ZNAK SAGITE — više od fantastike — edicija, časopis, knjižara...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9c6W4CCU9M4&feature=player_embedded#!

Postajemo Roboti 

Koliko li sam zaražena igrama kad mi je ovo super i nimalo uvrnuto...  

Nije mi uvrnuto, samo:


- ne želim da me tako lako cimaju
- ljudi koji znatno više nego sad kao da pričaju sami sa sobom?!
- zatvaranje u sopstveni svet sa sopstvenom muzikom i drugim stvarima koje odvlače pažnju - pa te neko pregazi dok prelaziš ulicu, ili ti zgaziš nekog dok voziš

Meni je uvrnuto jel te samo odaljava od sveta, umanjije kontakt s prorodom, zatupljuje instikte i osećaje....  kao imaš neke džidžabidže koje kao nečemu služe, a ne služe ničemu. Ko pre neki dan što sam video, Rusi napravili aplikaciju koja ti kaže gde se ublizini tebe nalazi neka žemska, a moje pitanje na to je Od kad nije dovoljno pogledati oko sebi i naći tu istu žemsku?

Pomaže ako je žemska van vidokruga.

Ovaj Glass je privremena tehnologija. Glavna stvar neće biti da vidiš informaciju ispisanu ispred sebe, nego da je prosto znaš u sebi.

...као у хипериону

GTalk is down!

Quote from: дејан on 26-07-2012, 14:55:36
GTalk is down!

a ja vidim ne radi...

jako će me potresti!
svaki vid komunikacije koji je intimniji od imejla, prezirem!!

zar i šaputanje na jastuku? 

mi to obavljamo elektronski. filing skoro ko u blejd raneru, a ušteda vremena nezanemarljiva!

Quote from: lilit_depp on 26-07-2012, 14:58:36
jako će me potresti!
svaki vid komunikacije koji je intimniji od imejla, prezirem!!

бљак!

nekom bljak, nekom mljac!

Jes', vala. Gtalk zeza već neko vreme...

zakk, radi li ti twitter account? ja imam nekih problema, nit mogu da tvitujem niti učitavam tuđe tvitove i sve to koincidira sa čudnim tvitom u kom sam bila adresirana. paranoja?!!!

sorry, sad mi izbaci ovo:

Twitter is currently down for <%= reason %>.

We expect to be back in <%= deadline %>. For more information, check out Twitter Status. Thanks for your patience!

Znači istog dana su pali Gtalk i Twitter? A mi se smejali vjesnicima apokalipse!!!!!!!!!!!

nije džaba 2012!!!  ko zna šta će biti do kraja godine!

Kad smo već kod aplikacija od kojih se ježimo, da li je neko pogledao Friday za Android?

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.dexetra.friday

Ja obično nisam paranoična kada su aplikacije koje prikupljaju lične informacije u pitanju, ali ovo je i za mene previše.

hahah, da, friday i am in love, ali ovo je skeri!
"Friday changes the way you use your android. It captures your entire life through your phone and builds a beautiful timeline of your life. Not just that, you can filter and search your life to find the exact information you want."

meni su na androidu aktivne bukvalno osnovne aplikacije, koje ionako ne koristim. lol.
osnovna android funkcija je da mi izigrava hot spot u nedostatku interneta.

Ali ti si Apple fetisista, tvoje misljenje je automatski diskvalifikovano

Ova diskusija me ladno ponukala da pogledam Lilitin tviter. Svoje špijunske sklonosti ne bih ni obelodanila da nije pomenuta moja ljubav iz Libeka! Ahhh! Tamo sam jela najlepšu tortu sa marcipanom (Gran Marnije) i kupila čaj sa marcipanom i i i.  Ahhh. Ti baš znaš zašto živiš.
EDIT: ahhh.

Постоје одличне домаће "андроид" апликације, оне за које кажеш - е, коначно од свег овог "прогреса" и нешто што је заиста употребљиво. Прво, апликација симпатичног назива "Паркинг манијак". Једном се унесе број таблице и апликацијом се плаћа паркирање свуда по Србији. На менију су сви градови, зоне, итд... Друга је "ВИПутник". Приступа базама података везаним за путовања, редовима вожње (возови, аутобуси, авиони), бројевима такси удружења (или приватника) по Србији, мада највише користим опцију која приказује број преосталих места по београдским паркинзима. Није лош ни приступ саобраћајним камерама, а што их буде више, апликација ће бити кориснија јер се у рил-тајму види где је у граду гужва итсл.

