same as a tablet, using a kinect-style input device? Wearable computing could be considered a super-set of the tablet form factor, not mutually exclusive. You are still thinking in terms of usability and comfort issues of wearable computing, but when it becomes invisible and transparent, i.e. you don't even realize you are wearing it, and the
Re: (Score:3)
As I vaguely made it known, I worked (not too far back) in the area of mobile industrial computing. UPS and FedEx are just a small part of the crowd that runs around with tablets, barcode scanners, RFID readers, and transmits all that over the radio direct into the mainframe.
Very few of those guys would want anything that is more sophisticated than a rugged UPS tablet. Why? Because it is rugged. You'd be amazed to learn what requirements - real, necessary requirements - shipping companies specify for thes
Re: (Score:2)
You miss my point entirely. I'm not claiming these issues will be solved within 10 or even 20 years. I'm speaking theoretically. 50 years ago, someone would have said the same thing you are saying about handheld tablet devices. Sometime in the future, it will be clear that there will be shared UI that will be visible and interactive for everyone within range, without any obvious equipment usage. And over time it will be made reliable under severe conditions. The military already uses this type of equi
Re: (Score:2)
4 business men were out playing golf, a Brit, an American, a German & a Japanese.
While teeing up for a shot the Brit pauses and apologises, "Sorry, I have to take this." He raises his cuff to his ear and speaks into his lapel, conducting business. He explains afterwards that he has this new tech that allows him to have a wearable phone.
A short while later the american is about to take a shot and he too pauses, holds his thumb to his ear and little finger to mouth and also conducts business, explaining a
Re: (Score:2)
You have no idea what this technology might do for us.
Yes, of course. My expectations are only of the near future, and I am leaving possibilities open if someone comes up with, say, an implant for operation of computers by a thought.
I am sure you have seen people wearing a string
I am not a fan of *that* kind of behavior :-)
But sure you can have all your gizmos wired. You will be tired of plugging them in and out of that "body LAN" every time you put your hat on or remove it, every time you take the
I'm looking ahead to... (Score:4, Funny)
... see the implications on the professional life.
I want to see a manager blatantly lying to me when wearing one of those. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
"Device? What device?" :-)
Agree and Disagree (Score:5, Interesting)
It's my expectation that in three to five years...
I agree with their view and disagree with it. I agree that wearable computers are the future but I disagree with their timeline - I believe "three to five years" is an enormously, overly aggressive timeframe.
First of all, project Glass is coming to market next year at a price of $1400 (iirc) and is only available for developers (currently - which I would imagine means the price is as low as possible to help get developers involved rather than to generate profits). This is already one year of their three-to-five timeframe eaten up. While I realize that price will come down as the tech gets better and once it's made available to the general public economies of scale will also help drive the price down, I believe there's still far too big a difference between "price the tech has to be sold at to make it a viable business" and "price most consumers are willing to pay". So, first of all, I believe the price is a significant barrier and it will take longer than three to five years to get the price into a realm where the average consumer feels comfortable paying for the tech.
Second, and more importantly, people have zero experience with the interface. Smartphones were set to explode because people a) understood phones and b) understood computers so the marriage of the two as a technology as easy to understand and required minimal learning to use. It was easy for the mass market to pick up and go. For something like project Glass, I cannot see the average person easily figuring out how to use it. Now, understand, this is absolutely independent of how easy it actually is to use - it might be the easiest, most intuitive thing in the world to use but people won't feel that it's easy to use because they've never used anything like it which will serve as a barrier to adoption. People intuitively knew how to use a phone and knew how to use a computer so selling them a phone that was a computer was easy. Selling them a set of glasses that is also a computer will not be an easy sell. Thus, there needs to be a significant amount of effort spent making that usage scenario _feel_ easy and intuitive to the average consumer before they will actually pick up the device and that will only happen over time. It will happen, eventually, but it will take time.
All in all, I agree that wearable computer devices will become the norm but I think that "three to five years" is an enormously optimistic timeframe. There will be early adopters and the like but it will take at least a decade, probably a bit longer, before it solidly penetrates the mass market and becomes "normal".
Re: (Score:2)
Your information is way out of date.
$1400 now for developers. $799 next year. they already released that next year they will be available for nearly have the price they released them at IO for.
Re: (Score:2)
$1400 now for developers. $799 next year. they already released that next year they will be available for nearly have the price they released them at IO for.
Until your average schmoe can go in and get them for free or at least deeply subsidized from their phone provider, they're not going to take over for anything. It's going to have to come down to about $400 for that at best.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not "coming to market" - a TINY group of developers (Americans who were present at the IO when the offer was made) were allowed to pay for a prototype (1500$) - and the price was high to try and discourage riff raff.
Brin hopes to bring it to market in 2014. The final retail price will be much different.
