Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Sergey Brin Says Using a Smartphone Is 'Emasculating'

Soulskill posted about a year and a half ago | from the you-are-not-the-things-you-own dept.

Cellphones 325

An anonymous reader writes "While speaking at the TED Conference in California earlier today, Sergey Brin seemingly tried to set the stage for a world where using Google Glass is as normal as using a smartphone. What's more, Brin went so far as to say that using smartphones is 'emasculating.' Brin said that smartphone users often seclude themselves in their own private virtual worlds. 'Is this the way you're meant to interact with other people,' Brin asked. Are people in the future destined to communicate via just walking around, looking down, and 'rubbing a featureless piece of glass,' Brin asked rhetorically. 'It's kind of emasculating. Is this what you're meant to do with your body?' Is wearing futuristic glasses any better?" Another reader sends in an article that also muses on our psychological connection to our devices. Or, as he puts it, the "increasingly weird and perhaps overly intimate relationship we have with our gadgets; the fist we touch when awake, the last at night. Our minds have become bookended by glass."

cancel ×

325 comments

First Post! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031435)

Wow.

Re:First Post! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031639)

Was that Wow for "the fist we touch when awake"?

The fist we touch ... (0)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031931)

I hope that's a typo

But anyhoo, the first thing I touch when I'm awake is my wife, the wife that I love so much

She's also the last thing I touch, before I go to sleep

Hmm (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031439)

This is vs staring into some one's face while you ignore them while reading something off your glasses?

Re:Hmm (4, Funny)

MrEricSir (398214) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031523)

Or trying to hold a conversation with someone who's ignoring you and reading Slashdot on their glasses?

Re:Hmm (3, Informative)

davester666 (731373) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031735)

Or trying to hold a conversation with someone who's ignoring you and speaking to their glasses?

Re:Hmm (5, Informative)

Trepidity (597) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031883)

The inability to even tell if they're looking at you is particularly weird. I had a meeting with this guy [gatech.edu] as a student 8 or 10 years ago or so, when he was wearing a heads-up display attached to a computer he kept sort of slung over his shoulder, with a one-handed chording keyboard on the outside of it. It seemed interesting tech-wise, definitely at the time, when it was all DIY'd. But it was slightly weird always being unsure when he was looking through his glasses at me, and when he was looking at his glasses reading the web or something. At least with a smartphone or laptop you can see people look down and look up.

is SoulSkill's R key broken? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031449)

Or is it a bit of a slip, fist and tip?

My mind has bookends? (4, Funny)

Press2ToContinue (2424598) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031451)

I don't know about Brin, but my e-masculinity is e-normous. Bookends help hold it all in.

Re:My mind has bookends? (2)

CAIMLAS (41445) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031867)

What's a bookend?

Re:My mind has bookends? (5, Funny)

deimtee (762122) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031969)

EOF

I'll be the first to say... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031453)

I love glass :) ...

Looking for the meaning of emasculating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031459)

Is gay.

Doesn't it really all come down to (5, Funny)

bobstreo (1320787) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031481)

The size of your screen?

Re:Doesn't it really all come down to (2)

G3E9 (2740699) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031487)

It's not how big your screen is, it's how you use it!

Re:Doesn't it really all come down to (5, Funny)

DerPflanz (525793) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031995)

Only people with small screens say that!

Re:Doesn't it really all come down to (1)

CodeBuster (516420) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031589)

The size of your screen?

Some screens are larger than others.

Re:Doesn't it really all come down to (1)

dbIII (701233) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031813)

And when that's not large enough there is apparently "the fist we touch when awake".

Re:Doesn't it really all come down to (0)

niftydude (1745144) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031619)

The size of your screen?

Yep - I guess Sergey feels that it is hard to feel properly masculine when you are looking at porn on a small screen - those tiny titties just won't do the job.

Much better to use google glass so you can have naked females spread across your entire field of vision, all telling you that you are the man.

But what's his argument for getting women to adopt google glass?

Re:Doesn't it really all come down to (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031957)

So that they could check their recording of how they look naked across the entire field of view?

Regardless of what you think of smartphones... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031491)

these glasses are going nowhere. They look stupid so they are dead on arrival. Furthermore, they only appeal to the part of the population that already wears glasses.

The hype over these nerd glasses couldn't more clearly illustrate how out of touch dorks are with regular people.

Re:Regardless of what you think of smartphones... (2)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031637)

Yeah, how dare a tech company experiment with wearable interfaces, and what the fuck is this news even doing on this site??? It's obviously not commercially viable, so it's of interest to NOBODY around here.

Re:Regardless of what you think of smartphones... (4, Insightful)

tlhIngan (30335) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031651)

these glasses are going nowhere. They look stupid so they are dead on arrival. Furthermore, they only appeal to the part of the population that already wears glasses.

The hype over these nerd glasses couldn't more clearly illustrate how out of touch dorks are with regular people.

There are several problems. If you want to talk about Glass as enabling face to face human interaction, you'll find most people won't want a camera shoved into their face. Secondly, most people will probably notice your eyes darting about so they know you're not paying attention to them, and once that happens, they'll never believe you're paying attention unless you take the damn things off.

But I'm sure you'll find a lot of people "encouraged" to wear the glasses because they ARE a portable camera that basically records 24/7. While useful to catching crooks because basically the entire public space is under surveillance all the time, and anyone who stands out will probably have multiple cameras trained on them, they also have the downside of well, everything you do would be recorded. So if you visit any sort of morally questionable establishment, it'll be recorded.

