Shared publicly  - 
The FBI removed a movie goer's Google Glass and questioned him for a long while afterwards.

This angers me. Glass isn't always recoding though you're wearing it. Glass would be a horrible method for bootlegging a movie. The microphone can barely record someone 10 feet in front of you, it's not meant to record movie audio. The battery would die after 45 minutes. Glass is not a movie recording device plain and simple. Next, we all carry smart phones with us in theaters. That's why we see the please turn off your phone messages before a show starts. Phones have much better cameras, mics, and batteries.

Besides, the man had his Glass powered off.

I've worn Glass to the movie theater a half a dozen times over the past 7 months without issue. This is just absurd.
Matthew Cheung's profile photoAntonio Souza's profile photoDavid Demma's profile photoRaul Santos's profile photo
Smh @ the idea of being able to bootleg an entire movie with Glass. Google need to get them in the hands of authorities so they can stop being so paranoid. 
And I quote paraphrase +Alex Gonzalez.(I think) 'ask any user of glass, and they will say that the battery won't last recording for 2 hours.'
Well they would probably do the same thing if you had your phone pointed at the screen. I think this one of the problems of Glass that people keep dismissing: Glass might be off but it's still being pointed at things as if it's on and being used while worn.
Whoa.  Quite an overreaction! (I wouldn't even expect this sort of FBI attention if he were holding a camcorder)  By contrast, I was previously invited to a movie pre-screening along with 6 other Explorers specifically because we had Glass.  

Despite the initial misunderstanding by the authorities, I'm amazed it took so long to clear this up, considering the well-known limitations of recording video with Glass which could have been easily confirmed with a Google search.
Wow.... So insane! You know what they say knowledge is power and ignorance is why this stuff happens...

+Derek Ross I too have worn my #glass to almost every movie I have seen since I have had them... 
If it did happen, it too so long because these are guys used to traditional interrogation techniques of intimidation and because pride. If it was over in 5 minutes, they would be the laughing stocks of their office and the cops would have probably chastised them too.

But if it takes three hours, they can spin it as if he got off on a technicality.
+Alexander Terry I don't think you can get more than 30-40 minutes on a single charge...

+Derek Ross doesn't Glass have the same camera as most phones? 5MP. But regardless, this is crazy. You're right that the audio would suck... you'd never be able to sell the bootleg.
Reporting before confirmation.
The FBI doesn't have better things to worry about?
So the MPAA is so far into the federal government they have the FBI doing interrogation. I think the FBI's time would be better served in other ways than worrying about some guy bootlegging a movie.
+Jake Weisz - After reading the original account, I would like to see a confirmation as well - or even the name of the Explorer.

I suspect that if this event did occur as described, it was not the FBI, but some MPAA private security force involved.  At least I hope the real FBI wouldn't be so clearly naive as described.
+Keith Achorn There's a lot to be suspicious about. I was hoping the blogosphere would've been responsible enough not to report without confirmation, but this is the world we live in, I guess. :/
Not surprising that this happened in Columbus, OH.
+Rory S - Offering to educate others about new tech is one thing.  Being involuntarily detained and required to do so under threat of federal prosecution is another.
J Agnew
+Rory S the response you're describing would be appropriate to questions about Glass (that's the whole point of the Explorer program) or if you were taken out of the theater and asked some questions.
IF this story is true (which I doubt) then anger and outrage would be the appropriate response to such a heavy handed overreaction. 
Goes to show that even they are not up to date with technology...
The pogroms against Glass will only stop when Glass is indistinguishable from glasses.

+Google Glass - This is your challenge: stealth Glass
+Rory S - It isn't about new tech or educating the public.  I have given countless demos of Glass, and enjoy doing so.  

This story - if confirmed - is about abuse of power.  Regardless of their ignorance in this matter, the authorities should be expected to at least attempt to understand the situation.  According to the original description however, they instead made accusations and distorted the facts to fit a preconceived narrative.
I dread the day when it will be a contact lens
+Keith Achorn Apparently, it's a post on the Glass community, where we can find out the name of the guy claiming it happened to him. I've asked for some evidence or other confirmation.
+Rory S I guess I should be angry at Google for not educating the masses and instead being mysterious about Glass and making us take matters into our own hands.
I seriously doubt that a person would give such a detailed account of what happened to him if the story was phony. It would be easy enough to find inconsistencies if he did make the story up (i.e. if you're going to fabricate a story, keep it simple or people will be able to tell it's fake). Also, if it's not a true story, why would he risk the wrath of the FBI by going public with a false accusation against them?
I though the FBI was smart? How have they not been briefed on this tech!?
Incidentally, copyright enforcement is part of the FBI's job - you see their warnings all the time in DVDs before the movie comes on.
+Jeff McIntire Yeppers, It just really seems like a waste of resources anyway. BTW, I thought they just recently took "law enforcement" off of their list of duties. ;-)
The story became unbelievable to me as soon as the narrator started talking about their prescription lenses. There are two possible options where the prescription lenses and Google Glass could have been a real thing, but in both cases I find it highly unlikely.

