7 ms·

Seattle Restaurant Ejects Customer Wearing Google Glass

10 points by darkmethod 13y ago

cgore 13y ago
"But it's my right to make 24/7 video recordings of people I don't know eating at restaurants I don't own!"
benched 13y ago
This is begging for a flash mob.
- DavidBradbury 13y ago
  The restaurant is trying make a comfortable atmosphere for their customers. If they feel that someone wearing a camera on their head will make their customers uncomfortable, they have every right to not allow them to wear it. Your response makes you look like an entitled child who gets upset when they are told no.
gaius 13y ago
He doesn’t like it, so he tries to get the server fired. It’s a total (expletive) move. And that's why they're called glassholes.
- tadfisher 13y ago
  It's worth pointing out that absolutely nothing about this interaction was corroborated except for the fact that there was an issue and the customer left.
daveidol 13y ago
What if someone has their smartphone out at the restaurant? Are they asked to put it away or leave for fear of everyone's privacy? Just because someone is wearing Glass doesn't mean they are constantly shooting photos you know...
- DavidBradbury 13y ago
  If someone had their phone up and continually aiming it around the room, then you can be sure they'd be asked to stop or leave. The problem with Glass is that you cannot tell if they are or not. Rather than risk their customers being uncomfortable, they decided to be proactive and protect them. That seems perfectly reasonable.
  - adamio 13y ago
    It's unreasonable. If someone wants to record they will use a hidden camera. This is fake protection.
adamio 13y ago
What about using Glass to translate the menu on the fly? Or building a Glass compatible menu that lets Glass users see videos of the dishes? Banning glass because it has a camera is silly. They should ban people too, because people can have photographic memories!!
- dpark 13y ago
  There's absolutely nothing wrong with this argument. That's why it's generally accepted for people to set up video cameras in locker rooms. I might have a photographic memory, so you might as well let me video you.
  - adamio 13y ago
    locker room != restaurant. crime != policy And I'm not saying video. I'm saying banning because capability of taking video. Cell phones are not banned in locker rooms. Recording with them is.
prince_hakeem 13y ago
How the hell does this Nick Starr loser keep getting media coverage. It's too bad he didn't go through with one of his threatened suicide attempts several years back. This little fag just screams for attention all the time and it's unclear why he gets ANY media coverage ever. Didn't realize he ever left SF. Anyone who's ever had the change to cross paths with this loser knows exactly what I'm talking about. And yes, Google glass is a DOA product for replacing cellphones because of the social awkwardness that arises. Leave it for the doctors, drivers, etc. But I refuse to talk to anyone at a party that's wearing that fucking thing.

10 points by darkmethod 13y ago

cgore 13y ago

"But it's my right to make 24/7 video recordings of people I don't know eating at restaurants I don't own!"

benched 13y ago

This is begging for a flash mob.

DavidBradbury 13y ago
The restaurant is trying make a comfortable atmosphere for their customers. If they feel that someone wearing a camera on their head will make their customers uncomfortable, they have every right to not allow them to wear it. Your response makes you look like an entitled child who gets upset when they are told no.

gaius 13y ago

He doesn’t like it, so he tries to get the server fired. It’s a total (expletive) move. And that's why they're called glassholes.

tadfisher 13y ago
It's worth pointing out that absolutely nothing about this interaction was corroborated except for the fact that there was an issue and the customer left.

daveidol 13y ago

What if someone has their smartphone out at the restaurant? Are they asked to put it away or leave for fear of everyone's privacy? Just because someone is wearing Glass doesn't mean they are constantly shooting photos you know...

DavidBradbury 13y ago
If someone had their phone up and continually aiming it around the room, then you can be sure they'd be asked to stop or leave. The problem with Glass is that you cannot tell if they are or not. Rather than risk their customers being uncomfortable, they decided to be proactive and protect them. That seems perfectly reasonable.
- adamio 13y ago
  It's unreasonable. If someone wants to record they will use a hidden camera. This is fake protection.

adamio 13y ago

What about using Glass to translate the menu on the fly? Or building a Glass compatible menu that lets Glass users see videos of the dishes? Banning glass because it has a camera is silly. They should ban people too, because people can have photographic memories!!

dpark 13y ago
There's absolutely nothing wrong with this argument. That's why it's generally accepted for people to set up video cameras in locker rooms. I might have a photographic memory, so you might as well let me video you.
- adamio 13y ago
  locker room != restaurant. crime != policy And I'm not saying video. I'm saying banning because capability of taking video. Cell phones are not banned in locker rooms. Recording with them is.

prince_hakeem 13y ago

How the hell does this Nick Starr loser keep getting media coverage. It's too bad he didn't go through with one of his threatened suicide attempts several years back. This little fag just screams for attention all the time and it's unclear why he gets ANY media coverage ever. Didn't realize he ever left SF. Anyone who's ever had the change to cross paths with this loser knows exactly what I'm talking about. And yes, Google glass is a DOA product for replacing cellphones because of the social awkwardness that arises. Leave it for the doctors, drivers, etc. But I refuse to talk to anyone at a party that's wearing that fucking thing.