And of course, with Google Goggles, it'll all be tagged for easy searching.

Re:Regardless of what you think of smartphones... (5, Interesting)

dbIII (701233) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031835)

When Sol Trujillo was running Australia's Telstra (running it into the ground, but that's another story), he had his sales employees wear recording devices around their necks so that management could replay what the sales staff did each day. It was excused as being commonplace in the USA, and after hearing about how HP employees were bugged for all I know it may be true. I can see management with an almost slave owner attitude being attracted to such devices.

Re:Regardless of what you think of smartphones... (2)

XxtraLarGe (551297) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031665)

Furthermore, they only appeal to the part of the population that already wears glasses.

They don't appeal to me because I do wear glasses. As far as I'm aware, you can't wear Google's goggles and your glasses at the same time, unless they plan to sell it as prescription glasses as well.

start investing in eyewear manufacturers (1)

ferret4 (459105) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031669)

seriously, if Glass takes off everyone is going to be wearing prescription-free glasses or frames, and they won't want to stick with the google-issued model - it'll become victim to fashion trends as much as regular glasses and sunglasses are, but amped up to the level of womens footwear fashion.

This is going to be huge - it's on your face all the time. Third-party frames compatible with Glass is where I'd invest my cash.

Re:Regardless of what you think of smartphones... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031687)

Yeah, I'm going to take fashion advice from the guy who uses the words "dorks" in the year 2013.

Google Glasses has all of the touchy feely appeal of Facebook and the Nintendo Wii. Google glasses is the iPhone to Oculus Rift's Galaxy SIII.

All the artistic types are going to want to get Google glasses so they can take pictures of their food and tweet videos of themselves doing status elevating activities. Just wearing the fucking things is going to be the equivalent of white headphones or carrying an iPad case.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yEb6HCG7ec

The reason the voice command is "Ok, glass" is because it sounds like you're talking to a pet instead of issuing commands to a servant.

Re:Regardless of what you think of smartphones... (5, Interesting)

mcrbids (148650) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031709)

Based on the fact that the primary (and really, ONLY) interface to Google glass is voice recognition, and given my experiences with voice recognition using the latest (or at lesast recent, Android 4.1) technology Google has for voice recognition, Google Glass is their Apple Newton.

The tech, it just ain't ready yet. I carefully enunciate: "Send Text to Kathy (pause) I think the problem is Becky, who wants to cancel Robert's plan"

A few beeps later...

"Sending text to Becky, The problem is Becky who wants to cancel Robert's plan".

Yeah, the example sorta sucks, but this pretty much happened to me when I decided to trust the text to speech for texting. It was almost a complete interpersonal disaster. It's good, but it's just not good enough. And given that text to speech has been "almost" good enough for at least 20 years [wikipedia.org] , I'm not expecting it to improve any time soon until semantic understanding is part of the mix. (Watson: I'm looking at you.... [ibm.com] )

In response I like to send random sounding texts to family members like "Happy birth tazer ahh" just to see the response, to which I can reply: "Stupid voice to text, happy birthday Sarah!"..

Re:Regardless of what you think of smartphones... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031761)

these glasses are going nowhere. They look stupid so they are dead on arrival. Furthermore, they only appeal to the part of the population that already wears glasses.

The hype over these nerd glasses couldn't more clearly illustrate how out of touch dorks are with regular people.

lol. the world applications for this tech is huge. you're just thinking about the social aspect, to your credit you have a point, but also which, shrinks your brain. the impacts to manufacturing, education and journalism alone, will be significant. augmented reality applications now have a device that can stand as a unifying platform.

Re:Regardless of what you think of smartphones... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031765)

I've seen many people walking around with them on in the Bay Area, and they actually look pretty natural and non-geeky.

Re:Regardless of what you think of smartphones... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031773)

Huh, seen a lot of fairly normal people than know about Google Glass and are interested. Pretty sure the out of touch one is Anonymous Coward, whoever you are.

That being said what I see as their failure, based on impressions I've read of people that have actually used it, is not only does it look silly to wear, but it looks silly to use. As in, bluetooth headset awkward. You can, apparently, tell when somone is looking at their Glass, because they try to focus on it with both eyes and go cross eyed.

I see it as similar to a bluetooth headset. Functionality interesting in concept, awkward in execution.

Glass, our downfall (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031493)

I'm telling you. Between this and the Russian meteorite that caused injuries due to flying glass, this substance needs to be comprehensively banned by all governments around the world!

Re:Glass, our downfall (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031535)

If you outlaw glass, only outlaws will have glass.

Re:Glass, our downfall (1)

causality (777677) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031653)

If you outlaw glass, only outlaws will have glass.

It's not the glass that is transparent. It's the person looking through it.

What a bizarre statement (4, Insightful)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031497)

There are a number of things you can say about a smartphone, but - emasculating? Seriously? Out of what orifice did he pull THAT?

Is Brin worried that Glasses are going to be another Q?

Re:What a bizarre statement (5, Insightful)

c0lo (1497653) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031513)

Emasculation [wikipedia.org]

Emasculation is the removal of the genitalia of a male, both the penis and the testicles. Removal of the testicles alone is castration.
By extension, the word has also come to mean to render a male less of a man, or to make a male feel less of a man by humiliation.

