Brace yourself for more Glassholes. Beginning last week, Google started to make available a limited supply of Google Glass to anyone with $1,500 to spare. To be certain, Glass still affords—or make possible—a whole range of problematic behaviors. There are concerns about distracted driving; about people (probably men) taking photographs of other people (probably women) without consent; about Glassholes serving as foot soldiers in Google’s data-gobbling army, expanding the corporation’s ongoing assault on what we used to call “privacy.”
These are real issues, but not new ones; rather, they are the newest manifestations of much larger, long-standing problems. While Glass may make those problems more visible than they were before, hating Glass (or even Glassholes) won’t make the problems go away.
The backlash against Glass is a result of foregrounding—when a new technology makes some preexisting aspect (or aspects) of society more visible and, in so doing, is mistaken for having caused the phenomenon in question rather than having brought it to increased attention. Social scientists have long been aware that this happens, and so have described it with many different names. I like to use “foregrounding,” however, because it emphasizes that while what we’re seeing may be more salient than it was before, the phenomenon has been there all along.
Contentious or unsettling new technologies (such as Glass) are therefore important signals, and can draw our attention toward issues that we as a society need to address. Consider “creepshots”—suggestive photographs that are taken without the knowledge or consent of the people pictured (who are almost always women). It may well be easier to take a creepshot with Glass than it is to take one with a smartphone, but Glass doesn’t cause creepshots. Creepshots were a problem before the advent of face-mounted computers, and they will continue to be a problem until we deal with the much bigger problem of why anyone would take a creepshot in the first place. Full story...
Related posts:
These are real issues, but not new ones; rather, they are the newest manifestations of much larger, long-standing problems. While Glass may make those problems more visible than they were before, hating Glass (or even Glassholes) won’t make the problems go away.
The backlash against Glass is a result of foregrounding—when a new technology makes some preexisting aspect (or aspects) of society more visible and, in so doing, is mistaken for having caused the phenomenon in question rather than having brought it to increased attention. Social scientists have long been aware that this happens, and so have described it with many different names. I like to use “foregrounding,” however, because it emphasizes that while what we’re seeing may be more salient than it was before, the phenomenon has been there all along.
Contentious or unsettling new technologies (such as Glass) are therefore important signals, and can draw our attention toward issues that we as a society need to address. Consider “creepshots”—suggestive photographs that are taken without the knowledge or consent of the people pictured (who are almost always women). It may well be easier to take a creepshot with Glass than it is to take one with a smartphone, but Glass doesn’t cause creepshots. Creepshots were a problem before the advent of face-mounted computers, and they will continue to be a problem until we deal with the much bigger problem of why anyone would take a creepshot in the first place. Full story...
Related posts:
- Google Glass update: The ultimate wet dream for perverts, law enforcement
- Cafes ban Google glasses to protect customers' privacy...
- We will all be cameras...
- Google's sinister glasses will turn the whole world into search giant's spies...
- This is the Modem World: The dark side of Google Glass...
- Facial recognition: is the technology taking away your identity?
No comments:
Post a Comment