И, наравно, постоји гомила веома корисних ГПС апликација.

А ту је и "батеријска лампа", наравно. 

Quote from: Jevtropijevićka on 26-07-2012, 23:59:25
Ova diskusija me ladno ponukala da pogledam Lilitin tviter. Svoje špijunske sklonosti ne bih ni obelodanila da nije pomenuta moja ljubav iz Libeka! Ahhh! Tamo sam jela najlepšu tortu sa marcipanom (Gran Marnije) i kupila čaj sa marcipanom i i i.  Ahhh. Ti baš znaš zašto živiš.
EDIT: ahhh.

na sagiti sve neki agenti službe, ne može čovek ko čovek ni na twitteru da palamudi!!! iako mi twitter nije više toliko zanimljiv, nova simpatija mi je instagram!
a ova tvoja torta ne može da se naruči online, al donosim ti marcipan trinaestog u avgustu, ili bilo kog drugog! već imam i druge izjelice na spisku!

A jel taj instagram isto za jelo?
Inače, fala.   Ja ću tebi... nemam pojma. Možda će da nam dozru smokve u bašti jer sve ostalo izgleda da će biti sprženo. Od sada gajimo samo kaktuse.

samo oftopikuješ črna jevtro! o hrani se priča kod skalopa! 

Pa kad se vrati pričaću kod njega! A šta ja da zvrčim o gadžetima kad ne razlikujem ajped od ajpoda! Živio oftopik! al na deponiji!

Quote from: дејан on 05-04-2012, 10:47:58
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9c6W4CCU9M4&feature=player_embedded#!

looove it!

сјајан филм 


http://vimeo.com/46304267#

Pošto me mrzi da smišljam u koji topik bi išla ova vest:

      Google's Motorola Files New Patent Case Against Apple   

Quote
      Google's Motorola Files New Patent Case Against Apple By Susan Decker - Aug 18, 2012 6:00 AM GMT+0200   

   
• Facebook Share

   
• LinkedIn
• Google +1
• 64 Comments

   
• Print
• QUEUE  Q

Google Inc. (GOOG)'s Motorola Mobility unit said it filed a new patent-infringement case against Apple Inc. (AAPL) claiming that features on some Apple devices, including the Siri voice-recognition program, infringe its patents.
The complaint at the U.S. International Trade Commission claims infringement of seven Motorola Mobility patents on features including location reminders, e-mail notification and phone/video players, Motorola Mobility said yesterday. The case seeks a ban on U.S. imports of devices including the iPhone, iPad and Mac computers. Apple's products are made in Asia.
"We would like to settle these patent matters, but Apple's unwillingness to work out a license leaves us little choice but to defend ourselves and our engineers' innovations," Motorola Mobility said in an e-mailed statement.
Motorola Mobility and Apple have been fighting since at least 2010 after licensing talks failed. Apple has said Motorola Mobility is making unreasonable demands, and argues that phones made by Motorola Mobility and other handset manufacturers that run on Google's Android operating system are copying key patented features of the iPhone.
The complaint is the second that Libertyville, Illinois- based Motorola Mobility has filed at the agency against Apple. A copy of the new complaint wasn't immediately available. The commission is scheduled to announce a final decision Aug. 24 in the earlier case, and could impose an import ban on the iPhone.
Kristin Huguet, a spokeswoman for Cupertino, California- based Apple, had no immediate comment.
Broader Battle  The dispute is part of a broader battle for share in a smartphone market that Bloomberg Industries said rose 62 percent to $219 billion last year. Apple, which made one-third of the smartphones sold in the U.S. last quarter, is in the midst of a patent-infringement trial in federal court in California with its biggest rival, Samsung Electronics Co.
Android, which is distributed by Mountain View, California- based Google, is the most popular platform for smartphones. Google bought Motorola Mobility in May.
A trade judge in April said Apple infringed one of four Motorola Mobility patents in the first case. The patent covers a way computers transmit signals through Wi-Fi. The full commission is reviewing those findings and is scheduled to release its final decision on Aug. 24.
A key issue in that case is whether the agency, which is designed to protect U.S. markets from unfair trade practices, should issue import bans on products found to infringe patents on technology used in industry standards.
Industry Standards  Companies that help develop standards to let electronics work together pledge to license patents covering those standards on fair and reasonable terms. Apple contends that issues over what is fair should be resolved in a federal district court, since the ITC doesn't have the power to award damages.
Motorola Mobility said Apple has refused to negotiate a license and that Apple's argument is merely a way to avoid punishment for infringing another company's patents.
Apple filed its own patent-infringement case against Motorola Mobility at the Washington agency. The commission in March upheld a judge's determination that the handset manufacturer wasn't infringing one Apple patent and that two other patents were invalid. Apple is appealing that decision.   