Women should be safe from the effect of smart phones

(yes, I understand that the most metaphorical sense would imply weakening in a generalized sexless sense. However... think how well the following expression sounds to you: she felt emasculated by...)

Re:What a bizarre statement (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031559)

Ouch, that must hurt!

Re:What a bizarre statement (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031613)

Damn straight it hurts!

Damn straight it hurts!

APK is a 45-year old white male with a stocky build and a beard. His head is shaved. He responded to my ad to be interviewed for this article wearing only leather pants, leather boots and a leather vest. I could see that both of his nipples were pierced with large-gauge silver rings.

Questioner: I hope you won't be offended if I ask you to prove to me that you're a nullo. Just so that our readers will know that this isn't a fake.

APK: Sure, no problem. (stands and unbuckles pants and drops them to his ankles, revealing a smooth, shaven crotch with only a thin scar to show where his genitals once were).

Q: Thank you. That's a remarkable sight.

(laughs and pulls pants back up). Most people think so.

Q: What made you decide to become a nullo?

(pauses). Well, it really wasn't entirely my decision.

Q: Excuse me?

The idea wasn't mine. It was my lover's idea.

Q: Please explain what you mean.

Okay, it's a long story. You have to understand my relationship with Scott before you'll know what happened.

Q: We have plenty of time. Please go on.

Both of us were into the leather lifestyle when we met through a personal ad. Scott's ad was very specific: he was looking for someone to completely dominate and modify to his pleasure. In other word, a slave.

The ad intrigued me. I had been in a number of B&D scenes and also some S&M, but I found them unsatisfying because they were all temporary. After the fun was over, everybody went on with life as usual.

I was looking for a complete life change. I wanted to meet someone who would be part of my life forever. Someone who would control me and change me at his whim.

Q: In other words, you're a true masochist.

Oh yes, no doubt about that. I've always been totally passive in my sexual relationships.

Anyway, we met and there was instant chemistry. Scott is a few years older than me and very good looking. Our personalities meshed totally. He's very dominant.

I went back to his place after drinks and had the best sex of my life. That's when I knew I was going to be with Scott for a long, long time.

Q: What sort of things did you two do?

It was very heavy right away. He restrained me and whipped me for quite awhile. He put clamps on my nipples and a ball gag in my mouth. And he hung a ball bag on my sack with some very heavy weights. That bag really bounced around when Scott fucked me from behind.

Q: Ouch.

(laughs) Yeah, no kidding. At first I didn't think I could take the pain, but Scott worked me through it and after awhile I was flying. I was sorry when it was over.

Scott enjoyed it as much as I did. Afterwards he talked about what kind of a commitment I'd have to make if I wanted to stay with him.

Q: What did he say exactly?

Well, besides agreeing to be his slave in every way, I'd have to be ready to be modified. To have my body modified.

Q: Did he explain what he meant by that?

Not specifically, but I got the general idea. I guessed that something like castration might be part of it.

Q: How did that make you feel?

(laughs) I think it would make any guy a little hesitant.

Q: But it didn't stop you from agreeing to Scott's terms?

No it didn't. I was totally hooked on this man. I knew that I was willing to pay any price to be with him.

Anyway, a few days later I moved in with Scott. He gave me the rules right away: I'd have to be naked at all times while we were indoors, except for a leather dog collar that I could never take off. I had to keep my head shaved. And I had to wear a butt plug except when I needed to take a shit or when we were having sex.

I had to sleep on the floor next to his bed. I ate all my food on the floor, too.

The next day he took me to a piercing parlor where he had my nipples done, and a Prince Albert put into the head of my cock.

Q: Heavy stuff.

Yeah, and it got heavier. He used me as a toilet, pissing in my mouth. I had to lick his asshole clean after he took a shit, too. It was all part of a process to break down any sense of individuality I had. After awhile, I wouldn't hesitate to do anything he asked.

Q: Did the sex get rougher?

Oh God, yeah. He started fisting me every time we had sex. But he really started concentrating on my cock and balls, working them over for hours at a time.

He put pins into the head of my cock and into my sack. He attached clothespins up and down my cock and around my sack. The pain was pretty bad. He had to gag me to keep me from screaming.

Q: When did the idea of nullification come up?

Well, it wasn't nullification at first. He started talking about how I needed to make a greater commitment to him, to do something to show that I was dedicated to him for life.

When I asked him what he meant, he said that he wanted to take my balls.

Q: How did you respond?

Not very well at first. I told him that I liked being a man and didn't want to become a eunuch. But he kept at me, and wore me down. He reminded me that I agreed to be modified according to his wishes, and this is what he wanted for me. Anything less would show that I wasn't really committed to the relationship. And besides, I was a total bottom and didn't really need my balls.

It took about a week before I agreed to be castrated. But I wasn't happy about it, believe me.

Q: How did he castrate you?

Scott had a friend who was into the eunuch scene. One night he came over with his bag of toys, and Scott told me that this was it. I was gonna lose my nuts then and there.

Q: Did you think of resisting?

I did for a minute, but deep down I knew there was no way. I just didn't want to lose Scott. I'd rather lose my balls.

Scott's friend restrained me on the living room floor while Scott videotaped us. He used an elastrator to put a band around my sack.

