Shared publicly  - 
Friends have been asking me why I would want to look like a dork while wearing the Google Glasses. Here's my answer as to why you will get over the stigma of wearing computing devices like +Project Glass 

Do you agree or disagree? What use cases do you see Project Glass solving for you, that will make these things worth buying and wearing?
Leif Sikorski's profile photoSergio Duran's profile photoEd Grant's profile photoNicholas Klein's profile photo
I would want something like this to be camouflaged as possible. I think they're kind of an eyesore. I don't know what Google, or any company, could do to make me get over how dorky they look.
I wish people wouldn't be so critical of others for any reason, I personally hope that wearing computing devices like this will finally start to erode our seemingly inherent dependence on what looks "normal"
Well the porn industry is already on board, so these are GOING to be a success right?
Can you imagine having something like this in special ops scenarios, or SWAT teams? There are a lot of intelligent uses for this. I also like the idea of it being required during things like surgeries, so there's proof of what happened if something goes awry during a surgery.
There was a day when carrying a smartphone at all made you look like a dork. Society will adapt. And honestly, they aren't unattractive devices in person, once you see someone walking around with one for a bit, you stop noticing. I literally was standing next to someone with Glass for a few minutes before I realized "Hey, they're wearing Glass!". And if the prototype is already fairly unobtrusive, imagine how nice looking the final models could potentially be.
the benefits of this outweigh the cons of looking like a dork
So... people who wear regular eye wear look like a dork now?

If people can wear regular glasses without criticisms, why can't they wear these?
So Google get on making them mass affordable so everyone can wear them so the stigma goes away.
Figuring out the correct use model for a new technology is often the most difficult part of adoption. I've been a tablet owner since the orignal iPad, and I'm still discovering new and innovative ways to expand my productivity through tablet devices. The use models in the link make sense to me - but eventually, the technology needs to become less obtrusive - something like a contact lens. 
I think for the most part, people who are already dorks won't feel like a dork wearing these. ;-b
I tend not to frequent Quora, +Robert Scoble, but I posted the following as an answer:

I wear dumb glasses, and therefore look like a dork anyway if I pick an ugly set of frames. However, I think that wearable electronics will be with us only as long as it takes to develop implantable electronics which display directly to the human field of vision by jacking into the optic nerve, make these devices inexpensive, and overcome people's natural fear of cyborgs.
If you wear Google Glasses, you're a dork
If you wear iEye, you're wearing a revolutionary product
Screw you, society!
I would rather look like a dork and not miss a precious fleeting moment with the kids than fumble with a smartphone/camera and have the shot gone already. folks thought bluetooth headsets were dorky and cybermenish but over time it became commonplace, this will be the same.
Don L
Spot on.  I'd say #3, #5, and #6 are very "standard consumer" friendly reasons.  The more people like that wearing them, the less the stigma.
I agree as long as having that on my head is safe, which I assume it will be. I don't really give a hoot about what people think, and they will come around, but I don't think I want to wear it all the time though.
I would wear it on the 2nd or 3rd day while visiting a new place, and immediately put it on in a new mall I want to get in and out of. Perfect for wearing to Target. Basically on when I am going places I have been, off when I want to experience something new as a regular human. Time to develop glass cases? G-lanyards. 
Here is the problem as I see it with the current design. Unless there is a corrective action that requires me to wear an item, I will - but even then, I'm bound to take whatever it is off. The Google Glasses do me no more good than a tablet if they're sitting on the Coffee table when the tornado hits. 
The "dork" factor is certainly there.  I'd rather answer a phone the old fashioned way or wear a small earpiece with a discreet wire than a blinking larger prosthetic ear...  (my 2 cents)
Heh, all it will take is "oh yeah, check this out." 

"Whoa, that IS cool."