Mislite da je vaš posao sranje? A kako bi vam bilo da osam sati dnevno, godinu dana gledate snimke pogubljenja, mučenja, kidi porna itd.? I posle vas gugl otpusti.

Tech Confessional: The Googler Who Looked At The Worst Of The Internet 

Quote
Sitting in the sun at a tech company cafeteria, this former Google worker described a year spent immersed in some of the darkest content available on the Internet. His role at the tech company mainly consisted of reviewing things like bestiality, necrophilia, body mutilations (gore, shock, beheadings, suicides), explicit fetishes (like diaper porn) and child pornography found across all Google products — an experience that he found "scarring." The company refused to make him a full-time worker, keeping him on contract status without much of a support system.
After college, I went to work in politics; I was a social media guy. A recruiter called me and said, "You should work for Google." It never occurred to me to work for a tech company. They convinced me it was the right place to go.
So I went there. I was kind of repulsed at how much I had. I think anyone who said they didn't enjoy it would be a filthy liar: I ate breakfast, lunch and dinner there every day. They give you everything you need. As a person just getting out of college, it was fantastic. My parents, being traditional, were very proud that that I was working for this huge company.
Over the phone, the recruiter informed me I'd be dealing with "sensitive content." It didn't occur to me that I would be doing the work without technical and emotional support.

One of the most shocking parts of my job was working on porn issues. Child porn is the biggest thing for internet companies. By law you have to take it down in 24 hours upon notice and report it to federal authorities. No one wanted to do it within Google.
I dealt with all the products that Google owned. If anyone were to use them for child porn, I'd have to look at it. So maybe like 15,000 images a day. Google Images, Picasa, Orkut, Google search, etc.
I had no one to talk to. I couldn't bring it home to my girlfriend because I didn't want to burden her with this bullshit. For seven, eight, nine months, I was looking at this kind of stuff and thinking I was fine, but it was putting me in a really dark place.
Google got someone from a federal agency to talk to me, and that's when it occurred to me that I needed therapy. She showed me photos of seemingly innocuous activities (kind of like a modified Rorschach test) and asked me for my first visceral reaction. I was like, "That's fucked up!" It was just a father and a child.
So I went to get therapy. Google covered one session with a government-appointed therapist — and encouraged me to go out and get my own therapy after I left.

I think my manager was a little shocked, too, when I couldn't get hired full-time by Google. He gave me the news around the nine-month mark, so I had two months to find a job. [Ed. note: Google contractors can only stay for a year before leaving or becoming regular employees.] But he couldn't tell me why I wasn't hired.
A lot of people I know are ex-Google and they have the same story. Three people here were on the midnight shift for YouTube and they were given the promise that if they were going to see beheadings and child porn and all this shit all the time, they'd get hired. YouTube's review process is proactive — they have to sit there and look at all of it, from 10 p.m. to 8 a.m., for a year. One of my really good friends lost her life for a year doing that.
But no one talks about it. Like the guy I knew at YouTube. He was the guy who knew everything about child porn, knew everything about beheadings. I worked with him very closely and every time a new video by Al Qaeda came up, he was the first guy to see it. He had to see it for everybody. But he was a contractor and they didn't hire him. He has no idea why. His manager called the recruiters and said, do you have any idea what this guy does? They had no idea. If you're a contractor, you're just a name and a department.
This is the second of an occasional series of interviews with tech workers that one doesn't often hear from — the kind who don't take the stage at conferences and yet play a crucial role in the internet economy. This interview has been edited and condensed and some identifying details have been changed. If you have any interest in talking to us (or know someone who might), please be in touch: reyhan.harmanci@buzzfeed.com.