Sounds to me like a hoax until someone produces confirmation.
Do the American thing, sue sue and sue some more for illegal detainment etc etc... 
I just want to know how he is the only person on the planet that has +Google Glass that will record a whole movie without dying
+John Lieske you can get prescription lenses from a third party. People do have them. I'm not saying that's confirmed, but it is a high possibility.
Why are fbi agents hanging out in movie theaters?
+Derek Ross not yet they don't. There are a few companies looking to make lenses, but they're all in development phases right now until a final form factor is known. Hence that's one of my two unlikely scenarios: that this guy works for one such company.
+Steven Mautone I can place my Glass above my frames as well (I'm also an Explorer). That's not even close to the same as what the individual in the story described. They described their lenses as being part of Glass, meaning they'd have to clip on or the frames were permanently affixed.

I don't mean to be snappy about it, but my disbelief is due to having read what was actually described and not the outrage of people talking. Until I see confirmation of this story I call BS.
+John Lieske Just an FYI. A company by the name of Spectacles is right down the road from my office. They made prescription lenses for Glass back in the fall.
+Derek Ross I'm not disputing people making lenses. I'm disputing people being able to buy such lenses. So unless the individual in the story A) works for one of these companies or B) works for Google and had a prescription friendly model-- both of which are fractions of a population that's already very small -- then the likelihood of that otherwise minor detail seems like a glaring oversight.

So far we have one blog that's the source, with the author of the blog post saying "trust me I know the guy who knows this guy" regarding the story. By the time it made its way to the initial Internet blog post it was already hearsay. I don't think my skepticism is at all unreasonable.
+John Lieske I don't wear my Glass above frames. They are attached. If I take off my glasses the Glass comes with it.

And there definitely are prescription Glass attachments for sale. Not to mention all of the frames that Google is testing internally. Check +Sarah Price's photo...
+John Lieske I agree with your skepticism, but disagree with your assessment of the number of prescription Glass wearers in the Community.
He was kidnapped by Cardassians from the Obsidian Order who were surgically altered to look human and are posing as FBI agents. 
+Steven Mautone you just pointed to a Google employee. How is that evidence? You say yours are attached, but are they attached via a rig you made yourself or from something you've acquired?

This is really a silly argument, and it's very much like trying to discuss the smartphone market in general to a group who only hear the echo chamber of iOS or Android enthusiasts. There are roughly 10,000 Glass Explorers in the US. Of that, there's a small percentage who are Google employees, and only a small percentage of those employees who have the as yet unreleased prescription frames. Of the remaining percentage of that 10,000 number, there's also a very small percent who have either manually modified their device to clip onto their frames or who have gotten access to lenses that can clip on from someplace that has yet to offer anything commercially.

What do you want to estimate that aggregate number is? Shall we ask the MyGlass community for their estimates as well? I'll be genuinely surprised if the number of actual people who have affixed prescription lenses on their Explorer Edition frames is greater than single digits in percent. I estimate that the number is actually far lower.

I'm not asking for anecdotes, I'm asking for data. I know there are people who either work for Google or who are hardware hacking. What I'm saying is that the number is sufficiently low that spreading this story without attribution as if this would be somehow a regular thing is implausible. It wouldn't show up first on some blog site who claims they knew a guy who knows the guy this happened to.
If you're happy with someone walking around a changing room showers with google glasses on then no problem wearing them in cinemas :-) 
+Hamish Robinson I wear them in public restrooms daily. So far Glass hasn't turned me into a pervert and made me stare at other dude's junk.
I'm not saying it will, but perhaps try thinking of what other people may be feeling when someone with a camera walks into a place where there clothes may be off, it may not bother you but may not run well with someone else... 
You can make a lot of money at recording bathroom junk all day...but you will have to view and edit so many dicks. Then what if they are all ugly? Then you spent a whole day looking at dicks for no reason. Ain't nobody got time for that. Then someone will catch you and that's an automatic ass whipping and most likely a new pair of glass you must buy.

So, if you have glass, do not try to make a website called a bigger hassle than profit
Okay, so basically everything I could find in about a half hour of claim verification and some side digging:

* There is indeed a real person with Glass who is making the claim, and they even have a prescription hardware hack (possibly even from the place in PA Derek mentioned)

* There were reportedly police there, but only the original guy is reporting anything about "federal services" being present.