Q: That must have really hurt.

Hell yeah. It's liked getting kicked in the balls over and over again. I screamed for him to cut the band off, but he just kept on going, putting more bands on me. I had four bands around my sack when he finished.

I was rolling around on the floor screaming, while Scott just videotaped me. Eventually, my sack got numb and the pain subsided. I looked between my legs and could see my sack was a dark purple. I knew my balls were dying inside.

Scott and his friend left the room and turned out the light. I lay there for hours, crying because I was turning into a eunuch and there wasn't anything I could do about it.

Q: What happened then?

Eventually I fell asleep from exhaustion. Then the light switched on and I could see Scott's friend kneeling between my legs, touching my sack. I heard him tell Scott that my balls were dead.

Q: How did Scott react?

Very pleased. He bent down and felt around my sack. He said that it felt cold.

Scott's friend told me that I needed to keep the bands on. He said that eventually my balls and sack would dry up and fall off. I just nodded. What else could I do at that point?

Q: Did it happen just like Scott's friend said?

Yeah, a week or so later my package just fell off. Scott put it in a jar of alcohol to preserve it. It's on the table next to his bed.

Q: How did things go after that?

Scott was really loving to me. He kept saying how proud he was of me, how grateful that I had made the commitment to him. He even let me sleep in his bed.

Q: What about the sex?

We waited awhile after my castration, and then took it easy until I was completely healed. At first I was able to get hard, but as the weeks went by my erections began to disappear.

That pleased Scott. He liked fucking me and feeling my limp cock. It made his dominance over me even greater.

Q: When did he start talking about making you a nullo?

A couple of months after he took my nuts. Our sex had gotten to be just as rough as before the castration. He really got off on torturing my cock. Then he started saying stuff like, "Why do you even need this anymore?"

That freaked me out. I always thought that he might someday take my balls, but I never imagined that he'd go all the way. I told him that I wanted to keep my dick.

Q: How did he react to that?

At first he didn't say much. But he kept pushing. Scott said I would look so nice being smooth between my legs. He said my dick was small and never got hard anymore, so what was the point of having it.

But I still resisted. I wanted to keep my cock. I felt like I wouldn't be a man anymore without it.

Q: So how did he get you to agree?

He didn't. He took it against my will.

Q: How did that happen?

We were having sex in the basement, and I was tied up and bent over this wooden bench as he fucked me. Then I heard the doorbell ring. Scott answered it, and he brought this guy into the room.

At first I couldn't see anything because of the way I was tied. But then I felt these hands lift me up and put me on my back. And I could see it was Scott's friend, the guy who took my nuts.

Q: How did you react?

I started screaming and crying, but the guy just gagged me. The two of them dragged me to the other side of the room where they tied me spread eagled on the floor.

Scott's friend snaked a catheter up my dick, and gave me a shot to numb my crotch. I was grateful for that, at least. I remember how bad it hurt to lose my balls.

Q: What was Scott doing at this time?

He was kneeling next to me talking quietly. He said I'd be happy that they were doing this. That it would make our relationship better. That kind of calmed me down. I thought, "Well, maybe it won't be so bad."

Q: How long did the penectomy take?

It took awhile. Some of the penis is inside the body, so he had to dig inside to get all of it. There was a lot of stitching up and stuff. He put my cock in the same jar with my balls. You can even see the Prince Albert sticking out of the head.

Then they made me a new pisshole. It's between my asshole and where my sack used to be. So now I have to squat to piss.

Q: What has life been like since you were nullified?

After I got over the surgery and my anger, things got better. When I healed up, I began to like my smooth look. Scott brought friends over and they all admired it, saying how pretty I looked. It made me feel good that Scott was proud of me.

Q: Do you have any sexual feeling anymore?

Yes, my prostate still responds when Scott fucks me or uses the buttplug. And my nipples are quite sensitive. If Scott plays with them while fucking me, I have a kind of orgasm. It's hard to describe, but it's definitely an orgasm.

Sometimes Scott says he's gonna have my prostate and nipples removed, but he's just kidding around. He's happy with what he's done to me.

Q: So are you glad Scott had you nullified?

Well, I wouldn't say I'm glad. If I could, I'd like to have my cock and balls back. But I know that I'm a nullo forever. So I'm making the best of it.

Scott and I are very happy. I know that he'll take care of me and we'll be together always. I guess losing my manhood was worth it to make that happen for us.

Re:What a bizarre statement (1)

JanneM (7445) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031593)

think how well the following expression sounds to you: she felt emasculated by...

Really, it doesn't sound strange to me at all. I'm even a bit surprised; had you asked me without typing out the example I would have said it doesn't work.

I guess perhaps the gender-role divisions just aren't as strong today as they used to be. Most role models and most regular men you see and meet every day aren't particularly masculine in the traditional sense; if anything, brawn, machismo and physical strength seems a bit anachronistic and a bit negative, much like smoking has become.

Re:What a bizarre statement (2)

c0lo (1497653) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031769)

Most role models and most regular men you see and meet every day aren't particularly masculine in the traditional sense; if anything, brawn, machismo and physical strength seems a bit anachronistic and a bit negative, much like smoking has become.

One wonders: is this why the movie industry pushes violent movies one after the other - the "Die hard" kind? (i.e. only as a palliative for the today's boys/men venting frustration?)

