It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Google Caves to Privacy Concerns, Wipes Glass of Facial Recognition Features

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 12:25 PM
link   
Source


"When we started the Explorer Program nearly a year ago our goal was simple: we wanted to make people active participants in shaping the future of this technology ahead of a broader consumer launch. We've been listening closely to you, and many have expressed both interest and concern around the possibilities of facial recognition in Glass," the Glass team stated.


Hmmm.

I somehow don't believe them.
But, I guess we will just have to wait and see where things go with this. I don't have any intention of ever getting Google Glass, though I am sure it may end up being a useful device. It could even be a precursor to how we eventually interact with the world in the future.

It is obvious that there are extreme concerns regarding privacy. Many casinos have taken to preemptively banning the devices to protect their livelihoods.

As with most new technology there are pros and cons. I just don't trust Google as far as I can throw them. But, what is to stop the Govt. or any other 3rd party from using it for nefarious purposes?

What are your thoughts ATS?




posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by watchitburn
 


Oh, Thanks a lot! I wasn't worried about government snoopage with the damn thing until now!

And on your other point--that Google is not to be trusted: Right again. Google has become the enemy that we thought they detested as much as we did. They ARE the rich and powerful now. Whatever led them to make statements about how they listened to our concerns, believe me it wasn't their listening to our concerns that affected their decisions. Probably fear of a drop in sales.

And even if the public versions of it don't have facial recognition: as you point out, I'm sure there will be facial-recognition versions in public....


edit on 6/1/2013 by Ex_CT2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 12:52 PM
link   
Well, even if we were to trust Google, hasn't the government pretty much forced them to do whatever they want regarding handing over information?



posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by darkbake
 


Well, I wouldn't say forced... More like accepted them as another Big Brother into the fold. I'd have to look it up, but I believe they are now a corporate member of the CFR--I should say among other nefarious things....

ETA: Ah. Here we go. Directly from the CFR's own website:

Jared Cohen, Google, Inc., Adjunct Senior Fellow

As I've noted many times, Google long ago dropped their "Don't be Evil" tagline. Apparently it's now good to be evil...


edit on 6/1/2013 by Ex_CT2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 01:01 PM
link   
reply to post by darkbake
 


I think Google has enough resources, money, influence, and sheer size and scope that they could tell the Govt. to pound sand when it comes to user privacy, if they wanted to.

As with anything, profits come first.



posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by watchitburn
 


it is a game of "nets".

If they don't pull the privacy infringing aspects and just release the glasses, they will sell a bunch and make 5 fists full of cash. But they will have to pay all the legal fees from the onslaught of lawsuits over privacy breaches.

Or they can mothball that function, still sell a bunch, and still make 5 fists full of cash. And not have all the legal costs. They net a bigger payday, and all is well in the world.



posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


I agree.

They can also make the facial recognition software and sell it separately.

I'm envisioning within two years, all law enforcement will be using something along these lines for everything from targeting assistance to fugitive identification, running license plates, you name it.

That way, they make twice the money with no liability.



posted on Jun, 1 2013 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by watchitburn
 


When the government and Private interest use sentences like this "We've been listening closely to you" is not you the consumer the one that have been "heard" but the private interest and profiteers that our government and private interest cater too, this is propaganda at its finest and this is how private companies agovernment get away with the crap they are doing to the consumer and citizens this days.

I do not use Google or any other social media in the net and never will and I do just fine getting my way around the internet without pouring my life out for other to read and my information for others to steal.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join