[ocdtrekkie]

This sort of notion ignores major realities of Google Glass: That it is not realistically capable of continuous recording, and that taking a photo with it has always been pretty obvious/distinct of a behavior.

If I wanted to take a photo of you with Glass, you'd have plenty of time to turn away, put your hand up, or whatever. And you'd certainly know I was doing it.

[michaelt]

Not bothering with privacy rules because of on the technical constraints of today's technology is a dangerous game, because when better technology comes along you might find what "everyone does" is already on the wrong side of all the clear lines in the sand.

I mean, 50 years ago it would have been ridiculous to suggest the government could transcribe and search all phone calls - consider the incredible cost of all those typists, filing cabinets and reel-to-reel tapes! If someone had said "because we already have technical constraints, there's no need for ethical or legal constraints" we'd be in a difficult position when the technically impossible became possible.

[ocdtrekkie]

Sure, but this is no different than smartphones. The parent comment above mine says Glass is a "new form", but it really isn't. It's just an Android device with a worse-than-average camera and a worse-than-average battery life and a worse-than-average capability to covertly record other people.

In the vein that you can buy a pen camera that'll do a much better job for $30, worrying specifically about Glass seems silly.