Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I'm not sure I understand this article. What is it that he imagines actors and athletes doing that they don't do with Twitter now? People hold up their phones pretty close to their face when capturing photos and videos so it is already the first person POV. And it is pretty easy to do, I'm sure it will be harder taking pics with Glass than a phone, it is more flexible taking pictures with your hands than your face. The only successful consumer head-mounted cameras that I know of are the Go Pros which are used mainly for niche action shots. If the main advantage of Glass is just that you can take pictures in situations where both your hands are busy that does not seem like the huge use-case that is going to take down Facebook.


He imagines that the feed from, oh, say, a baseball player? (football is too violent) will, someday, be wearing one of these, and then you'll get to see the game from their perspective while they're doing other things, and it'll be awesome.

... I'll believe it's awesome, with copious amounts of editing. If you're just watching it raw, it'll be disorienting and shaky and distracting. :P I'm also dubious exactly what baseball team would bother to wear these things in the general case. Presumably they would just be a distraction to the players. Maybe someone like, oh, downhill skiiers would have a better time of things?


Go to youtube right now and watch any number of first person downhill skiing videos. What does Glass add to that?


Convenience


Serious question - how is that different from this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNMyj2ftuZA


I think you're underrating just how cool things look in first person sometimes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZA-57h64kE




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: