[FoRK] Google Goggles
Ken Ganshirt @ Yahoo
ken_ganshirt at yahoo.ca
Wed Dec 9 12:56:12 PST 2009
I need to clarify my last post (below). Google Goggles is predicated on your being "there" AND having connectivity with sufficient bandwidth to make it feasible.
I get that it can be really handy if you're standing right beside something and have a good connection and can't be bothered to go inside and ask your question or ask a passerby. It's either useless or terribly inconvenient in any other situation.
Yeah, some of us travel places where there's no cellular service AT ALL, never mind no, or poor, data service. For instance, almost every place I'm likely to be interested in the answer to the question, "What sort of plant is this?", will likely be outside coverage. Same goes for many landmarks. And some of us live in regions where cellular data plans are too expensive for this sort of frivolity if you're employer is not picking up the tab. (Naturally there's a bit of sour grapes in there.)
--- On Wed, 12/9/09, Ken Ganshirt @ Yahoo <ken_ganshirt at yahoo.ca> wrote:
> --- On Wed, 12/9/09, Jeff Bone <jbone at place.org>
> > If you haven't seen this yet, go look for it.
> > This has the potential, perhaps, to be the most important
> > innovation since the Web itself, IMHO. And it may well
> > be *the* driver for mass adoption of AugR tech and the
> > creation of a mass market for critical AugR consumer
> > technologies (like practical everyday HUD gear, etc.)
> > Combined with a remembrance agent (perhaps fed with
> > Wikipedia and a few other key public data sources) and total
> > recall technologies, and we're at some kind of a critical
> > tipping point in human intelligence augmentation.
> > $0.02,
> You're kidding. Right? If I can remember where the hell I
> put the visual I can certainly remember whatever I need to
> know about it. (At my age I'm lucky to remember my name some
> days. I had to ask my wife what day it was yesterday.)
> Or put another way, you STILL can't get an answer if you
> can't think of the right question. At least not a
> particularly useful answer. So I have to go out and take a
> picture of something I want to know about. Why don't I just
> go in and ask someone while I'm there? I'll probably get a
> lot better information than what someone takes the trouble
> to type into the computer. Same dealeo with someone's
> business card .. just pick up the damn phone.
> I'll give you that it's an interesting toy that will
> probably turn out to have some useful applications for some
> people in some situations. I sure don't mean to knock
> anything that makes searching easier for more people, if
> this turns out to do that. (Have you seen the LMGTFY site?
> Stands for "Let Me Google That For You". Amazing how few
> people can think of the right questions to ask.) For the
> present I'll view it as not much more than an interesting
> toy. Maybe with potential.
> But even if it turns out to be really really useful I don't
> get that it's "augmentation" any more than packing a PDA or
> smartphone is "augmentation". Perhaps our definitions of
> "augmentation" differ. Do you consider PDAs, smartphones or
> an automobile to be human augmentation in this context? (I
Make your browsing faster, safer, and easier with the new Internet Explorer® 8. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/
More information about the FoRK