Hasta La Gadget!

The first time we featured programmer Will Powell, we learned how he was able to make a crude version of Google’s Project Glass augmented reality glasses. It turns out that Powell has made another version of his hack that is capable of translating spoken language and displaying the translation in subtitles.

Like with his earlier project, Powell used a pair of Vuzix STAR 1200 glasses as the base of the hack. If I understood what Powell said on his blog, a Jawbone Bluetooth microphone picks up the audio and sends it to a mobile device, which then processes the words using translation API made by Microsoft. The translation is then passed on to a Raspberry Pi, which sends a text of the translation to the Vuzix display and a transcript of the conversation taking place to a TV. Below is a shot of the subtitle being displayed on the glasses’ monitor:

And here’s a shot of the transcript on the TV:

Finally here’s a demo of the hack in action. Note that there is a significant delay in the translation, which according to Powell occurs mainly when the audio goes through the translation API.

The sheer number of gadgets needed plus the fact that the Raspberry Pi is physically connected to the glasses via an S-video connector means that this is not a portable system, but I am still amazed at what one man armed with off the shelf parts can do. Besides, all devices – including the ones Powell needs – get more powerful and smaller in time. The time when we’ll be able to reenact Casa de mi Padre is closer than we think.

[Will Powell via Ubergizmo]

More »

The augmented reality researcher at the center of allegations of assault over sporting a wearable computer in public has warned that ubiquitous cameras – and the potential for privacy incidents – are only going to increase. Professor Steve Mann, the father of wearables who claimed McDonald’s staff in Paris assaulted him and damaged his advanced EyeTap headset earlier this month, fired back at criticisms that his constantly-running camera was a provocation to the privacy-minded. ”Ironically the people most frightened of cameras seem to be the ones who are pointing cameras at us (e.g. big multinational organizations)” Mann argues.

Mann makes only a side reference to the McDonald’s incident, pointing out that the restaurant has “denied assault or destruction of my property, despite solid evidence that I have provided to the contrary.” Instead, he lists the ways cameras and being observed have worked their way into our daily lives, and sets out an argument for why a balance of surveillance and sousveillance (literally “watching from below”; in effect the observation of a situation from an individual within that situation) is an inevitability.

Mann’s EyeTap actually captures at a rate of 120fps and in groups of three; a little known fact is that the researcher actually patented HDR (High Dynamic Range) photography two decades ago, and the trio of differently exposed images are combined for a single view that combines more detail than would be possible with a regular camera or the human eye unaided. “If I see and remember something (whether a temporary short-term image cache, or permanently), and use it for my own use, I have not violated anyone’s privacy” Mann suggests.

“Some of us have experienced resistance to this [DEG (Digital Eye Glass)] technology, as some people are frightened of cameras. Ironically the people most frightened of cameras seem to be the ones who are pointing cameras at us (e.g. big multinational organizations that use lots of surveillance cameras in their own establishments). My own experience with EyeTap DEG is that objections raised by individuals are usually appeased by a simple explanation of what the eyeglasses do, and how they help me. Basically individuals can work things through. But when a large organization has a policy against cameras, we have a fundamental problem that, on the surface, would seem to have a chilling effect on mass acceptance of DEG” Professor Steve Mann

The ex-MIT professor contrasts his own wearable camera – which, in normal use, does not retain images, but only saved the shots of the McDonald’s workers challenging Mann because a damage-related security system was triggered – with the cameras installed into modern street lighting which adjusts brightness depending on whether the road is in use (but which may also end up tracking peak utilization or even watching for crimes). Part of his argument is around personal use and transience of storage; a camera versus a “seeing aid”.

“In a world where people interact face-to-face, in often crowded spaces, a wearable camera is in itself not necessarily a violation of privacy when the images are used only for personal use.  In fact surveillance is a greater privacy violation than sousveillance because, for example, when you’re alone, you might still be on camera” Professor Steve Mann

Overall, though, Mann points out that cameras aren’t going anywhere, and that a head-in-the-sand approach to wearables – suggesting, say, that the world simply isn’t ready for sousveillance technology – is pointless. “To try and stop picture-taking in 2012 is almost impossible.”

