Humor: The Daily Show Makes Fun of the Intolerance Faced by Google Glass Owners

Here’s a little chuckle for your Monday morning. You may have heard the stories of discrimination and sometimes outright violence faced by Google Glass users in some parts of the country.

People who are afraid they’re being inconspicuously photographed or videotaped (and they sometimes are) by Glass wearers are at times lashing out against the would-be invaders of their privacy.

But while this is a valid debate that will likely come to a head as the technology becomes more and more popular, Comedy Central’s The Daily Show with John Stewart decided to poke a little fun at it in a humorous segment called “Glass Half Empty.”

Check it out at the top to start your Monday off on a lighter note.

(via Laughing Squid)

  • joshsouzaphotos

    It’s funny to me that people are worried about Google Glass when EVERYONE walks with their phone in hand in a way that could also be photographing everything in front of them. o_O

  • Alessio Michelini

    This video is available only in the U.S.

  • Burnin Biomass

    “makes fun of the intolerance faced by Google Glass owners”.

    Actually, I believe it is making fun of Google Glass owners… which I’m ok with.

  • Monteraz

    I dont think this is about privacy. When you do street photography (I do) you point a camera to people, whether you talk with your subject previously or not. I do believe it is ok from a privacy point of view (insert eternal discussion here). Then we have people who hides the act of making a photograph, be it with a google glass or a phone in a hand as Josh Souza points above. Just would say them it is much more funny talking to people like we used to do in the good old days,

  • Ralph

    I disagree, at least when you’re relatively close. There’s a pretty distinct difference between someone checking a text and pointing their phones at you. How people normally hold their phones would only make it easy for them to take pictures of your shoes.

  • Larissa

    Google glass just makes you look like a 5year old in any generic sci-fi costume. I could not possibly take anyone seriously if they spoke to me while wearing that, frankly, ugly pair of… well what do you call it, because honestly there’s like a square centimeter of glass on that thing?

  • Bill Binns

    Like anyone else who has been a photographer for some time (amateur or pro) I have run into this weird fear of photography many times over the years. I have been threatened with violence, had the police called on me repeatedly, come very close to being arrested many times, had people put their hands on me and my gear etc. Now, I’m not shooting in bathrooms, private property etc or anyplace else where people would have an expectation of privacy. As a man, I have learned to never ever point a camera at children and to give playgrounds and schools a wide berth.

    For the life of me I can’t figure out why some people are so enraged at the mere possibility that they or their children may have been photographed while fully clothed in a public place.

    The irony is that the people who are openly carrying cameras are the last one’s that anyone needs to worry about. With the cheap tech available these days, anyone can secretly take photos anywhere they want.

  • Christopher Kessell

    The new terminology is Glassholes….

    I would just remove the Gl…

  • Ivor Wilson

    So true… the people carrying ultra-obvious cameras get all the abuse, when pretty much anyone who carries a modern phone can take photos far more secretively.

  • TN

    self importance is the reason people are so enraged at the mere possibility that they or their children may have been photographed while fully clothed in a public place.

    they are famous in their own mind, and fail to grasp that they aren’t the subject, and it isn’t about them. this is common behavior of people who express entitlement

  • yopyop

    FYI, I’ve been able to watch it in France without any particular effort (no proxy…)

  • joshsouzaphotos

    A slight shift and you can snap away and they’d never know. Disagree all you want the phone zombies can record or take photos without you having the slightest of clue.

  • Jason

    Maybe there should be a rotating red light they could strap to their heads that would go off when they are videoing. They wouldn’t look much dafter…

  • Cypherpunks (a public account)

    Many times I’ve taken video and photographs of people standing just a few feet without their realizing. You just need to know how to do it. It’s quite easily done, actually.

  • Cypherpunks (a public account)

    People need to get over thinking they have the same expectation of privacy in public as in their living room.

  • Kynikos

    The voiceover says these people are “a generation of Phillip K. Dicks”

    I don’t know about the “Phillip K.” part, but the rest, yeah.

  • Kynikos

    Indeed. I wonder if they could find users who were any dorkier.

  • Gerard

    Very funny indeed BUT I made a picture exactly like this on October the 19th 2013

    But what an other man does could be done by someone else too :)
    To bad i wasn’t shown on TV :)

  • Darshan Karia

    And I have been able to watch it in India…

  • Alessio Michelini

    It doesn’t work for me in Ireland

  • Ivor Wilson

    Nor me in Scotland.

  • Michael Hemingway

    Nor here in Canada.

