--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <noozguru@...> wrote: > > On 03/11/2013 05:06 PM, John wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jr_esq@> wrote: > >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > >>>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <noozguru@> wrote: > >>>>> On 03/11/2013 11:59 AM, John wrote: > >>>>>> Like it or not, this is the next fad for the internet. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> http://www.upi.com/blog/2013/03/10/Seattle-dive-bar-bans-Google-glasses/9881362922347/?spt=mps&or=1 > >>>>> I have a Swann pen camera. Looks just like any other nice > >>>>> ballpoint pen. Push the button on top and it starts > >>>>> recording video. Didn't cost $1500 either (of course by > >>>>> the time Glass is available to the public it'll may be > >>>>> only $200). It cost $20 after rebate. Records video > >>>>> (640x480) and audio. They have an HD version for a little > >>>>> more. > >>>> Small world. I have a Schwanstucker 1000, which is not a > >>>> pen but IS pen-is mounted, and also records in full HD. > >>>> > >>>> The results are far less interesting than you'd imagine... > >>>> > >>>> :-) > >>>> > >>>> As for Google Glass, can you *imagine* the pathology of > >>>> someone who needs to be THAT "connected" to the Net? > >>> Did you ever watch the Predator with Arnold S.? > >> I did, enough times that I'm tempted to reply because > >> I honestly don't get the connection to that movie you > >> seem to see. Please explain it to me. My memory may > >> be faulty. > > Barry, > > > > My point is that information will be available almost at will. In the > > movie, the predator had his visor which gave him all kinds of information > > about his victims, including Arnold. Unfortunately for him, he couldn't > > outfox Arnold's character in the movie. So, the predator had to resort to > > a self-destruct mode by detonating a nuclear bomb in his arm-gadgetry. > > > > IOW, the google glass appears to be the manifestation of Kurzweil's > > prediction that humans will eventually merge with the machine/computer for > > the sake of a perceived advantage in improving the brain performance of > > humans. Yes, cyborgs in Star Trek terms. > > > > There are some people, like Michio Kaku a physics professor from CUNY, who > > are welcoming this kind of human development. But IMO this is really a > > devolution of the human physiology and spirit. > > There seem to be a lot of people in society who are insecure and want to > look smart who embrace science even if they don't understand it. To me > this has always been hilarious. I always did well in the sciences as > well as the arts. Though I chose a career in the arts I still paid > attention and understood a lot of the sciences. Because I understood > electronics, in spite of playing drums in bands, it was I who selected > and setup sound and recording gear as the other members usually only had > a peripheral understanding of the gear. It also paid off in a second > career in technology. > > That said, I think it a very dangerous thing to merge man and machine. > There will be unintended consequences. Leave such merges for those who > are crippled and can benefit from it. The rest need to develop organically. >
Yes, I agree that these new technologies should be used to help those who are handicapped mentally and physically. But the technologies shouldn't be used for the healthy ones.
