Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Google Technology

Details of Google's Project Glass Revealed In FCC Report 76

Posted by Soulskill
from the attaches-to-head-using-eyeball-clamps dept.
Flozzin writes with news that documents published to the U.S. Federal Communications Commission's website have provided new details about Project Glass, Google's augmented-reality headset. "A test report describes video playing on the device alongside audio running to a 'vibrating element.' The description tallies with a patent filing suggesting it plays sound via 'bone-conduction' tech rather than earbuds. Developers are due to receive a test edition of the headset later this year. ... [The FCC's papers] describe data being sent to the small screen display via wi-fi and Bluetooth using a radio unit manufactured by Broadcom. The equipment is also said to be able to store video files internally and can be recharged by plugging a power connector into the computing unit on the right-hand arm of the glasses' frame. However, the most arresting detail is the suggestion that audio is provided without the user needing to wear headphones which might disturb how they hear ambient sounds. Last week Google filed a patent application entitled Wearable Computing Device with Indirect Bone-Conduction Speaker."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Details of Google's Project Glass Revealed In FCC Report

Comments Filter:
  • by LikwidCirkel (1542097) on Saturday February 02, 2013 @04:11PM (#42772919)
    In a few years, I expect to see the rate of pedestrian-car accidents and people running into poles to go up by an order of magnitude. Sure, it overlays in your field of vision, so it's not like looking down at a phone, but we're just not meant to multitask with our senses the way this kind of device demands.

    I don't even want to think about how many idiots will drive while using such devices.
    • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

      In a few years, I expect to see the rate of pedestrian-car accidents and people running into poles to go up by an order of magnitude. Sure, it overlays in your field of vision, so it's not like looking down at a phone, but we're just not meant to multitask with our senses the way this kind of device demands. I don't even want to think about how many idiots will drive while using such devices.

      ... and BOOKS, don't even get me started on those. I mean, people used to have to KNOW things, and now they can just look them up? And they're in ENGLISH? Seriously. It loses so much meaning when it's not in the traditional latin.

    • by JaredOfEuropa (526365) on Saturday February 02, 2013 @04:21PM (#42772987) Journal
      Driving with these glasses showing you where to go should be safer than having to glance to the side at a satnav screen from time to time. And a pedestrian or cyclist reading an incoming message on a HUD is actually less likely to crash into a pole than the person who takes his cellphone out of his pocket and looks down at it while continuing to walk/pedal.
      • by AmiMoJo (196126) *

        You won't have to look at a HUD, it will just read out messages or speak directions for you.

    • by russotto (537200) on Saturday February 02, 2013 @05:09PM (#42773261) Journal

      In a few years, I expect to see the rate of pedestrian-car accidents and people running into poles to go up by an order of magnitude.

      You forgot about Google's self-driving car.

    • by robmv (855035)

      people with better genes for multitasking will survive, natural selection at work

    • by icebike (68054)

      These glasses never block your vision or require you to take your eyes off the road, so at least you will see things you are approaching. They also have a camera embedded so they could probably be programmed to know when you are driving, and limit the display of data to just navigation info.

    • by nospam007 (722110) *

      "In a few years, I expect to see the rate of pedestrian-car accidents and people running into poles to go up by an order of magnitude."

      Think of it as evolution in action.

      It will weed out the non-multitask people in a few dozen generations.

  • Addiction (Score:4, Interesting)

    by CRCulver (715279) <crculver@christopherculver.com> on Saturday February 02, 2013 @04:15PM (#42772943) Homepage
    It'll be interesting to see how addictive this technology becomes, especially as many people already can't be separated from their smartphones. One of the more thought-provoking things in Vinge's novel Marooned in Realtime [amazon.com] (about the pace of technology accelerating towards a singularity) is that human beings from later in the 21st century feel disoriented and sluggish when disconnected from wearable technology that provides them 24/7 with sources of information.
  • I would buy a pair in an instant. Most of what I do on my phone is read things, so what better than having it in front of your eyes? Also, completely private personal movie viewing. Four people could with in a room and watch four different movies without any external devices if they wanted.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      They're had these types of devices for over a decade. I bought an EyeTop over 5 years ago. Most people can't handle it. The displays give them migraines. You also start turning your head in the direction of the display as you're subconsciously trying to get both eyes looking at it. For some people that means they start turning towards the direction their head is pointed as well. I've seen more than one person walk into walls and stumble over chairs while focused on the display.

      I don't see anything abo

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Or maybe wait until the damn thing actually comes out before judging how good it is or not. This is nowhere near the final form so you just make yourself look like a jackass dissing it.