* This Bob Hope guy seems fishy, as does the badge flashing. Typical of private investigators who got into the biz after law enforcement.

* The claims that the FBI had anything to do with this should probably be amended until anyone can get any more verification. So far I can't find any corroboration of that.

Based on the MyGlass thread and some quick follow up, it looks like a guy got hassled at a movie theater and had the cops called on him. Looks like there was some kind of private security or PI there working with the local cops as well, if the statements in the MyGlass thread are to be believed. Still no confirmation of actual FBI involvement.

Looks like on the Snopes scale this one gets a yellow.
Also +Steven Mautone from the Rochester Optical website:


Prescription lenses for Google Glass WILL be available in a few weeks. Read our formal press release here

Get an official invite from Rochester Optical when they are released by completing the form below.

Seriously, guys, am I the only one who researches things around here? Rochester, like the three other places I know of, don't actually sell any product yet. Looks like they might be taking orders soon, which will make them an early early bird, but still no companies with actual product yet.

Again, I've already confirmed that the guy has a hardware hack and not an official product. So can we please stop with the "but but there are companies making stuff now" statements? None of it is on the market yet. You may as well be telling me the Galaxy S5 is available now because it's just as accurate.
+John Lieske I was actually in contact with them. They are available. Many types of lenses... awesome customization. Don't believe everything you read Online. ;)
You mean on their own website?

Yeah, okay. I'm going to believe someone telling me that they talked to this company and was told they're available, versus looking at the company's press release that says the opposite.

Regardless, however, this guy didn't get them from any lens maker. They got a hardware hack clip which is mentioned in the MyGlass thread.

All of this was easy for me to find with just a few minutes of follow up research. Why can't ANY of the blogs do that? This is why I don't give any credibility to any Android blog.
I can understand them being concerned but I'm more concerned at why the FBI is hanging at a movie theater. Also why wear glass if its powered off?
+Christopher Smith read my last comment. There's no evidence that the FBI was there. Instead there was one guy who flipped two badges and seems to have been a private security worker. As to why wear Glass, he says he had a prescription lens clipon attached so he could see the film.
+John Lieske +Christopher Smith and as to why wear Glass to the theater, well Glass is a part of my life. It goes where I go and I don't use it where I shouldn't use it. For example, when I go to the theater, I turn off head wake so when I look up it's not turning on. It don't normally turn Glass off, but it can' do anything anyways as my phone is normally in airplane mode as my theater here is a dead zone and my battery would get axed in no time if I didn't do that.
Ok I understand for the prescription then. I was thinking if its not powered on then what good is it. I guess FBI looks better in the headlines lol
If they actually yanked it off, I'd get their names and charge them with assault.
It seems to me also that he never really verified that they were FBI either. Considering the RIAA and MPA run their own paramilitaries that dress up like SWAT and FBI and like to go around flashing badges and performing raids, it's quite possible there were no authorities there at all.  The presence of rentacops does tend to back that up.
Wear your Glass into a Vegas casino and you'll get worse then the FBI, I remember a post last year many of them banned Glass before it even was released. 
+John Beebe That seems like hyperbole. All a casino will ask you to do is either remove them or leave. The only ones that care so much to do what happened here are the copyright lobbyists - MPAA and RIAA and such. No one else really cares that much.
+Anthony Fawcett Of course it was hyperbole, isnt everything about Vegas hyperbole, but the fact is some casinos did ban Glass outright, like they have with anything that can record.  The few times I've been there they never seem concerned abut family stuff, but since Glass is so new I would be fairly certain that person would get a little more attention and Casinos tend to know their tech fairly well. 
+John Beebe I imagine they are concerned with card counters and other cheating tactics, which is fair enough. 
what crap.. does anyone else think this techno-paranoia is going a bit too far?  When the commercial version comes out, i know i'll be wearing it often.. 
+Peter Frazier honestly Google needs to come up wit ha marketing campaign for Glass besides "let's have explorers market Glass for us!"
agreed.  do everything you can to dismiss FUD.  I freaked out on my friend back when camera phones came out and explained to him that NO one cares about him.. people will take photos of what they find interesting, just like b4, but now with their phone.  the ego that someone is going to find you even slightly interesting is stunning..

we really need to rein in the fear, statistically we are far safer then we were even a few years ago, but according to the media every 3rd person wants to take your kid and touch them..  tech will make life easier and better and to be a gigantic jerk to straight up violent is just unacceptable..
Not yet, but I will now.  Thanks, Derek.
+Keith Achorn Yeah, today the professionals are on the case. Official statements and crud.
Add a comment...