Re:What a bizarre statement (3, Funny)

Moridineas (213502) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031703)

You're being hysterical [wikipedia.org] .

For at least two thousand years of European history until the late nineteenth century hysteria referred to a medical condition thought to be particular to women and caused by disturbances of the uterus (from the Greek "hystera" = uterus)

OR ARE YOU??

Re:What a bizarre statement (1)

Tough Love (215404) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031553)

Out of what orifice did he pull THAT?

Nostril I think.

Re:What a bizarre statement (1)

gnoshi (314933) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031655)

There are a number of things you can say about a smartphone, but - emasculating? Seriously? Out of what orifice did he pull THAT?

The messy one left behind after too much smartphone time.

Re:What a bizarre statement (1)

c0lo (1497653) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031679)

There are a number of things you can say about a smartphone, but - emasculating? Seriously? Out of what orifice did he pull THAT?

maybe understandable from the perspective of Brin's culture at origins [wikipedia.org] (even if I find hard to accept it):

Brin immigrated to the United States with his family from the Soviet Union at the age of six.

(don't give me the shit with "but he get is education in US". First at all, a good part of the culture comes from the family - I guarantee you even now the Russians have a "man rules" type of culture - just look at Putin. Second... is US better in this regard? E.g. ever wonder how long ago slapping a woman was acceptable as a movie scene? Do you remember "The Man with the Golden Gun" (1974)? What about the "Airplane!" (1980)?)

Re:What a bizarre statement (1)

nabsltd (1313397) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031907)

E.g. ever wonder how long ago slapping a woman was acceptable as a movie scene? Do you remember "The Man with the Golden Gun" (1974)? What about the "Airplane!" (1980)?)

Even today, slapping a woman is quite acceptable when done for comedic effect, as in Airplane!, so I don't think that's a good example.

Re:What a bizarre statement (2)

Jessified (1150003) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031869)

Ever notice how emasculate and effeminate are essentially synonyms? Weird.

Could be worse (1)

jrumney (197329) | about a year and a half ago | (#43032011)

There are a number of things you can say about a smartphone, but - emasculating?

Consider it a preemptive strike in the age old editor wars before someone accuses Google Glasses of violating privacy.

Bookended by all knowledge in the known universe? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031499)

I'll settle for that.

Glasses make you look feeble (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031501)

that's pretty emasculating in and of itself.

Re:Glasses make you look feeble (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031885)

Not really.

The FIST we touch when awake ? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031507)

I don't think you want to know what touches my fist when I awake.

Speelchecking (1)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031509)

the fist we touch when awake, the last at night

Hmm, so you're into fisting are you?

By the way, most smartphones have a spellchecker. Maybe /. editors could use them to post articles...

Re:Speelchecking (1)

Mr. Slippery (47854) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031615)

By the way, most smartphones have a spellchecker.

Maybe newer Android ones have fixed this, but I can't get spell check working on my Epic 4G. But spell check is irrelevant here, because "fist" is a properly spelled word.

"Eye have a spelling chequer, / It came with my Pea Sea. / It plane lee marks four my revue / Miss Steaks I can knot sea."

Brin Has Been Smoking... (1)

Press2ToContinue (2424598) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031511)

too much glass...

Reverse marketing (2, Interesting)

cachimaster (127194) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031519)

IMHO even if Glass is clearly the superior device, it makes you look like a dork/nerd.
There is no way to change that until they look like regular glasses. Until then, all you can do is attack your main competitor, the smarthpone, or it will go the way of the segway.

Irony (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031525)

Oh the irony. Gimme a break.

Sergey Brin is the new Mike Lazaridis. (5, Insightful)

aristotle-dude (626586) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031527)

The two founders of RIM suffered from Founder's Syndrome and now it seems that it has spread to Google. Don't insult your potential customers deliberately. Mike Lazaridis and Jim Balsillie drove their company to ruin by ignoring the competition and insulting/ignoring potential customers.

Sergey, you should leave the marketing to professionals in your organization. You can be the "vision" guy but don't trying to create the narrative for your company. You are not Steve Jobs.

Steve Jobs was the founder of Apple and the CEO until recently but he had some qualities that are unfortunately uncommon among tech industry CEOs. He knew how to "think" like the common man and figure out what the common man wanted before he knew that he wanted it. He also had a sense of taste and an extreme attention to detail to help his company "polish" their products.

Re:Sergey Brin is the new Mike Lazaridis. (3, Insightful)

Mr. Slippery (47854) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031631)

He knew how to "think" like the common man and figure out what the common man wanted before he knew that he wanted it.

Jobs knew how to manipulate people into wanting what he had to sell them. He was an excellent salesman.

He also had a sense of taste...

I guess a bad sense is still a sense, so, ok.

Re:Sergey Brin is the new Mike Lazaridis. (5, Insightful)

Moridineas (213502) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031711)

Jobs knew how to manipulate people into wanting what he had to sell them. He was an excellent salesman.

He was an excellent salesman, certainly fallible, and with a well-earned reputation for his RDF. However, he did a damn good job of knowing what people did want!

I guess a bad sense is still a sense, so, ok.

So if you're saying Jobs had a bad sense of taste, yours--by comparison--is better? Why should we believe you? The corpus of Jobs' legacy is in front of us.

Re:Sergey Brin is the new Mike Lazaridis. (2)

Belial6 (794905) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031801)

Maybe if he did, he could have gotten more than 12% market share for his desktop systems.