Stigma ends.
Click on head set. I would rather have bluetooth w/ headphones and something I can click on to my glasses. If I wore the heads up display then everyone would be paranoid that I am recording them
Umm, stigma? You mean how will they keep women from raping you in the street because you're a sexy power user?
Looking like a dork for a while, if that is the case, is a small price I am willing to pay in exchange for enjoying google glass, sir.
Anything that gets me closer to being a Borg ;)
It will be similar with Bluetooth devices.... It will look little bit strange at the beginning then it will be fine. Competition will promote the devices with little bit more style when technology will be the same for all the devices.
#8... YOUR glasses are doing facial recognition on ME and reporting back to you about that? Hmmm.... That certainly creates a brave new world. 
Just wait until someone syncs up a bluetooth machine gun remote and ports Call of Duty to it.

People will stop caring about how others see them real quick!
We are the Goog.  Prepare to be assimilated.  Resistance is futile.
Still want the terminator overlay.
+Mark Evans  There is a not so nice word to describe those people wearing bluetooth everywhere they go...

That is the point of the article.
I've actually noticed a lot LESS bluetooth earpieces within the last year. Also, +Hewy NoSleep brings up a good point about people paranoid they are being recorded. You really can't tell. At least most people have to hold up a cell phone to capture video these days and it's clear you're being recorded.
+Hewy NoSleep I agree with the recording fears. I already discovered someone I know has been recording my conversations for a while using iPhone. 
Well, they don't sound very friendly.
Is it me, or does Project Glass look like it's mainly for people who don't already wear corrective lenses?
I bet anyone who gives you a hard time for wearing them will then immediately ask to try them on. Curiosity is funny that way.
Interesting answers and all valid, but if we all start wearing these glasses will we not be focusing more on what's going on in the glasses than the people around us. I already see people tuning out of the real world by listening to music while in the company of others or constantly glancing at their mobile devices. Do we really want to be having conversations with people who are not actually engaging with us but looking at the latest sports results or facebook/google/twitter feed
It will take a bit of time and suddenly it won't look dorky at all. Also, the technology will keep getting smaller and lighter and less intrusive.
about the fire thing. my mom who lives in Larimer County about an hour north of denver and speaks broken english and has a 5 year old laptop knew about the fires. The smoke in the air also gave it away.

but yet these people couldn't figure out there was a huge forest fire coming that you could see and smell from miles away without high tech gadgets?
Get ready for lawsuits when people are distracted by the glasses and have accidents. Then you'll have people overly reliant on wearable computers and won't be able to think for themselves or navigate the real world without them.

Enter the Humachine, the Hybrid Automaton People.
+Robert Scoble I was in Brazil last week speaking at a university—I don't speak Portuguese.  I had my first, "Google Glass would be really cool here" moment, I realized it would be amazing while using my iPhone as a voice translator if both people were wearing Google Glass. Conversations could be translated and printed on screen like subtitles, instead of having to wait for a phone and pausing the conversation.  By reading a translated conversation you would increase the speed two people could communicate in a different language...

Imagine if you were speaking to an audience with mixed language backgrounds, everyone could have their own translation...
20 years ago it was dork talking in a cell phone while walking the street. And wearing wristwatch 100 years ago or smtgh. World changes. 
I like the idea of recording surgeries, but I think we're still many years off from the glasses being able to overlay data on the organs, etc. it could however give the doctor a HUD of vitals an integrate things like the checklist.

I see more use in areas with frequent repetitive tasks that are bound by location, or have a very well defined graphical structure. People working on tarmacs at airports could get visuals of their checklists, along with their next assignment location, and the current status and location of the plane they are servicing. They would also be shown where the proper tools and carts are located.

Similarly, repair technicians would get a HUD overlay of steps and locations of the next steps.
I think that is a silly think to think about when no one really knows what this will actually look like for the user. Are there any articles that show what the users will see? Any information on how the glasses will actually function, how they will manage your vision and the information it's intended to display? I don't care about any of this other stuff until I can learn a little more about the basic functions of what USE will be like...
Devin, I believe Sergey said at Google IO that they intended these to either work over top of existing lenses or to be integrated into prescription lenses.
It's not so much looking like a dork that scares me. It's the amount of information you'll have to keep up with, if you want to stay in the race...
+Robert Scoble, the fire idea is interesting, if only for insurance purposes. That said, how many people are responsible for their own insurance claims and wouldn't like their insurance company getting access to that video?
I think what worries me is not so much looking dorky with Google Glasses as being totally distracted by yet another device. Except this time it's on your eyeballs already so you don't even need to look down at it (like with a smart phone).

