Maybe it's because that 'first-person video' is so much more enjoyable than a TomTom in the corner of your eye. The Truman Show and Big Brother have shown us how experiencing someone else's life can fill an emotional void. And Being John Malcovich showed us how fascinating and addictive it can be to 'see through someone else's eyes'. Thanks to Google Glass, this ' next level of sharing ' is now within reach.
Google's 'glasses with information' seem like a Trojan horse: on the outside we see the smart glasses with list to data the 'lens for your eye', but the built-in camera ( head cam ) will change our lives much more than the lens. Do we want that permanent camera? Are we waiting for a growing army of life loggers ? What does this mean for privacy?
Social codes
Critics of Google Glass also pay particular attention to the camera, because of the consequences for our privacy. Of course, that problem is not entirely new: even the smartphone sometimes records more than you would like. But at least that is visible: the filmer has something in his hand.
In his book Halting State (2007, recommended), Charles Stross sketches a world – roughly in 2020 – in which a wearable device like Google Glass is completely normal. He describes how a police officer regularly turns on the 'e vidence logging ' mode on her glasses. A small light then comes on, so that everyone can see that she is – officially – recording video. Google Glass reportedly has such a light too, so that you can see that the camera is running, but that light will very quickly be hacked. 'It is not polite to film without a recording light', says the etiquette of 2014.