  • Google Glass is no more augmenting reality than a TV set is.

    If it were rendering also the view behind it so there was no loss of vision, then it would be augmented reality. As it is it's the same as if you strapped your cell phone on an arm attached to your head a foot out or so.

    • by icebike (68054)

      Google Glass is no more augmenting reality than a TV set is.

      If it were rendering also the view behind it so there was no loss of vision, then it would be augmented reality. As it is it's the same as if you strapped your cell phone on an arm attached to your head a foot out or so.

      But that is exactly what it does.

      Its a HUD, projecting a mostly transparent overlay [dailymail.co.uk] on what you see behind it. Further, it only covers one eye. So it could show navigation arrows without occluding your vision of the road.

      Meets my definition of augmented reality.

    • by Gaygirlie (1657131) <gaygirlie@NOsPAM.hotmail.com> on Saturday February 02, 2013 @05:58PM (#42773637) Homepage

      Google Glass is no more augmenting reality than a TV set is.

      If it were rendering also the view behind it so there was no loss of vision, then it would be augmented reality. As it is it's the same as if you strapped your cell phone on an arm attached to your head a foot out or so.

      This may come as a surprise to you....but it's transparent.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Look, let me paint a use case for you:

      Google adapts the code used by google maps cars to be used by your glasses (Just as they've already done for android phones). It gives you simple instructions on how to move and rotate and while you have the camera on, Google glass creates a 3D image based map of your location. Now, all of this is overlapped with the position of you on the planet, the direction you are looking and the tilt of your head. Only, every person who has google glass has the capability to do th

    • Google Glass is no more augmenting reality than a TV set is.

      You're saying "The Goggles Do Nothing!" [youtube.com]?

      Sorry. Couldn't resist.

  • I use a hearing aid, and it massively irritates the one working ear I have. But a non-surgical bone conduction hearing aid? One that might give me some semblance of binaural hearing without turning my ear canal into a mass of pain?

    Where do I sign up and what percentage of my soul do they want?

  • Does anybody know if the google glasses can be worn over a pair of prescription glasses? Myopia and presbyopia are common and not everybody can wear contact lenses.
    • by Albanach (527650)

      There are images of Sergey Brin [aninews.in] wearing them outdoors while attached to sunglasses. Looking at the design I don't think you'd wear them over prescription glasses, but rather would get prescription lenses for the existing frame.

    • by Albanach (527650)

      A bit more searching brings up this article [techtwitt.com] which has an image of them incorporated into more 'normal' looking glasses. So it might be possible to use them in conjunction with your regular eyewear.

  • by tlhIngan (30335) <slashdot@wor f . n et> on Sunday February 03, 2013 @02:11AM (#42775895)

    So, assuming these things get popular, anyone sort of concerned that now everyone has a camera recording their every move 24/7? Or worse yet, it's going to be indexed an searched and tracked by Google?

    Sure, crime will go down - after all, would anyone want to rob anyone where a yell would bring dozens of cameras recording someone get mugged/raped/etc on the street? Or have dozens of cameras recording every face, so you can tell when that sex offender may be breaking their conditions (in other words, a boon for law enforcement when they have dozens of cameras and angles that can pinpoint anyone at any location).

    Then there's the somewhat more ... private side, given there'll be dozens of cameras watching you coming out of that ... adult entertainment establishment.

    I'm not quite sure society is ready yet for a technology that really puts everyone in the spotlight - where there's a camera on you every moment you step outside your house. Compile the results of dozens of cameras and people would have a pretty good track of your movements even if you only appear for a few frames in every glasses. Between law enforcement, Google ad tracking, insurance companies, they'd be really interested in your whereabouts, your activities, and even what you eat and do...

    • Or paint your face...
    • Signal to noise will likely be too high. In the words of one of modern day's great philosophers, "Aint nobody got time for that".

      Is you insurance agency going to have the time and money (and access) to examine petabytes of data from so many sources, just to put a few more cents onto your premium?

      These cameras may be the worst possible thing for insurance agencies. When everyone has one, there's a good likelihood that people will stop buying full comp insurance, and just settle for 3rd party (mandatory) in t

  • The ability to read a book or watch tv without disturbing the other half will be worth the premium! Now if anyone can point where i can register my interest.
  • Typo in the summary - it's boner conduction they're using.

"Look! There! Evil!.. pure and simple, total evil from the Eighth Dimension!" -- Buckaroo Banzai

Working...