Bilo bi na sagiti dobrovoljaca da besplatno rade na ovome...

Ma našlo bi ih se svuda... 4Chan forumašima su takve stvari hobi. Ali ipak, osam sati dnevno, pet dana u nedelji, godinu dana. To ne može čoveka da ne upropasti. Terapija bi stvarno morala da bude deo paketa.

Što ste naivni bre 

http://apps.facebook.com/theguardian/books/2007/feb/11/booksonhealth.familyandrelationships

QuoteBrett Kahr is a bright, polite, charming man whose early academic career took him from Cornell to Oxford to Yale; he also has more sexual fantasies in his head than anyone who has ever lived. Kahr, who is 46, has been collecting these fantasies on and off for years, but since 2002, he has considerably increased his productivity rate: 19,000 fantasies from the UK, another 4,000 from America. Each one has been carefully catalogued and archived: B for bondage or bestiality, C for coprophilia or Cherie Blair.

QuoteKahr seems unfailingly interested in the extremes of British lust, though he insists that these are fantasies of absolutely normal citizens; 'none of them has been hospitalised or imprisoned; they are all at liberty,' he says, a thought which becomes increasingly alarming as his book goes on. He approaches each of these secret stories with undimmed curiosity, 'like an anthropologist who has stumbled upon a relatively untouched, faraway tribe'.

Some of the revelations must have tested his professional straight face. One man confesses to his long-held wish to 'bind both the Queen and Baroness Thatcher with ropes and then make love to each woman in turn'. Some are deeply disturbing - a woman whose parents perished in the Holocaust who has always become aroused by the thought of SS officers in jackboots. Kahr says he has been for a long time intrigued by a comment of Freud's suggesting 'that every sexual act is a process in which four persons are involved': the two people in bed and the two others in their heads. He sees himself in the tradition of Alfred Kinsey and Nancy Friday, a liberating force, and insists that that force is still needed when it comes to the British and sex.

Ja sam sigurno naivan, plus ne mogu da vidim ništa na Fejsbuku jer sam old skul, ali kakve veze ovo što si citirao sa ovim o čemu smo pričali? 

evo, da progledas

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2007/feb/11/booksonhealth.familyandrelationships?fb=optOut

Ovde je reč o nasilju.
Nasilje je način da se "stvari animiraju".
To je bitno, jer je uzrok nasilju zapravo odsustvo reakcije na input.
U seksualnim maštarijama, ljudi zamišljaju prinudni seks...
U stvarnosti, nasilje ima isti uzrok.

Kod ovog tipa što je radio za Google, najveći je problem što nije bio pripremljen za tu vrstu informacije, pošto informacija - informiše. Pretvaraš se u informaciju, doslovno. Što više gledaš u Ambis to Ambis više gleda u tebe.
Treba biti desenzitizovan i s razumevanjem proučavati tu pojavu. To je osnovna budistička meditacija, recimo.
Ali, ljudi su uslovljeni da reaguju emotivno, odnosno njih ovakav sadržaj aktivira da reaguju odbojno i bolesno...
A zatim, traže psihijatrijsku pomoć. 

Evo jedne viralne slike 

Google Puts Its Virtual Brain Technology to Work 

Quote
A powerful new approach to artificial intelligence is ready to improve many Google products.


This summer Google set a new landmark in the field of artificial intelligence with software that learned how to recognize cats, people, and other things simply by watching YouTube videos (see "Self-Taught Software"). That technology, modeled on how brain cells operate, is now being put to work making Google's products smarter, with speech recognition being the first service to benefit.
Google's learning software is based on simulating groups of connected brain cells that communicate and influence one another. When such a neural network, as it's called, is exposed to data, the relationships between different neurons can change. That causes the network to develop the ability to react in certain ways to incoming data of a particular kind—and the network is said to have learned something.
Neural networks have been used for decades in areas where machine learning is applied, such as chess-playing software or face detection. Google's engineers have found ways to put more computing power behind the approach than was previously possible, creating neural networks that can learn without human assistance and are robust enough to be used commercially, not just as research demonstrations.