  • vonrock

    A whole new place to wear them is coming soon.

  • lillianhoward

    Carolyn implied I’m blown away that any body can earn $5584 in a few weeks on
    the internet . look here


  • Korios

    In Greece (with Greek IP) it’s viewable.

  • Korios

    That’s very strange.. If it’s a copyright issue how come you can watch from USA, France, Greece and India but not Scotland (UK?), Ireland and Canada?

  • Korios

    Parents are very sensitive about their children due to the mass media’s pedophile witch-hunt. This is not an intellectual but an emotional response. Emotions make us do very stupid things, you know.

  • Korios

    “We have to protect the children!!” screams from the media certainly do not help either.

  • Alessio Michelini

    That’s really odd

  • PatsyWerstleritu

    before I looked at the check of $8543 , I accept …that…my
    neighbour woz like they say truley earning money parttime on their apple
    labtop. . there sisters neighbour has done this 4 only 19 months and by now
    cleared the debts on their house and bourt a gorgeous Ford . visit this site C­a­s­h­d­u­t­i­e­s­.­C­O­M­

  • ThatGuy

    Apparently, many people don’t realize they’re on video most of the time when out in public anyway with so many surveillance cameras nowadays.

  • tensei

    It is pretty hard to tell when people are position higher than you in some establishments, or they’re taller than you. Perhaps we should ban camera phones on balconies, stairwells, and even hassle tall people for owning phones with cameras- because I can’t tell when any of them are photographing me in public (which is legal).

  • tensei

    Shhhh! Don’t let them know that, what if they find out that privacy isn’t a thing anymore?

  • Brian Zuzulock

    I don’t understand your desire to take pictures of random kids at schools or playgrounds. What are you going to do with those pictures? Frame them and hang them in your house? Not sure if you have kids or not, but would you really want someone you didn’t know taking pictures of your kids? I get that you’re free to do it legally but at what point do you lose sight of ethics?

  • Brian Zuzulock

    Or perhaps it’s just weird to have someone taking pictures of random kids.

  • TN

    how presumptuous, to assume that someone with a camera is even trying to photograph someone or their random kids.. it isn’t out of the realm of possibility that they are trying to take a picture of something else. they could have been commissioned to take pictures of a school, or playground, or a park, or any of the other types of facilities that random parents with random kids tend to gather

    that’s where the self importance comes in.. because they think that they are the subject, without exploring the situation.

    the person with the camera may very well be taking creeper pictures of random kids, but until that is determined to be the case, the random parents concern is in their mind.. and likely the collective minds of those in the immediate vicinity, because they fail to take the first step towards understanding the situation, and ask the photographer.

    but it still comes down to an individuals perception of the situation, which is subjective.. and a result of projecting their perceptions onto someone else.. hence self importance..

    there are plenty of times that i go out, with camera in hand. sometimes there are kids present.. that’s not something i can control. some random parents concern that i may be taking a picture of them or their child, is unfounded, even more so if they neglect to take the steps to determine my subject matter or the nature of my photographic outing.

    in the example of being out in public with a camera, i’m likely taking pictures of a specific person, in a predetermined location, for a purpose. So, if some random person steps into the frame, it’s because they’re unaware, or they are expressing some sort of attention seeking behavior, which is something i have no control over.

    the real question should be, does the photographer have any reason to be taking pictures of me? in an effort to determine if one is actually worth taking pictures of.. this self evaluation is difficult for many because they are self centered, or self important, or famous in their own mind..

    i’ll put it like this.. there are millions of random parents with random kids, and i understand and accept that they are sensitive, and likely suffer from some social anxieties, none of which i aim to aggravate, but they’re not that interesting, and neither are their kids, and there’s nothing special about them, or their kids either.

  • Bill Binns

    I have no particular interest in photographing children themselves. The vast majority of times I have been confronted, the person who was complaining (or their children) did not appear in a single frame on my camera. They were just on high alert because there was “a guy with a camera” in the area.

    A few months ago, the city I live in (Montreal) was in a panic for a few days because a man had been seen outside one or more schools with a camera. That was the entirety of the warning. No children had been approached. Just a guy with a camera. This was enough for parents to stop allowing their kids to walk to school, sketches of the scary photographer guy being put on TV and the paper etc.

    Now, I do not remember ever going out to photograph schools or school children but as someone who does a lot of walking around with a DSLR, it is not hard to imagine a situation where I would be in the vicinity of a school with a camera. I would rather not have to somehow “proove” to the police or an angry mob that I am not a kidnapper or a pedophile in such a situation.