Google Glass predicted in 1994

[jcarmody]

... by Douglas Adams.  I could relate to this then; I even have a copy of this cartoon in my old Franklin Planner.

[tst]

---

@jcarmody wrote:

... by Douglas Adams.

---

I assume you mean Scott Adams?

Not that I have a problem with Douglas Adams. I just rererereread all the Guide books this week.

[jcarmody]

I've gotten that wrong 42 times already.  It's mostly harmless...

[Hornless.Rhino]

---

@tst wrote:

---

@jcarmody wrote:

... by Douglas Adams.

---

I assume you mean Scott Adams?

Not that I have a problem with Douglas Adams. I just rererereread all the Guide books this week.

---

Do you count the recently released non-adams one (number 6 in the series as a guide book?)

Just the 4 part trilogy?

The Adams-5th part?

[jcarmody]

---

@tst wrote:

[...] I just rererereread all the Guide books this week.

---

I read them first in High School (in the mid-80s) and thought they were the height of nerdy humor.  I reread them when my kids were getting older to see if/when I could recommend them but was disappointed to see that the humor didn't age with me.

[tst]

---

@Hornless.Rhino wrote:

Do you count the recently released non-adams one (number 6 in the series as a guide book?)

Just the 4 part trilogy?

The Adams-5th part?

---

Just the 5 Adams ones (and a short story). I haven't read either of the sixth books.

[joaopam]

@Topic.

Does anybody here believe that Google Glass will be THE GADGET in the next years?

How do you see yourself with that?

I wonder how people will behave living with the huge possibilite of being video recorded without acknowledgement.

[jcarmody]

---

@joaopam wrote:

@Topic.

Does anybody here believe that Google Glass will be THE GADGET in the next years?

How do you see yourself with that?

I wonder how people will behave living with the huge possibilite of being video recorded without acknowledgement.

---

I believe it'll be "the gadget" that gets a lot of people punched in the back of the head.  I wouldn't interact with anyone if I identified their glasses as a gadget, although I expect that they'll become harder to recognize as the number of knocked-unconscious early-adopters rises.  😛

[joaopam]

yeah, that makes sense.

Sometimes I ask myself why to use this gadget in non-specific situations.

Scientists, engineers, researches and some other professionals, this will be such a great product.

But for entertainment of the end user, it's more likely to be an useless gadget with fake-necessities features.

Unfortunately, now we can say that people are stamping in their own faces that they can be robbed: they wear a $ 1500 dollar glass, full of personal information. Thats odd. 

[Hornless.Rhino]

---

@joaopam wrote:

yeah, that makes sense.

Sometimes I ask myself why to use this gadget in non-specific situations.

Scientists, engineers, researches and some other professionals, this will be such a great product.

But for entertainment of the end user, it's more likely to be an useless gadget with fake-necessities features.

Unfortunately, now we can say that people are stamping in their own faces that they can be robbed: they wear a $ 1500 dollar glass, full of personal information. Thats odd. 

---

I'll correct that and say scientists, engineers researchers, professionals and creepy perverts.

Seriously, being able to stand anywhere and just be able to take a photo by saying something like "take a photo" is just making it easy for them.