The company's neural networks decide for themselves which features of data to pay attention to, and which patterns matter, rather than having humans decide that, say, colors and particular shapes are of interest to software trying to identify objects. 
Google is now using these neural networks to recognize speech more accurately, a technology increasingly important to Google's smartphone operating system, Android, as well as the search app it makes available for Apple devices (see "Google's Answer to Siri Thinks Ahead"). "We got between 20 and 25 percent improvement in terms of words that are wrong," says Vincent Vanhoucke, a leader of Google's speech-recognition efforts. "That means that many more people will have a perfect experience without errors." The neural net is so far only working on U.S. English, and Vanhoucke says similar improvements should be possible when it is introduced for other dialects and languages.
Other Google products will likely improve over time with help from the new learning software. The company's image search tools, for example, could become better able to understand what's in a photo without relying on surrounding text. And Google's self-driving cars (see "Look, No Hands") and mobile computer built into a pair of glasses (see "You Will Want Google's Goggles") could benefit from software better able to make sense of more real-world data.
The new technology grabbed headlines back in June of this year, when Google engineers published results of an experiment that threw 10 million images grabbed from YouTube videos at their simulated brain cells, running 16,000 processors across a thousand computers for 10 days without pause.

"Most people keep their model in a single machine, but we wanted to experiment with very large neural networks," says Jeff Dean, an engineer helping lead the research at Google. "If you scale up both the size of the model and the amount of data you train it with, you can learn finer distinctions or more complex features."
The neural networks that come out of that process are more flexible. "These models can typically take a lot more context," says Dean, giving an example from the world of speech recognition. If, for example, Google's system thought it heard someone say "I'm going to eat a lychee," but the last word was slightly muffled, it could confirm its hunch based on past experience of phrases because "lychee" is a fruit and is used in the same context as "apple" or "orange."
Dean says his team is also testing models that understand both images and text together. "You give it 'porpoise' and it gives you pictures of porpoises," he says. "If you give it a picture of a porpoise, it gives you 'porpoise' as a word."
A next step could be to have the same model learn the sounds of words as well. Being able to relate different forms of data like that could lead to speech recognition that gathers extra clues from video, for example, and it could boost the capabilities of Google's self-driving cars by helping them understand their surroundings by combining the many streams of data they collect, from laser scans of nearby obstacles to information from the car's engine.
Google's work on making neural networks brings us a small step closer to one of the ultimate goals of AI—creating software that can match animal or perhaps even human intelligence, says Yoshua Bengio, a professor at the University of Montreal who works on similar machine-learning techniques. "This is the route toward making more general artificial intelligence—there's no way you will get an intelligent machine if it can't take in a large volume of knowledge about the world," he says.
In fact, the workings of Google's neural networks operate in similar ways to what neuroscientists know about the visual cortex in mammals, the part of the brain that processes visual information, says Bengio. "It turns out that the feature learning networks being used [by Google] are similar to the methods used by the brain that are able to discover objects that exist."
However, he is quick to add that even Google's neural networks are much smaller than the brain, and that they can't perform many things necessary to intelligence, such as reasoning with information collected from the outside world.
Dean is also careful not to imply that the limited intelligences he's building are close to matching any biological brain. But he can't resist pointing out that if you pick the right contest, Google's neural networks have humans beat.
"We are seeing better than human-level performance in some visual tasks," he says, giving the example of labeling, where house numbers appear in photos taken by Google's Street View car, a job that used to be farmed out to many humans.
"They're starting to use neural nets to decide whether a patch [in an image] is a house number or not," says Dean, and they turn out to perform better than humans. It's a small victory—but one that highlights how far artificial neural nets are behind the ones in your head. "It's probably that it's not very exciting, and a computer never gets tired," says Dean. It takes real intelligence to get bored.

Ovi iz googla znaju šta je pos'o:

http://www.photontide.org/nova-era-androida/

How It Feels [through Glass]

QuoteAll video footage captured through Glass.

Topolsky in Mirrorshades, or, trying out Google Glass


(via Wired via Bruce Sterling via The Verge via Joshua Topolsky)

Warren Ellis: The Inexorable Rise of Crapjects


(via Vice)

Nema, kad ga Voren Elis živopiše, to je onda živopisano. Lepo ga je sročio.