Maybe I'm being curmudgeon (I am 31 after all), but that reality frightens me a bit. Pretty soon we can stop interacting in real life altogether. 
It's not any different than when people first started using bluetooth headsets. People looked like dorks when they used it, still do (especially the giant ones in the early stages), but it's common and accepted now.
Glass is only the beginning of this type of technology. The more people start to use it the more the awkwardness will fade. Plus as time progresses the functionality and designs will improve. Of course, I'd have to say that as far as the design is concerned, at least, it's not to shabby for the first iteration. As long as Apple doesn't put a knife through the heart of progress that is.
I guess we that currently wear glasses will be out of luck? Or maybe a prescription version?

I wonder if Google is working with Zennioptical?
+Robert Scoble I think #3 and #7 are the big ones for any remote job site. we have so much stuff hidden everywhere on the space station the ability to review a procedure hands free while doing repairs, or  use a hangout with the engineer back at headquarters or telepresence medicine if there is not a doctor around (like that scientist that had to perform surgery on her self in Antarctica) or heck if it could access the location map of where exactly Locker 1138 is plus comm and telemetry so you don't have to get to a work site laptop when an alarm first goes off.
I already wear  glasses, if it can do more for, I don't mind. If it comes out, people will use it. We just like complaining at first then  use it when it is out like as if we never complained about it
How much do you care about what other people think?
Yes, yes, and yes, these are great reasons to have a wearable display.  I don't expect the stigma to last long, but thank you for using your powerful influence to show how powerful this technology will be in every day life!
Ace E
Google would definitely update the looks of Glasses given what were seeing is still a prototype.
And yeah I agree they might look strange or dorky as you may call it but people will adapt.
So really, people have strong opinions about something they're not even how they function in the slightest... How do you control your interface smoothly? Lots of gestures? Voice Control only? How do you navigate? Do you use your hands in front of you face? How would that work while in public?
Google Glass will never become accepted casualwear, I think Google knows that. That doesn't mean that its not a great idea to launch a 'tolerably low profile' rev 1 for large-scale real-world testing with devs to get a handle on user experience and applications.

I see bits and pieces of what comes out of Google Glass eventually reaching fashion eyewear manufacturers without any compromise as to style or comfort.

In other words, the long view is when the pair of Ray-Bans you are wearing now have some specific Google Glass derived functionality, but that's not visible to others and the eyewear still looks and fits just as well.
+Mark Evans is right.  People wear blue tooth headsets everywhere.  Remember when folks thought we would never carry phones bigger than the almighty Razr?  Pretty soon it was cool to carry a big phone again.  In the same way, because of functionality, this could catch on in a big way.
I struggle with finding a practical use for these in my life right now. However, I think these things will be amazing in some industries. You could slap them on assemblers and they could scan bolts or other parts and instantly know where they go or be able to upload a bolt torque specification to a torque wrench just by looking at objects. I'm almost giddy thinking about the possibilities!
I remember a long time back I saw a guy talking to himself. I was certain he was crazy...then when I walked by him, I saw that he was talking into his bluetooth headset. I still thought that was weird then...not anymore.
Same thing will happen with Glass.
I imagine a situation at the local store, trying to do the grocery shopping. Google glass would warn me that this product is on offer online and order it so that it waits for me when I get home. At the check out of the grocery store I see all the sweets and take one. The Google glass rinds me that I am on a diet and promised myself not to snack in between meals. It will also support me when shopping which foods are compatible with my food regime.

