Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Google Displays Input Devices It's funny.  Laugh. Privacy Your Rights Online

Seattle Bar Owner Bans Google Glass, In Advance 471

Posted by timothy
from the we-don't-want-your-kind dept.
An anonymous reader writes "A popular Seattle bar and restaurant has posted a notice on its Facebook page warning patrons that wearing Google Glass will not be tolerated. 'Ass kicking will be encouraged for violators,' wrote Dave Meinert, owner of the 5 Point Cafe, perhaps in a mock aggressive tone. GeekWire reports that Meinert raised privacy concerns in an interview with a local radio station: 'People want to go there and be not known and definitely don't want to be secretly filmed or videotaped and immediately put on the Internet.' A subsequent FB post includes more Meinert musings on Google Glass: 'They are really just the new fashion accessory for the fanny pack & never removed Bluetooth headset wearing set,' along with unflattering photos of a pair of early adopters."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Seattle Bar Owner Bans Google Glass, In Advance

Comments Filter:
  • That's his right (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 10, 2013 @03:48PM (#43133007)

    And it's my right to take my business elsewhere.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      And it's my right to give them extra business because of it, and living in Seattle, I will.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      And it's my right to take my business elsewhere.

      Why is this modded flamebait? I tend to view this as a reactionary policy done by a person who clearly thinks far too much of his establishment. That's his right. Since I view his policy in that light it's my right to go somewhere else. The policy also strikes me as hypocritical as I'd be willing to bet that he has several cameras and probably audio monitoring throughout the establishment (also his right) and yet wants to ban others from doing the same thing.

      It reminds me of those few gun stores where they

      • Seems more like a grab for free advertising to me. hint hint
        • Re:That's his right (Score:4, Informative)

          by Darinbob (1142669) on Monday March 11, 2013 @01:26AM (#43135671)

          For sure. There will be a lot of customers who feel similarly who will give that establishment more business. The two or three yuppies who decide to go elsewhere and pout about the restrictions will be minor compared to the 100 new customers who show up to cheer.

      • by gallen1234 (565989) <(gallen) (at) (whitecraneeducation.com)> on Sunday March 10, 2013 @06:43PM (#43134019)
        I think we can be pretty confident that he won't be posting the security camera video on YouTube. I don't think you can say the same for video taken by patrons.
      • Re:That's his right (Score:5, Interesting)

        by rocket rancher (447670) <themovingfinger@gmail.com> on Sunday March 10, 2013 @07:52PM (#43134355)

        It reminds me of those few gun stores where they ban their customers from carrying a gun while their staff is openly carrying. Sure, it's their right to ban such but it's still hypocritical.

        lol...I live in one of the most gun-friendly states in the union -- Arizona. There are seven gun shops within a ten minute drive of my house, and two shooting ranges inside of fifteen minutes. There are three supermarkets (yes, supermarkets!) -- two Wal-marts and a K-Mart -- that also sell sporting goods, including shotguns, rifles and a small selection of hand guns. At the Wally-world, you can purchase 500 rounds of 9mm parabellum at 6am on a Sunday morning, and the sleepy-eyed clerk just yawns as she's stacking the boxes for you on the counter. Getting the picture, yet? Let me see if I can make it a little clearer. Maybe one more anecdote to crystallize this for you. People can and do carry openly in Arizona (not a majority, not even a large minority) but you will always see somebody carrying in Arizona if you are out in public enough. The local military base has a "local conditions" briefing for newly arrived personnel and their families, which includes a presentation to explain why there is no need to dial 911 if the guy or girl standing in line next to you at the Starbucks or the bank has a piece shoved into their waistband. Now, about your hypocrisy thing -- at every gun shop in my home town that I've ever visited, there is a sign on the door with words to the effect that your weapon must be secured in your holster, or you will be relieved of it -- probably by prying it from your cold, dead fingers. Not that you can't carry it, mind you, but just that you be smart about it. One even has a picture of Dirty Harry with "Do you feel lucky, Punk?" tacked beneath the warning sign, in case you think they are being a tad hypocritical. All this is to point out to you that in Arizona, the idea that somebody can stop you from responsibly bearing a weapon is a non-starter. Hypocrisy can only occur when it's possible for you to prevent somebody from doing something that you do your self. When it comes to Arizona and carrying a gun, that kind of hypocrisy just can't happen.