Re:Sergey Brin is the new Mike Lazaridis. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031823)

Considering there is no accounting for taste, the "corpus of his legacy" is not evidence of his good taste. Why should we believe anybody who says Jobs had good taste? Such a statement would inherently depend on the taste of the person making that statement.

Re:Sergey Brin is the new Mike Lazaridis. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031721)

You know, I was with you on your commentary for the most part. Until, that is, you switched tracks and started fellating a dead guy who most people can agree was a world class douchebag...

Re:Sergey Brin is the new Mike Lazaridis. (3, Insightful)

Daetrin (576516) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031783)

Look, i'm with you on the douchebag thing, but what the GP was pointing out was that Jobs did an amazing job (er, so to speak) of selling product. Love him or hate him, Jobs was good at marketing and trying to deny that won't fool anyone but yourself. Whether he did that by figuring out what the consumer wanted or by convincing the consumer they wanted what he had is outside the scope of this discussion.

The thing is there are two ways of selling a product, convincing the market that what you have is better, or convincing the market that what your competitors have is worse. It's often easier to take the second path, because it's usually easier to knock something down than to build something up. However it's also a riskier path. Sometimes when you try to knock down the competitor instead of deciding to buy your product the market ends up thinking you're a bully or an asshole.

And it can get really problematic if you're also selling a product that shares traits with the competitor's product that you're knocking. If your company sells cars and motorcycles, then _maybe_ you can get away with telling people "you should buy our motorcycles, because cars suck" if you can restrict your message to people you know are inclined to like motorcycles. But if the message starts leaking into channels populated by the people who usually buy cars it may not go over so well. Telling people they should buy your motorcycles because motorcycles are awesome, and your motorcycles are especially awesome is safer, but it requires more talent (and a better product) to make that message stick.

Re:Sergey Brin is the new Mike Lazaridis. (1)

Belial6 (794905) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031797)

He knew how to "think" like the common man and figure out what the common man wanted before he knew that he wanted it.

A common trait of a con. Make the mark think it was their idea.

iDweeb (1)

Animats (122034) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031541)

Yes, looking at a smartphone while doing something else makes you look like a dweeb. Hanging the screen in front of your face won't help.

Sergey is a wuss (3, Funny)

Tough Love (215404) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031543)

Sergey just doesn't get it. My Android phone is a big swinging phallic symbol, especially when it does those 3D maps.... iPhone toting hipster chicks never fail to notice. Got plenty of mileage out of that, opposite sex wise. Sergey just doesn't know how to hold it.

External cognition (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031561)

In a sense, smartphones set you free. You don't have to remember your friends' phone numbers, or the address of that great take-out place. You will instantly know the commonly-accepted answer to just about any question. Brin feels like we're losing something, while I argue just the opposite. Take away the boring minutiae of our everyday lives that we're forced to remember just to get by and you have more room for the things that matter.

If you'll excuse me I have to go write a grant proposal to NIH about the memory effects of smartphones. Which will probably get turned down thanks to budget cuts, but you know, can't blame a guy for trying.

Re:External cognition (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031591)

So you dont have to use your brain.. ever? No wonder people are so soft today.. They don't work out anymore, and now thanks to smart phones, they can be fucking idiots too!

Re:External cognition (3, Insightful)

gnoshi (314933) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031671)

People were skilled in being fucking idiots long before smart phones.
However, offloading some memory tasks isn't necessarily a bad thing if the alternative is spending active time trying to memorise these things (I'm mainly thinking of rote-memorising facts). That time may be better spent actually actively thinking.

Then again, actually having memorised a range of information may be instrumental for novel ideas which draw on the variety.

Re:External cognition (2)

Concerned Onlooker (473481) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031719)

The invention of writing has been blamed for the decline in our ability to remember long oral histories. Do you think we are significantly dumber because we can't remember and recite The Iliad or The Odyssey, which was originally a tale told from memory? Everything in measure, of course, but any devices that offload tasks so that we are freed up to dream up even better and more complex ideas is OK by me.

Re:External cognition (1)

dbIII (701233) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031853)

because we can't remember and recite The Iliad or The Odyssey

Can't quote it here, but the one page description of those as told by the discworld's greatest storyteller in Terry Pratchett's "Pyramids" is an amusing example of not quite remembering them.

Not with the N900, or any other *real* computer (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031573)

We always knew that the iDevices were crippling golden prisons... ditto for Windows 8 ones... and that Android, while being better in freedom of what you could install, was not at all different in general mindset of cripplingly dumbed-down UIs.

But it's not the phone. It's the *mindset*! Thinking of it as a *fixed-function* device, instead of a *computer*!
But most people nowadays have never actually *used* a computer, and do not even remotely have and idea what a computer actually is.
They have only used fat appliances that happened to be implemented on a computer. But they never ever saw, let alone used, the computer underneath. They never automated anything away.

That's what's emasculating... no, *crippling*.
And as long as people continue believing, that dumbing-down would be an "ideal", instead of being considered harmful, that won't change.

Re:Not with the N900, or any other *real* computer (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031729)

/. : come for the advertising, stay for the ravenous neckbeards.

And Google jumps the shark (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031577)

Using a smartphone is emasculating? What? That's not even incorrect; the two concepts have no relation to each other.