As a sport team coach it will give me real time information on the player statistics so that I can make evidence based decisions when making tactical decisions.
+Joe Dentici Bluetooth headsets are probably not a great example - they were once ubiquitous but now are as unacceptable as a cellphone holster fashion-wise. 
If it works as well as should and not give me headaches, then I'll get over the stigma.
+Chris Schoenfeld I dont know how its outside the Silicon Valley but I guess here bluetooth is no longer the in thing. But it did go through that cusp where it was completely acceptable.
+Robert Scoble I can see your point on many of the items in the list but there are issues I have with some. Many have already been stated. Depending on data shown I would see this as being just as distracting as texting and driving. If I'm just walking down the street bring it on but if I'm home... probably not going to wear it all of the time. I don't always want to be tethered to headgear and my phone.

One more thing. In a restaurant the glasses shouldn't be there. If you're paying attention to the glasses it means you're not paying attention to your wife. That would be a bit rude. When on a date you should be focused on your subject and not be looking around making them feel unimportant. It would be the same way with the glasses I think.

With that said... I can't wait until it's consumer ready. I'm pretty sure I'll be an early adopter with this like I am with other tech.
+Balaji Srinivasan Yeah in NYC its verboten, but NYC is a fashion center too. I've lived in Silicon Valley as well, and yeah, I'd garner nothing but curious envy if I walked down El Camino Real with a satellite dish on my head!
+Chris Schoenfeld I'm not disagreeing with you about the fashion.  I may be wrong, but I think we look down on perpetual bluetooth-ers, because we know that the functionality of the blue tooth headset doesn't justify wearing it all the time.  I suspect Glass will have a much broader functionality.  It will be more acceptable than looking down at your phone every 30 seconds.
Are these the same sort of people who think the iPhone is sexy, and that owning one will make them sexy as well? Yeah, I wouldn't take fashion advice from them. Just sayin'...
The stigma will be more in the early days when there will be fewer people wearing such glasses but with time it will erode to acceptable levels...
I think the stigma will be a non-factor as long as the product delivers what it promises. My fear is that, at least for the first few incarnations, Glass will have some trouble holding up its end of that promise. If they can improve the product steadily after release and really make it useful for people I think these could be great, but recording myself jumping out of an airplane really is not high on my list of immediate needs.
+Joe Dentici +Balaji Srinivasan made a great point that location is going to be a big determinate. My view of Bluetooth, which like everyone has evolved over time, is that Bluetooth as fashion statement indicates you have been 'leashed' by your job or spouse - relative to the absence of one, which indicates you are free to be 'present' wherever you are and you are more particular about what is phonecall-worthy. Its says something about the level of control and priorities you have regarding your day-to-day lifestyle. Again, this isnt true for any given bluetooth wearer, its just how I perceive it when I see someone using it I dont know.
I kind of think they've already reduced that stigma, I think people will think the device is cool, not dorky. I think their teasing of the device over a several year period (it isn't suppose to be even close to consumer ready until 2014) will make it a salient product that people desire, and thus will break the stigma of those who wear it. 
The first 1500 or something of us will also prime the perceptions a bit for when they are available mainstream. (Scoble, I hate you Mr. 107... 663 here.) We will also officially be the coolest of the uncool people to have them a year or more ahead of everyone else.
this why i like your analysis. very neutral & to the point. 
Seems there's a much simpler answer here: Early adopters will, as usual, field the burden of looking like "dorks" until the technology advances significantly enough over a few iterations to meld easily with most peoples' lifestyles.

The answer you gave actually raises more problems with the tech than it answers.  With all those potential scenarios for contextual alerts, on top of more general alerts, how will you sort them and how will they avoid not simply becoming more noise?
I don't think it is weird in the first place but I see the tech advancing (even just the next generation) to be able to fit in most any kind of frame. Google will offer a spartan design (quite like the current gen), a hipster style, and a "classic" or executive style. Why does it need to look like it does now? The tech could easily be made to work in a set of glasses with fake/non-functional lenses. People are already wearing glasses just for style, so why wouldn't they wear glasses that give them information at the same time? 
I don't think there's much stigma to begin with - except maybe amongst old people. If it does cool shit, nobody will care what it looks like.
Its the right question. Personally I don't see these as popular for the masses, personally I will not care, but the tech goes main steam when the screen is integrated into contact lenses.
+Joe Dentici Theres no doubt it will have more functionality then Bluetooth, but the measure of success will be its level of functionality augmenting your smartphone. 