    • by Shavano (2541114)

      You and your everyone-uploading glasses would not be missed.

      With any luck, Google Glass will use a set of identifiable ports that can be blocked on everybody's router.

      • by spire3661 (1038968) on Sunday March 10, 2013 @08:12PM (#43134445) Journal
        You just dont get it do you? What is the bar going to do when video cameras are woven into clothing? What about prosthetic eyeballs? I have the absolute natural right to videotape anything my eye can behold, period. Society is going to learn this one the hard way i think.
        • by jotaass (1917920) on Sunday March 10, 2013 @09:28PM (#43134819)

          I have the absolute natural right to videotape anything my eye can behold, period.

          That's a weird point. Your eye does not have perfect vision, you do not hold your memories indefinitely and you cannot feed what you see to a computer to be scanned and analyzed forever. It's one thing for you to look at me, it's a whole other thing when your machine does it. I agree that's the way the world is going, but shouldn't we feel sad about it? We can marvel at the technology, and as geeks we do, but seriously? Perfect infinite crowd-funded surveillance? Of everyone and everything? How is that a good thing?

          • by shutdown -p now (807394) on Monday March 11, 2013 @12:48AM (#43135565) Journal

            We can marvel at the technology, and as geeks we do, but seriously? Perfect infinite crowd-funded surveillance? Of everyone and everything? How is that a good thing?

            It's not a good thing or a bad thing. It's a different thing, and the culture will change to accommodate it.

            • such as places to go, like bars, that ban such surveillance, as an attractive feature

            • I'm willing to call "perfect infinite crowd-funded surveillance of everyone and everything" a bad thing. It's a bold move, but I stand behind it.

            • by tehcyder (746570)

              It's not a good thing or a bad thing. It's a different thing, and the culture will change to accommodate it.

              Bollocks, society (culture) can always decide something is just bad. E.g. we don't let individuals own nuclear weapons.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by tftp (111690)

          I have the absolute natural right to videotape anything my eye can behold, period.

          Just don't act surprised if you are denied entry to certain places. Then your eye cannot see the same stuff as your implanted camera.

          Society will teach you a lesson the hard way, I think. It's not the other way around because society is far larger than you. Walking into a bar and screaming "I have rights!1!" is one of many excellent ways to have your @ss kicked, hard. The trick is that the people inside the bar are not la

    • And it's my right to take my business elsewhere.

      I'm pretty sure that's exactly what he wants.

  • by 7-Vodka (195504) on Sunday March 10, 2013 @04:03PM (#43133099) Journal

    To be fair.. It's not hard to find unflattering photos of people with fanny packs, bluetooth earlobes or geeky google glasses.
    Just saying. If they had been flattering photos, it would have to have been some kind of astroturf.

  • SEATTLE bar owner (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Spy Handler (822350) on Sunday March 10, 2013 @04:12PM (#43133139) Homepage Journal

    his clientele probably consists of Microsoft employees

    • by Tumbleweed (3706)

      his clientele probably consists of Microsoft employees

      It's a mix of barflies, techno peasants from Amazon, MS and Google (among others), and hipsters. Lots of people there take pix with their cellphones ALL THE TIME, and I've never seen anyone get so much as a "talking to" about it, much less get their ass kicked.

  • by Shinobi (19308) on Sunday March 10, 2013 @04:13PM (#43133145)

    Given the desire to record 24/7 with devices like Google Glass etc, I fully understand the decision, and even support it.

    It's one thing if someone hauls up a phone and snaps a couple of pictures or a short video clip, but recording video and audio constantly, that's a big Asshole act...

    On a related note, isn't it funny to see how some geeks who complain about having their privacy violated actually want to do the whole "record everything 24/7", not thinking about the privacy of those they meet?