This makes the man sound absolutely loony. It's now very difficult to believe a word coming out of any company he is associated with, let alone is the head of.

Emasculating? (3, Interesting)

Warhawke (1312723) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031617)

You keep on using that word... I do not think it means what you think it means.

Seriously, does he legitimately expect that I'm going to suddenly ditch my phone and throw the contents of my wallet at him for a product that makes Navin's Opti-Grab look stylish simply because he's calling me and one-seventh of the human population -- including women -- castrated girly-men?

My dick is much bigger than his glasses (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031621)

And not only that, his glasses haven't been up his wife's ass.

But my dick has.

Google: improving perceived communication skills (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031627)

...by allowing you to stare blankly at the person right in front of you while you're looking at Google's stream of information about the world around you.

Do you worry about being emasculated by rubbing your featureless piece of glass in your fist? Well, your worries are over, my friend! With your Google Goggles, you'll be able to show everyone your masculinity with two free hands to rub whatever you want in your fist! Act now, supplies are limited.

Emasculate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031635)

Knowledge is king, words are power, I feel like the singularity has begun.

This cartoon explains it best (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031641)

This "Joy of Tech" cartoon explains what will really happen with Google glasses:

The Reality of Google Glasses [tapastic.com]

Sergey, can't you go away now? (3, Funny)

mbone (558574) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031645)

For me, he is well past his sell-by date. Can't he buy some remote island and cocoon there?

I think you might be on to something Sergey (1)

treadmarks (2528414) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031661)

Tapping on a screen is not the most natural way to communicate with people. You should assign your best men to this problem to invent a solution. But before you do I have a question for you. What if we used our phones to call people and talk to them?

Seriously what is with this guy? Why is this so complicated?

Umm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031685)

"Our minds have become bookended by glass."

Uh, what's the problem with that? So far you've just stated facts, now you need to state their effects. That's how telling people about something works. Currently, you're just letting the reader draw their own conclusions, and mine is that this is perfectly okay.

emaciating? emancipating? emasturbating? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031689)

Maybe emaciating because of flip motions give the thumb a workout?

Maybe emancipating because you aren't tied to a PC any more?

Maybe e-masturbating because of all the fondling and rubbing?

Not really sure emasculating is the right word. Can maybe blame spell-check auto-correct?

I watched the video, (2)

n3r0.m4dski11z (447312) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031707)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=v1uyQZNg2vE [youtube.com]

read the well stylized article::

http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/22/4013406/i-used-google-glass-its-the-future-with-monthly-updates [theverge.com]

To me it looks like it could revolutionize.
I could never get into smart phones, but this sounds way more of what I would consider "virtual reality". What I pictured in the 80s and 90s of that anyways. Its not lawnmower man, you are there in the real world. Altered states of reality.

Remember the business Google's in (1)

Swampash (1131503) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031731)

It's more helpful if, in the parent article, you replace "interact with other people" with "view advertisements".

You couldn't pay me to wear google glass (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031791)

Until it cooks my breakfast and reads my thoughts, a computing device that wraps around my head is useless, but Google can't figure that out. Its funny because all of the tech giants are in a state of confusion, grasping for the next big thing. Most users are still trying figure out their cell phones, what makes you think that introducing a new device is going to change us solely based on the fact that it is different and new? You need a third innovative element, and sometimes paying the brightest engineers in the world large sums of money cannot reproduce that. And apparently in the case of google glass they have lost their way.

A 'mind' interface or nothing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031831)

Tablets and phones are just mobile versions of regular computers. In other words, when you use a mobile computer, you are just as much lost to other people as when you use a desktop PC. How could it be otherise, given the attention that a computer must receive in order to be used properly.

A paradigm shift could only occur with a thought interface to a computer- after all we 'think' and interact with other Humans at the same time. Since we don't even know what a 'thought' interface would be in any sense, such a possibility is a very long way off, if doable at all (most unlikely).

So, the reality is that there is, and will be no tricksy method of allowing people to use a computer and interact with people in real-life at the same time. This simple truth will not change just because you shrink the computer, putting it on your wrist, in your ear, or in front of your eyeball. New, shrunk, computer gimmicks will carry on being niche products for use by certain professional groups in their work environments. Indeed, recall how the early PDAs and tablet computers totally flopped as consumer products, but were then found new homes in warehouses, hospitals, delivery trucks etc.

'Terminator' glasses are the worst idea of all for general use. What's the input? Talking to yourself? A screen that moves with your head is already conceptually 'wrong'. Augmented reality is a non-starter because of the dreadful resolution and tracking ability of these devices (AR needs to be astonishing well done to be acceptable, a bit like CGI in feature films).

Of course, Google, like Intel and Microsoft, cannot think of good new ideas to save their lives. Google would be better off investing its time, energy and financial resources into making Android the de facto OS for all mobile and desktop computers (it is kinda doing this, and it is doing well, but things could still be moving faster, and Android needs to merge with ChromeOS very soon so the desktop side of the project can be advanced in tune with the new generation of very powerful ARM quad-A15 parts). OK, I'm just in a hurry to see MS and Intel meet their very sticky and well deserved end. These two grossly incompetent companies have rode the gravy train for far too long.