If their relative value is just marginal, the other kids will indeed make fun of people for wearing them.
Really the only questions I have is will the lenses be Transition Lenses.  You are already wearing shades all summer so what's the big deal.
Does anyone know how this will effect the people that you are looking out? What if they don't want to be videoed? Or have their picture taken.  What about if you happen upon something going on that you should have seen in the first place by some "criminals"?   

I think that Google doesn't care too much already about one's privacy rights, but that doesn't mean that the wearer of these glasses shouldn't either.  What is your opinion on the privacy issue? 
Google Glass will actually be useful - unlike the failed Microsoft codpiece.
+Alejandro Patrone You can easily get transition lenses of your own, and hook Glass to them. I love Transitions on my glasses.
I've always wondered why video glasses designers never made them look like the big pair of sunglasses you get when you have your eyes dilated at the doctors office. They aren't fashionable, but dont stand out either -  and there is a lot of real estate to work with.
+Jan Landy Well, assuming you are wearing these glasses in public - the people you are looking at have no expectation of privacy, so at least in the US, it is perfectly legal to videotape and take their pictures. Same with any police activity, there have been several cases recently that uphold one's right to videotape/take pictures of police interactions. 

Also, people will know that you are wearing the glasses, it will at least be somewhat obvious, although not nearly as obvious if you were holding a camera or phone up. 
Yes, knowledge access in a timely fashion can get you power and money. That trumps stigma.
+Alejandro Patrone The price we paid last week is far above what these will likely retail for, partially to ensure only serious developers buy in, and because we're essentially buying prototypes.
+Jan Landy Yeah its a HUGE question that made waves when cameraphones evolved as well. But as we all know, its quite difficult to surreptitiously take a cameraphone picture now as everyone is tuned into what that body language looks like. 

That visual warning is gone with the glasses.

On the flip side, if the camera is good it could make for a new generation of great legitimate candid photography.

But that will probably pale in comparison to the watershed of  downblouse photography.
I would use it to document any process or evidence.
+Chris Schoenfeld  Don't know about about you, but I find that still cameras is one thing and there are some people that don't want there photo taken for numerous reasons, but even those that don't mind their photo taken, too many of them object to video.  Can you imagine how those people are going to react when not only is someone going to be taking video of them, but it is going to be streamed to the internet in real time?  I think that is a true invasion of privacy.   

I would hope that Google can work that out, because I want a pair of the glasses. 
It's 2012 if they can't figure out how to make it look like a standard pair of glasses then they deserve to fail.
+Nathan Weaver Military already has the 'Land Warrior' system ... I dont think SWAT teams would get much use out of it, as their job typically is to get inside a dangerous space with known hostiles, and probably dont want anything obscuring their peripheral vision when they go through the door.

Of course, military does this as well, but 90% of the job is a lot of routine patrol communication, navigation, etc, and they can (and probably do) put the display aside during combat.
+Christopher Lecky First, they designed it so it could be used with glasses. This is why they call is 'Google Glass' - because the display is designed to just take up a portion of your peripheral view, and be integratable into fashion sunglasses and prescription eyewear.

This is why this thread is a little 'missing the point' that the Google Glass prototypes we see are a prototype to keep the display on your head and house the electronics - I think the end goal is to have it integrated into fashion and prescription eyewear and the prototype frames you see are just for R&D and early adopters.