    • by foobsr (693224)
      On a related note, isn't it funny to see how some geeks who complain about having their privacy violated actually want to do the whole "record everything 24/7", not thinking about the privacy of those they meet?

      Not to emphasize on the meaning of "geek", I could imagine that the idea of a swarm of semiintelligent nonCCTV drones/droids would not only be appreciated in the UK. So, "do no evil".

      CC.

    • >> On a related note, isn't it funny to see how some geeks who complain about having their privacy violated actually want to do the whole "record everything 24/7", not thinking about the privacy of those they meet?

      You mean being selfish, but not knowing it ?

    • by 0123456 (636235) on Sunday March 10, 2013 @05:16PM (#43133541)

      On a related note, isn't it funny to see how some geeks who complain about having their privacy violated actually want to do the whole "record everything 24/7", not thinking about the privacy of those they meet?

      There's still a big difference between recording everything locally for your own use and uploading everything to Google where it will be catalogued, stored and used to funnel ads to people.

    • by smash (1351)

      Agreed. Things have gone too far. Especially with regards to places like a bar, where people want to get drunk, forget their worries and have a good time. Not worry that they'll have their entire night recorded and posted on the internet, or be recognised/profiled by someone on the fly whilst in a compromising situation, via surveillance tech.

      And yes, for all the bitching about privacy with regards to cookie blocking, ad-network tracking, etc. you'd think that the /. crowd would be up in arms. But i

  • The 5 Point (Score:5, Funny)

    by blackfeltfedora (2855471) on Sunday March 10, 2013 @04:19PM (#43133175)
    Is a dive bar located 2 blocks from the Space Needle. The best thing I can say about it is that you can watch the CCTV of the laundry next door. I did like being able to enjoy a beer while keeping an eye on my stuff in the dryer.
  • by ThePeices (635180) on Sunday March 10, 2013 @04:39PM (#43133297)

    While the bar owner in the article makes his point in an obnoxious and troll-like manner, his point stands under its own merit.

    People do not like being filmed and recorded and having it posted on the internet.

    Could you imagine the reaction people would have with somebody wearing these glasses at say, a beach, changing rooms, clothing stores, anything that has children ( oh wont *SOMEBODY* think of the children!) in it, movie theatres, art galleries etc etc.

    If a stranger wearing Glasses walked up and started talking to me, my very first reaction would be to put my hand up in front of my face to hide from the video camera, knowing full well that everything I say and do will be recorded and possibly posted onto the internet for the world to see. It would make conversation very awkward for both of us.

    Its quite a scary thought really. The tech is cool, thats not under debate. But the privacy ramifications of it are, most especially if Glasses become as ubiquitous as smartphones.

    What glasses needs is a way to be useful and cool and functional *without* a camera.

    • by AK Marc (707885)

      If a stranger wearing Glasses walked up and started talking to me, my very first reaction would be to put my hand up in front of my face to hide from the video camera, knowing full well that everything I say and do will be recorded and possibly posted onto the internet for the world to see.

      So when it goes out, they'll have your face shot while you recognize the item, then you putting your hands up like an idiot. I've seen lots of people interviewed on the street by someone with a larger camera, and nobody had that reaction. So why would you do that for google glass if you wouldn't for a shoulder-mounted studio camera?

    • by Swampash (1131503)

      This.

      My personal policy is to never face or engage in conversation anyone wearing Google Glasses. Ever.

    • by dave420 (699308) on Sunday March 10, 2013 @08:07PM (#43134427)
      A rather prominent light is illuminated when video is being recorded. It does not constantly record video, and does not do so surreptitiously. Your claim of "will be recorded" is absolute nonsense. Ignorance isn't helping you sound sane.
  • by gmuslera (3436) on Sunday March 10, 2013 @04:48PM (#43133363) Homepage Journal

    Technology already reached the point where you can be filmed or recorded without being aware of, without needing anything more advanced than a smartphone, with i.e. Koozoo [koozoo.com]. In fact, won't be surprised if there isnt a wearable webcam addon for smarphone to record an event, meeting or whatever, without going full to google glass.