As for getting people to understand it, they are focusing on just a camera to record precious moments from your life, because people understand cameras and many grouse over not getting a shot of their ki
Prescription Eyeglasses (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The first iPad was only 2 years ago. True, it wasn't $1400, but it also wasn't wearable. If this is out initially within the year, then in 3 years it is quite possible that anyone who wants one will have one.
Advertising will kill it (Score:5, Insightful)
We know that any piece of personal technology that CAN support advertising WILL be used for that purpose - whether we want it to, or not. Imagine how intrusive it would be to be using the Google Glass technology to look at something and suddenly an ad. pops up trying to sell us something that looks like what we're looking at.
What's even worse will be the privacy issues. Not only will advertisers be able to track the users as they can now, with 3G, Wifi and BT triangulation, but they'll be able to infiltrate our state of mind by interpreting what or who we're looking at.
Re: (Score:3)
Not on any device I own. I have advertising blocked on everything. Heck I dont even watch LIVE TV. It's all recorded via MythTV and commercials stripped. I listen to podcasts and Sirius radio in the car, no ad's on my phones or PC.
If you just sit there and let them have control, they will blast ad's at you. Dont let them.
Re: (Score:2)
Google don't do pop up ads.
Because I really need more tracking (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:3)
Just needs better input tech, like this... (Score:5, Informative)
If you haven't seen the Leap motion (and no I'm not in any way shape or form connected to the company, although I wish I were!) you should check it out.
It's a super-accurate (I think sub-millimeter), low latency 3D tracker with the ability to follow up to 10 fingers (or other objects like pencils) at once. All in a very small box (USB powered?) box that's expected to sell for $70 (this year). I don't know the volume in which it can track the objects but on the demos it appears to be pretty large, large enough that a belt mounted (or necklace version) would be sufficient.
Voice recognition is good and getting better but there are many time when a point and click(?) interface is still much more efficient. Like when you want to access one link out of many on a web page. Or control a complex virtual device that has many degrees of freedom. Humans have evolved to have hands of extraordinary flexibility and control; just look at the amount of our brain dedicated to them. So let's use them! (The reasons why this Leap device is so good as opposed to say "finger detection" using the Google glasses video-camera is because the resolution is much higher, it tracks in 3D and there might not be a problem with occlusion.)
Of course the Google glasses should be updated to have a stereo display (I think currently it's only in the right eye). That would allow truly interacting with items in 3D. (Of course, the above comments about people gesticulating in space would come to pass! I'm wondering if "I'm sorry your honor but I didn't mean to touch the young lady like that, I was turning the knobs on my virtual stereo receiver" would be a valid defense.)
This is the way that Google should be fighting Apple. Not by making incremental changes to Apple's tech (or so it appears to most people* and, apparently some judges) but by revolutionizing the field. If they're right, then in three to five years Apple may only control the remains of a vast but dying industry. Sounds like Microsoft before or IBM before it.
*look, prior to the iPhone, smartphones looked one way and then suddenly they (the successful ones that is) completely changed their basic appearance and interface (touchscreens using fingers not stylii, icons, slide to access, pinch zoom). Coincidence? Coming from companies with decades of experience in making hundreds of cellphone models? That's how most lay-persons (and at least some legal experts) might view it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not until it's invisible... (Score:2)
...so it won't be at all unusual to not see people wearing these.
Ever seen a woman wearing an in-ear phone?
Ever seen a man wearing an in-ear phone and not thought it looked silly? Or that he likes his technology a wee bit too much?
Re: (Score:3)
> Ever seen a man wearing an in-ear phone and not thought
> it looked silly?
No one wearing an Apple product ever looks silly. When iGlasses hit the market they will be incredibly cool. Google will rush to imitate them.
Re: (Score:2)
I always assumed that someone with an in-ear phone liked *themselves* a little too much, probably because they tended to be worn mainly by sales people. I thought we'd actually invented a way of tagging douche-bags.
Wonder if they've ever head of Marshall Brain? (Score:3)
http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm [marshallbrain.com]
"At any given moment Manna had a list of things that it needed to do. There were orders coming in from the cash registers, so Manna directed employees to prepare those meals. There were also toilets to be scrubbed on a regular basis, floors to mop, tables to wipe, sidewalks to sweep, buns to defrost, inventory to rotate, windows to wash and so on. Manna kept track of the hundreds of tasks that needed to get done, and assigned each task to an employee one at a time.
Manna told employees what to do simply by talking to them. Employees each put on a headset when they punched in. Manna had a voice synthesizer, and with its synthesized voice Manna told everyone exactly what to do through their headsets. Constantly. Manna micro-managed minimum wage employees to create perfect performance."
Re: (Score:2)
I like how that is put forward as a kind of Sci-Fi scenario, and not what's going on in cell centres around the world already.
Awkward? (Score:2)
it will actually look unusual and awkward when we view someone holding an object in their hand and looking down at it.