But if you have ever tried on a current-generation of display glasses, you would understand that its a huge technological leap they've taken to get what they have working so far into that tiny form factor already.
Nice example +Robert Scoble I also think if Google releases an option of the sunglasses like +Sergey Brin was wearing on the second demonstration at Google I/O, then people will get over the stigma.
Yes there will be a stigma when the glasses are shrunk down to wireless contact lens size.  At that point the stigma will be against the "old technology" of large glasses. Also, at this point, people won't know that you have them. They may just assume that you do. 
+Chris Schoenfeld : It's all about being imaginative. Just because we don't see an immediate use for it, doesn't mean someone else won't. 
I would totally use these without any worry of what people think. But I predict I will tire of them quickly. I already get annoyed by the constant distraction of my smart phone -- and find myself turning it off just to get away from the nagging feeling that I should be checking up on something.

Not to mention how these are just going to exacerbate the "Cell Phone at the Dinner Table" effect. We all have those friends who can't seem to tear themselves away from their screens long enough to maintain a normal human conversation when we go out. Seems like these might exacerbate that.
+Nathan Weaver You're preaching to the choir - I do mobile R&D and already have my $1500 pair on order. The unique issue were considering is public perception of wearing this on your head - which is going to be based on the popular consensus of GG's relative value.
+Kit Malone yep, having data as a tool is one thing. but a lot of times people just want to relax. whether its walking down the street and listening to music or relaxing at home people don't want data 24x7.

its why google TV is a failure. TV is a way to relax, people don't want to actively search about everything they are watching

+Robert Scoble as for the baseball stats, it's already on regular TV. and if you have MLB premium it's part of that as well
+Kit Malone Yeah I agree, I'm not looking for more intimate technology engagement, I get dragged there with relative value. This product is all usability hurdles from every angle, which is why Google is rolling it out slowly and with early developer input - it is in no way a 'slam dunk' and its success will beat the odds against it.
+Chris Schoenfeld Totally read you. And don't get me wrong - I think this technology has all kinds of promise. But I see it as something that will be more interesting when applied to engineering or medicine. Or think about how it could be used to help people with disabilities. When products like this become mainstream, they have all sorts of unintended social benefits. I'm just probably not personally signing up for one when they become available - I like my landscapes unadorned. 
#3 and 8 are good points, all others I can do with a phone
I don't know, Robert. Most of your examples are not day-to-day activities. You'd be wearing them most of the time just waiting for them to be useful. If there is a stigma attached I don't think those examples will overcome it.
+Alen Teplitsky I think Google TV will see long term success, Google TV 2 made important improvements like ditching the expensive chipset which made the price so high, Google dealing it baked-in to major TV sets, video overlay and ditching that god-forsaken keyboard for well-designed remotes.

Its still got a ways to go, but I'd rather have GTV2 as my TV's OEM firmware than anything the OEMs are currently offering (although Vizio's is very good).
We are dorks.  May as well wear the uniform!  
one case where i'd LOVE to be a dork....get that $1500 price tag down and i'm all in on them :) 
I was discussing this with my friend the other day. It may seem rather pretentious at first, but think about how many people wear bluetooth headsets now vs. When they first came out. I think people will just get used to it.
Bluetooth headsets are still dorky. That's only because they aren't a norm overall. Like using a mobile phone once was, it will be dorky for a while. Then, the utility will win through, they will be accepted and it will be no more dorky than carrying a computer in your pocket.

It would be good if they could get some designers to help with the shape so that different faces can have a pair that suit. Geeks won't care about the look, general population will. 
Stigma? Dorky? I think they're about as cool as can be! Of course, I'm a geek...YMMV.
Google glassess next must have tec
they'll need to make it look better or approach Oakley and get it incorporated in fashionable shade...
A bit +1. 
Just think back about how we looked at the first people who ran around with bluetooth headets or other headsets speaking to themself - it was just crazy. People will quickly realize how useful this glasses can be, some might just be too ashamed to wear them in public at the beginning. But once first people start they'll follow. 
humm i ask myself if using high magnetic frequency system like we already have on mobiles phones near brain could create damage ? or reproduction problems due to high expositions ,there is not serious studies on that and what about all people talking to themselves everywhere? technologicaly speaking it's a challenge but healthly speaking i ask myself... and maybe a social disaster for street everyday life.
Add a comment...