гизмодо о употреби гугл наочара

How Guys Will Use Google Glass

да сам ја влас у гуглу ја бих овај спот ставио као своју рекламу

https://vimeo.com/62092214

Quote from: дејан on 20-03-2013, 10:59:24
да сам ја влас у гуглу ја бих овај спот ставио као своју рекламу

https://vimeo.com/62092214

Quote

The Google Glass feature no one is talking about

FEBRUARY 28, 2013   |   by Mark Hurst

(Also: en español, 简体中文, 繁體中文, На русском, in het nederlands)

Google Glass might change your life, but not in the way you think. There's something else Google Glass makes possible that no one – no one – has talked about yet, and so today I'm writing this blog post to describe it.

To read the raving accounts of tech journalists who Google commissioned for demos, you'd think Glass was something between a jetpack and a magic wand: something so cool, so sleek, so irresistible that it must inevitably replace that fading, pitifully out-of-date device called the smartphone.

Sergey Brin himself said as much yesterday, observing that it is "emasculating" to use a smartphone, "rubbing this featureless piece of glass." His solution to that piece of glass, of course, is called Glass. And his solution to that emasculation is – well, as VentureBeat put it, "Sergey Brin calls smartphones 'emasculating' – but dorky Google Glass [is] A-OK."

Like every other shiny innovation these days, Google Glass will live or die solely on the experience it creates for people. The immediate, most visible problem in the Glass experience is how dorky the user looks while wearing it. No one wants to be the only person in the bar dressed like a cyborg from a 1992 virtual-reality movie. It's embarrassing. Early adopters will abandon Google Glass if they don't sense the social approval they seek while wearing it.

Google seems to have calculated this already and recently announced a partnership with Warby Parker, known for its designer glasses favored by the all-important younger demographic. (My own proposal, posted the day before, jokingly suggested that Google look into monocles.)

Except for the awkward physical design, the experience of using Google Glass has won high praise from reviewers. Seeing your bitstreams floating in the air in front of you, it would seem, is an ecstatic experience. Weather! Directions! Social network requests! Email overload! All floating in front of you, never out of your sight! For people who delight in a deluge of digital distractions, this is much more exciting than a smartphone, which forces you back to the boring offline world, every so often, when you put the phone away. Glass promises never to do that. In fact, in a feat of considerable chutzpah, Google is attempting to pitch Glass as an antidote to distraction, since users don't have to look down at a phone. Right, because now the distractions are all conveniently placed directly into your eyeball! (For a more accurate exploration of Glass-enabled distraction, see this darkly comic parody video. Even edgier is this parody – warning, some spicy language.)

As if all that wasn't enough, Google Glass comes with yet another, even more important feature: lifebits, the ability to record video of the people, places, and events around you, at all times. Veteran readers will remember that I predicted this six years ago in my book Bit Literacy. From Chapter 13:

    The life bitstream will raise new and important issues. Should it be socially acceptable, for example, to record a private conversation with a friend? How will anyone be sure they're not being recorded, in public or private? ... Corporations, police, even friends with 'life recorders' will capture the actions and utterances of everyone in sight, whether they like it or not.

Today, finally, that future has arrived: a major company offering the ability to record your life, store it, and share it – all with a simple voice command.

And this is where our story takes a turn, toward a ramification that dwarfs every other issue raised so far on Google Glass. Yes, the glasses look dorky – Google will fix that. And sure, Glass forces users to be permanently plugged-in to Google's digital world – that's hardly a concern for the company or, for that matter, most users out there. No. The real issue raised by Google Glass, which will either cause the project to fail or create certain outcomes you may not want (which I'll describe), has to do with the lifebits. Once again, it's an issue of experience.

The Google Glass feature that (almost) no one is talking about is the experience – not of the user, but of everyone other than the user. A tweet by David Yee introduces it well:

    There is a kid wearing Google Glasses at this restaurant which, until just now, used to be my favorite spot.

The key experiential question of Google Glass isn't what it's like to wear them, it's what it's like to be around someone else who's wearing them. I'll give an easy example. Your one-on-one conversation with someone wearing Google Glass is likely to be annoying, because you'll suspect that you don't have their undivided attention. And you can't comfortably ask them to take the glasses off (especially when, inevitably, the device is integrated into prescription lenses). Finally – here's where the problems really start – you don't know if they're taking a video of you.

