22 Comments

Google_Glass_doctor

What would you do if a restaurant asked you to remove the camera-on-your-face device, Google Glass, because other diners had privacy concerns? Would you storm out and then trash the place online? As blog EV Grieve reports, that’s what Katy Kasmai did after Feast, a restaurant in New York’s East Village, objected to her ocular choice. Kasmai complained about Feast on her Google+ page, which in turn led a dozen of her loyal followers to leave a series of savage 1-star reviews on Google — which is the first page to come up when New Yorkers search for “Feast.” This seems unfair, especially since many of the “reviews” were written from places like Phoenix. The episode is unlikely to help Glass fans overcome the”Glasshole” label.

You’re subscribed! If you like, you can update your settings

  1. Jeez, Katy Kasmai sounds like a real glasshole. Maybe she should dine at home?

    1. Perhaps you should actually read her report

      1. More important things for people to do than cater to a vindictive, small-minded, spoiled little girl who seems jealous of successful people. Good parents who gave a damn could have cured her.

  2. Maybe mandating the use of a sticker inside the dining place to cover the lens is one solution : The wearer shows off his/her gadgetry and the other diners keep their privacy.

  3. Adam Simmons Saturday, May 24, 2014

    Way to put a negative spin on it. The bottom line is diners do not have privacy concerns in most of these cases the Restaurants act like they do. This is no different that using your phone to take pictures of your food or perhaps the restaurant itself. Remember when Instagram came out and people started doing that? Some restaurants didn’t like it and even asked some customers to leave. At the very least Google Glass makes it apparent you have a device but it doesnt mean you are recording all the time. If anything it protects the people even more as its more apparent when you use Glass than it is when you sneak a phone picture of something. Where the restaurants claim this is about privacy…fine but on the activism standpoint this is about equality. Ban glass but you should also ban cell phones…or not at all. Technology ignorance at its finest.

    1. You are socially stunted.

    2. You seem to be one of those GH who is defending Katy. Restaurant has the rights to reject and you don’t know if other people have requested the restaurant to convey the message to Katy. In case of phone more or less the person knows that you are taking a photo but incase of Glass there is no way to know if the person is recording the conversation or taking photos.
      i would politely ask the person to take off Glass when talking to me.

    3. Pictures of food are not the same thing as pictures of me. I do not have an expectation of privacy, but I do have an expectation of not having my location broadcast in real time without my permission. I don’t want a ban on Glass, but I do want some measure of my needs accounted for by those who choose to use it. If they don’t care about my needs, then by definition they are Glassholes.

  4. Adam Simmons Saturday, May 24, 2014

    Way to put a negative spin on it. The bottom line is diners do not have privacy concerns in most of these cases the Restaurants act like they do. This is no different that using your phone to take pictures of your food or perhaps the restaurant itself. Remember when Instagram came out and people started doing that? Some restaurants didn’t like it and even asked some customers to leave. At the very least Google Glass makes it apparent you have a device but it doesn’t mean you are recording all the time. If anything it protects the people even more as its more apparent when you use Glass than it is when you sneak a phone picture of something. Where the restaurants claim this is about privacy…fine but on the activism standpoint this is about equality. Ban glass but you should also ban cell phones…or not at all. Technology ignorance at its finest.

    1. If people had their phones out all their time aimed at people as if they were recording, there’d be problems too. Phones are usually in people’s pockets or purses or aimed downward, not at others. It’s a big difference that Glassholes seem not to notice.

    2. These things are so stupid. I hope Glass dies a horrible death.

    3. “The bottom line is diners do not have privacy concerns in most of these cases the Restaurants act like they do.”

      Stunning. I guess you polled the diners and none had privacy concerns?

      Your statement is blindly ignorant on the matter and yet you have no inkling of this.

    4. One point of feedback – since you posted this twice, I’m going to assume you’re not just spamming and conclude you posted it once in the wrong place. Probably not the best way to establish your technology authority.

  5. Luddites of the world, unite!

    1. Grow up, you socially inept nerds.

      1. Oh anonymous. So quick to throw stones yet afraid to show your name.

  6. A perfectly reasonable request for the establishment. Any establishment should, by law have a right to such a request; demand.

  7. What I don’t understand is why doesn’t Google just put a tiny light next to the camera just like on laptops. That way the comically paranoid masses would know whether or not the cam was on or not. Or maybe El Goog likes the negative attention…

  8. This is much more analogous to open carry fire arms (guns) restrictions.

  9. glass dieeeee

  10. Byron M. G. Sanford Monday, May 26, 2014

    I fail to understand the hate towards Glass. Wearing Glass does not make someone a jackass. (No, I neither own Glass not want to.) If anyone is/are acting like assholes, it appears to be all the people condemning the people wearing glass without knowing the people or having any first hand knowledge of their behavior. Absolutely ridiculous!

    As for the restaurant, they have every right to ask people not to use Glass within their establishment. By the same token, people have every right to publicly blast the restaurant for its behavior. Action – Reaction. Both the action and the reaction seem rather juvenile to me, but such is the way of things.

    As for Glass being an invasion of privacy: it is no more an invasion of privacy than cell phone cameras. Furthermore, as a technical matter, no one in a public place has any legal expectation of privacy. Of course that does not give people a license to use technology (of any sort) to be jerks. (Just as someone being a jerk with technology does not give some the right to assault said jerk. That is, very simply illegal and egregious.)

    In short, people need to chill out. The best way to handle new technology is to use good manners and good sense and, in the process, just take a deep breath and keep your cool.

    Seriously, folks.

Comments have been disabled for this post