Google makes money from those emasculated users (1)

skaag (206358) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031833)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Google making a shitload of money from all those "emasculated" people?
And have we already reached the stage where Google tells us what to do with our bodies? :-)

Re:Google makes money from those emasculated users (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031987)

Not really. Google is making shitload of money by selling eyeballs of all those "emasculated" people. It's a really small step from selling their other parts as well.

smartphone is not just for reading (1)

Max_W (812974) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031841)

I use "OSMpad" on "iPhone" for mapping for the wiki-style "OpenStreetMap". So it is a precise GPS enabled data input tool. How can I do in with glasses?

If I can, I do not mind. Because every time I have to stop bicycle, take out iPhone, map a building or another structure, put back smartphone into the pocket, and so on.

Touching glass morning/night is Nothing new (3, Interesting)

hawguy (1600213) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031861)

Touching an inanimate object made of glass and plastic each morning and night is nothing new -- well before the days of smart phones (or even cell phones at all), I used to have a manual alarm clock that I'd have to set each night and turn off each morning. So this "strange intimacy" with our gadgets has been going on for 50 years or more.

Since it was a 12 hour clock, it wasn't possible to reset the alarm when it went off at 7am in the morning or else it would go off again at 7pm, so one had to set it each night.

Now my smartphone is my alarm, and it's better in that I don't have to set it at night, but it's still the first thing I touch in the morning since I have to stop the alarm.

Only on my own terms (4, Interesting)

tftp (111690) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031865)

I might buy the Glass, but only if the device connects only to my computers and does only what I want. In effect, it would be a convenient HUD, not a service. Not a bit would go outside of my LAN.

In most cases, though, I don't quite feel the need to have one on. Do I need to wear a monitor in front of me? Do I need to threaten everyone with recording of all their activities, public and semi-public? My life does not revolve around constant communication; there is specific time and place for that. The employer will probably also be not very happy that you can watch movies and read Slashdot all day long without anyone knowing it. The police will be joyful to learn that a Glass owner can see not just the road but also his email and chat - and there is no way to prove it one way or another.

The military will pick this up in no time. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031897)

Throw in a mini map showing friendlies deployment, a GPS and a camera to monitor activities by the command and you got yourself some very good gear.

One killer feature (point intended) that could actually make a difference to the soldiers themselves is a targeting line-of-sight camera \ giro that calculates the projectile course and displays a curve with wind correction and such. This will make shooting behind cover and from the waist possible at very long ranges.

Hell, Imagine all your grunts with Terminator 2 like mini-guns since those things can actually fire pretty accurately but the problem was the weak humans who couldn't aim properly while shotting from the waist and couldn't bring them up to the shoulder because they're way too big and bulky.

Screw protective gear. Deploy 5 guys with this combo and some support UAVs with AV and AA and watch them take out 300 men one their own.

Then you can talk to me about emasculating...

college dating (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031925)

this topic is very nice and popular website.i like this site.,
www.fallterms.com college dating,college socile networks,college party,student,college dance,academic sugesittion and all everything.please
please go to t
o link and enjoy your college life.

Re:college dating (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031989)

this topic is very nice and popular website.i like this site.,
www.fallterms.com college dating,college socile networks,college party,student,college dance,academic sugesittion and all everything.please
please go to t
o link and enjoy your college life.

this topic is very nice and popular website.i like this site.,
www.fallterms.com college dating,college socile networks,college party,student,college dance,academic sugesittion and all everything.please
please go to t
o link and enjoy your college life.

this topic is very nice and popular website.i like this site.,
www.fallterms.com college dating,college socile networks,college party,student,college dance,academic sugesittion and all everything.please
please go to t
o link and enjoy your college life.

nice post.thanks for shearing.

intimate touch with gadgets? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43031959)

This guy needs to get a partner. It seems a sad and lonely life if you are clutching some gadget all the time. I'm a developer, I have 3 "smart" phones and 4 tablets that are part of my daily activity. The last thing I touch at night is my wife, and also the first thing I touch in the morning. Few things are less annoying than people who don't have anything better to do than compulsively check email, etc. Wake up, be analog, smell the air, see the world, whatever. All that digital crap will wait. That is sort of how its designed.

Military (2)

Solarhands (1279802) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031967)

I see glass as a military device more than anything right now. A simple HUD with the locations of allies overlaid on an aerial map, plus features such as IR camera and text commands. The key feature that makes glass so useful in such an instance is its hands-free nature. This would apply anywhere you are using both hands. The problem is that for most civilians it is not such a hassle to take your phone out.

life-saving device for cycling (2)

Max_W (812974) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031971)

It could be an equivalent of a car dashboard camera but for cycling. Cyclists wear glasses anyway to prevent mosquitoes getting into the eyes.

Permanent recording could be a safety feature for cyclists. It would make road hooligans less enthusiastic as an HD video of an accident could be played later in a judicial assembly.

Sergey can suck on my balls (0)

Adult film producer (866485) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031991)

There's an app for that, you son of a bitch. Plug it into your damned glasses. You will enjoy it.

Another step towards hardwiring yourself to google (1)

LostMonk (1839248) | about a year and a half ago | (#43031997)

Of course Brin wants everyone hard-wired to their Google account 24/7. He wants to make Google an inseparable, integral and vital part of our every day life. Glass is a step in that direction. For me, while I do use Google products all the time and however much I like my Android smartphone, I feel just fine leaving it in my pocket/on my desk most of the time. I've no desire to "see the world" through it.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...