You insensitive clod! I take pictures with a TLR Rolleiflex!
That camera has actually started quite a few interesting conversations when people see me using it.
Prior Art? (Score:2)
This technology has been around for a decade or more. Perhaps not as compact and high resolution, but something like a pair of those wrap-around sunglasses old geezers wear.
There could be some uses for this. We did some R&D on superimposing assembly and test instructions on a technician's field of view. But one conclusion was that this was so distracting for tasks other than those performed sitting down that it could be hazardous or induce equilibrium or vertigo problems. On the shop floor, it is relat
I already wear eyeglasses ... (Score:2)
The Google Anal Probe (Score:2)
" It's my expectation that in three to five years it will actually look unusual and awkward when we view someone holding an object in their hand and looking down at it. Wearable computing will become the norm."
So Google really is coming out with an anal probe.
Old news (Score:2)
Project teams predicts their product will be the norm in the future.
Well according to Bill Gates (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Mostly because the tablet makers were retarded and did not allow me to make phone calls from the tablet.
Re: (Score:2)
It took a few more years than expected for the engineers at Area 51 to reverse engineer all that lovey technology they got their hands on in the 1940's. They still haven't figured out the drive systems though. I suspect it will be a while before that happens, since we don't exactly have the fuel here. It's kind of like reverse engineering a Prius in 1890. It could be done. It'll take a long time to re-invent the technologies to
Re: (Score:2)
Then you'll have to buy the White Album again.....
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone else will do something stupid with the tech, preventing critical mass adoption. Apple will come along and do it right, and the geeks will be outraged.
When wanting to impress this Kardashian society we live in, one must look well beyond the technical capability and instead focus on how it looks and slapping a high-enough price tag on it (at least 2x over other like hardware) in order to even be accepted as a possible option.
And when tech clearly needs to blend with fashion in order to get past the "critical mass adoption" phase, any respectable geek should know damn well one goes to Apple to accomplish this, for there really is no one else so deeply roote
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You ape-descended life forms are so amazingly primitive. You still think digital watches are a pretty neat idea.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, it's a shame that we still have no implanted clock which communicates the current time directly to our brain.
Uh, can we disable this thing for the end of June and the end of December? Being kicked in the head by a leap second [slashdot.org] might feel somewhat unpleasant...
Re: (Score:2)
Ditto. I don't know whether I'd call it a blessing or a curse, but my circadian rhythms must be extremely strong or something because I wake up at the same time every day, give or take a few minutes, get hungry at the same time every day, get tired at the same time every day...and my work hours are random and somewhat sporadic, so it's not due to any external factor I can discern. Using these 'landmarks', I can usually tell what time it is within 15 minutes or so. Wasn't always like this, I was a grand c
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It could be worse.. [wikipedia.org]
If no one disturbs me, I wake up at the crack of noon +- 5 minutes. I get tired at about 4am, and to sleep at 4:30 to 5am. That's my circadian rhythm.
If I force myself to "normal" work day patterns, I'm screwed. First off, it takes several alarm clocks, and usually someone living with me to scream at me that the alarm has been going off for an hour. Alarm clocks that reset themselves after a few minutes are worthless to me. My phone has a very obnoxious alarm clock on it. I set 4
Re: (Score:2)
That sucks, man. I have a friend that is stuck on a schedule similar to yours; she's most efficient from early afternoon to about dawn, and then she crashes from 5-6 AM until sometime in the early afternoon. It's not as severe as your case, but she's also got a reputation for sleeping through every alarm, phone call, she'll wake-up momentarily when someone physically shakes her awake but then drifts off again not long after unless said person stays there until she's ambulatory. When she was going to scho
Re: (Score:2)
Well, no bullshit. It depends on the degree. Some days it's just seeing double and I can't handle any sound, and sometimes it's hiding in the bedroom with my head under the pillows wishing it would stop.
Just because I didn't describe a migraine well enough for you doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
Re: (Score:2)
You can also live in a tent in the wood and save electricity AND gas...
What was your point?
Re:Heh. (Score:5, Funny)
And two in his home.....
Dammit, I let the secret out, Oh well.
Will you please put some clothes on when you walk around in the living room. Us at the Cable company are grossed out.
And please move the bedroom cable box to the left a little and put the bottle of hand cream elsewhere, it has been blocking our view and we have been using it as a kind of torture device for the new employees.
Re: (Score:2)
You can easily design an LCD that fails and turns clear - in fact a modern LCD works exactly like this. They go dark when they lose power because the backlight turns off - but if it stayed on, they'd turn white from constant illumination. On a transparent screen, it would turn clear.
More likely, when driving - or just normally using them - you'd configure a hardware lockout for maximum opacity in advance. Or a clear channel - just turn off the power to the relevant pixels in the middle of the vision field.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Coming up with the idea is the easy part. Making it work is the hard part.