Now pretend you don't know a single person who wears Google Glass... and take a walk outside. Anywhere you go in public – any store, any sidewalk, any bus or subway – you're liable to be recorded: audio and video. Fifty people on the bus might be Glassless, but if a single person wearing Glass gets on, you – and all 49 other passengers – could be recorded. Not just for a temporary throwaway video buffer, like a security camera, but recorded, stored permanently, and shared to the world.

Now, I know the response: "I'm recorded by security cameras all day, it doesn't bother me, what's the difference?" Hear me out – I'm not done. What makes Glass so unique is that it's a Google project. And Google has the capacity to combine Glass with other technologies it owns.

First, take the video feeds from every Google Glass headset, worn by users worldwide. Regardless of whether video is only recorded temporarily, as in the first version of Glass, or always-on, as is certainly possible in future versions, the video all streams into Google's own cloud of servers. Now add in facial recognition and the identity database that Google is building within Google Plus (with an emphasis on people's accurate, real-world names): Google's servers can process video files, at their leisure, to attempt identification on every person appearing in every video. And if Google Plus doesn't sound like much, note that Mark Zuckerberg has already pledged that Facebook will develop apps for Glass.

Finally, consider the speech-to-text software that Google already employs, both in its servers and on the Glass devices themselves. Any audio in a video could, technically speaking, be converted to text, tagged to the individual who spoke it, and made fully searchable within Google's search index.

Now our stage is set: not for what will happen, necessarily, but what I just want to point out could technically happen, by combining tools already available within Google.

Let's return to the bus ride. It's not a stretch to imagine that you could immediately be identified by that Google Glass user who gets on the bus and turns the camera toward you. Anything you say within earshot could be recorded, associated with the text, and tagged to your online identity. And stored in Google's search index. Permanently.

I'm still not done.

The really interesting aspect is that all of the indexing, tagging, and storage could happen without the Google Glass user even requesting it. Any video taken by any Google Glass, anywhere, is likely to be stored on Google servers, where any post-processing (facial recognition, speech-to-text, etc.) could happen at the later request of Google, or any other corporate or governmental body, at any point in the future.

Remember when people were kind of creeped out by that car Google drove around to take pictures of your house? Most people got over it, because they got a nice StreetView feature in Google Maps as a result.

Google Glass is like one camera car for each of the thousands, possibly millions, of people who will wear the device – every single day, everywhere they go – on sidewalks, into restaurants, up elevators, around your office, into your home. From now on, starting today, anywhere you go within range of a Google Glass device, everything you do could be recorded and uploaded to Google's cloud, and stored there for the rest of your life. You won't know if you're being recorded or not; and even if you do, you'll have no way to stop it.

And that, my friends, is the experience that Google Glass creates. That is the experience we should be thinking about. The most important Google Glass experience is not the user experience – it's the experience of everyone else. The experience of being a citizen, in public, is about to change.

Just think: if a million Google Glasses go out into the world and start storing audio and video of the world around them, the scope of Google search suddenly gets much, much bigger, and that search index will include you. Let me paint a picture. Ten years from now, someone, some company, or some organization, takes an interest in you, wants to know if you've ever said anything they consider offensive, or threatening, or just includes a mention of a certain word or phrase they find interesting. A single search query within Google's cloud – whether initiated by a publicly available search, or a federal subpoena, or anything in between – will instantly bring up documentation of every word you've ever spoken within earshot of a Google Glass device.

This is the discussion we should have about Google Glass. The tech community, by all rights, should be leading this discussion. Yet most techies today are still chattering about whether they'll look cool wearing the device.

Oh, and as for that physical design problem. If Google Glass does well enough in its initial launch to survive to subsequent versions, forget Warby Parker. The next company Google will call is Bausch & Lomb. Why wear bulky glasses when the entire device fits into a contact lens? And that, of course, would be the ultimate expression of the Google Glass idea: a digital world that is even more difficult to turn off, once it's implanted directly into the user's body. At that point you'll not even know who might be recording you. There will be no opting out.

Uzeto odavde.