    And add to that that a lot of places have security cameras, a lot of them insecure enough to be in this page [hhba.info] some weeks ago.

  • by rts008 (812749) on Sunday March 10, 2013 @04:54PM (#43133405) Journal

    "Ass kicking will be encouraged for violators"

    Well, I accept the challenge gleefully!

  • Nothing new here really. Public photographers have been harassed forever; ask any practicing street photographer. Cell phone camera users would be in the same boat except that they are in the majority now. Google Glass users are in the monitory currently, so they can be bullied. Give it time.
  • My patronage

  • The bar owner's a troll...however, I have to say that a bar is the LAST place I would have Glass on my head. I'm interested in it for business use, and recreational use, but come on...where do most cellphones get swiped/lost? That's right, in a bar.

    That being said, if I were offered physical violence for wandering into an establishment with these on, there would be problems. A _polite_ request to remove would be sufficient.

  • Yes, this guy has a right to ban whatever he wants in his business but that isn't really the issue. You have to speak out loud for the damn things to do anything (assuming the advertising is accurate) i.e. "Start recording" "Take a picture" so it isn't like they're active all the time. People are not going to record your stupid dalliances because (and this may shock you): NO ONE CARES. They're going to record their own lives and experiences and share those with their circles of friends (Google-related pun u

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      People are not going to record your stupid dalliances because (and this may shock you): NO ONE CARES.

      Just off the top of my head, the following HAVE been know to care enough to be a real nuisance:

      - paranoid employers (and prospective employers doing background checks)
      - ex-spouses and estranged lovers
      - cyber bullies
      - blackmailers
      - political opponents and activists
      - paparazzi and journalists
      - corporate spies
      - weirdos and jerks

  • In a restaurant, bar or other publicly accessible private establishment, the rules are made by the owner.

    Having that out of the way, I'd like to comment that in Russia dashboard-mounted cameras that film 24/7 are nothing new. They are in fact so common, expat Russians are spreading that habit in near-by countries. That's how some almost all (or all?) those recent awesome meteorite videos came to be.

  • I think most people here don't realize how irritating and problematic being recorded constantly during private conversations can be. From experience just with someone that had a voice recorder, knowing that the slightest thing you say could be shared out of context or edited to make you look bad and subsequently (perhaps after a couple of bad experiences) *trying* to police every word becomes stressful enough to spark real resentment and anger.

    Considering the amount of pressure that a lot of people are und

  • When you can bash a household names hardware and have your eatery splashed over the interwebs?

  • Countermeasures (Score:5, Interesting)

    by lurker1997 (2005954) on Sunday March 10, 2013 @06:33PM (#43133969)
    Forgive me if this has already been mentioned, but wouldn't it be cool to make a Infra-red led array that shines brightly on your face or away from your head in a way that saturates the photosensors in a camera and makes it impossible to see your face in an image / recording? I am going to try to make one of these I think.
  • Good on the bar owner for banning these intrusive and hideous things. My patronage is assured (If I lived there)

    But everyone here is going on about right to not be recorded and so on. Can you just stop going on about your rights and look at it from a decency and morality perspective? Society is perfectly capable to manage it's own etiquette. No laws or rights required.

    Poking a camera in ones face unasked is plain rude. It would piss me off. It is the domain for paparazzi and they are assholes. Google glass is the equivalent of poking a camera on ones face and if I were exposed to such a twat I warn him once and slap the bloody thing off his face the second time.

    The other irritating thing that also applies to smartphone users is having them checking their damn phone every few seconds during a conversation. It is rude and persons that feel the need to glue their damn screen to their eye while in a social environment are just the ultimate assholes. I tend to break off conversation when I detect those stealthy glances to their phone.

    But, it won't come to that. Google glass has always been a stupid idea and has no hope in hell to ever become cool or socially accepted. Good for the bar owner to make his declaration and get a conversation around the politeness aspect of those things started.

  • by russotto (537200) on Sunday March 10, 2013 @09:20PM (#43134795) Journal

    ...bans Glass before it's cool.

Somebody ought to cross ball point pens with coat hangers so that the pens will multiply instead of disappear.

Working...