“When we’re surrounded by “smart lights”, “smart toilets”, “smart refrigerators”, and the like, what’s wrong with having “smart people”?  That is, what is wrong with putting intelligence on people?” Professor Steve Mann

Don’t be blind on wearable cameras insists AR genius is written by Chris Davies & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.

Professional cyborg Professor Steve Mann has responded to McDonald’s denials that its staff physically assaulted him, releasing a new photo that reportedly shows one employee in the process of striking his wearable computer. In an update to his original report, Mann added another image captured by his EyeTap headset itself, seemingly showing the primary perpetrator accused in the assault reaching out and making contact with the gadget.

“Perp. 1 struck my Eye Glass” Mann wrote, clarifying that it was “not a direct hit like a punch in the face, but a side-swipe, grabbing motion.” Previously, the released photos had only shown Mann surrounded by three individuals supposedly working for McDonald’s, including tearing up what Mann says was the letter from his doctor explaining the nature of the EyeTap device and how it is permanently attached to his head.

Mann publicly called out the Parisian restaurant this week, claiming that during a vacation with his family he was challenged by staff unhappy with the possibility of him recording photos or video with the device. According to Mann, the staff grew aggressive and damaged his wearable computer before ejecting him from the restaurant.

McDonald’s countered with a denial, saying that its French management had spoken to staff at the location and all denied any argument and that the incident “did not involve a physical altercation.” After the internal investigation, McDonald’s insisted that “our crew members and restaurant security staff have informed us that they did not damage any of Mr. Mann’s personal possessions.”

Not so, according to the longstanding mediated reality researcher. As well as releasing the new image apparently showing contact, he points out that ripping up his doctor’s letter counts as damage. “They can’t deny tearing up the letter from my doctor,” Mann told LAPTOP, ”so that also would seem to suggest ill intent, e.g. that in itself is also willful damage to customer’s property.”

Although the EyeTap Mann was wearing does include a camera, capable of grabbing HD-resolution stills at 120fps, in normal use the headset does not actually store any of those images. However, the device is programmed to shift the transient photo stream into a buffer memory if damaged, hence the apparent record of Mann’s incident.

Update: McDonald’s declined to comment further on the incident, telling us only that its French team is talking with Professor Mann.

Wearables expert releases new alleged assault image arguing McDonald’s denial is written by Chris Davies & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.

If you listened to the whoops and hollers at Google IO last month, you’d have thought the world was more than ready for wearable tech like Google Glass. Beyond the braying developers, though, the real world is showing every sign that the Brave New World of augmented reality headsets will cause more headaches than just transparent eyepiece strain alone. The claims by wearables researcher Professor Steve Mann that he was physically assaulted in a French McDonald’s after staff suddenly took offense at his digital eyewear highlight the shadow side of the cutting edge: it can hurt more than just your wallet if the rest of society isn’t ready for it.

Mann’s story – which we covered more comprehensively earlier today – is perhaps as predictable as it is upsetting. The scientist was with his family in Paris, and while the first McDonald’s staff member he spoke to had no issues with his EyeTap wearable, when he sat down to eat he was challenged by three other employees, one of whom tried to pull the gadget from his head.

Mann knew there could be problems; he’d even brought along paperwork from his doctor that explained the nature of the EyeTap and how it’s permanently attached to his head and can only be removed with the appropriate tools. According to his account – and photos snapped by the headset itself – the McDonald’s employees ripped up that documentation, seemingly unimpressed by how Mann has been immersed in the mediated reality dream for the past few decades.

Outside of the geekosphere, there’s still a long way to go before sousveillance – the recording of an activity by a participant of that activity – is generally accepted. Tensions around the rights of photographers to take photos of buildings and other public places, often at odds with the actual legality of the situation, and concerns over privacy are yet to be smoothed away. The rise in cellphone cameras increased such arguments exponentially; how much more troublesome will it be when we hang permanently active cameras from our faces?

There’s invariably a catch-up period with each new technology, as old schemas get challenged (and generally forced to upgrade to accept) with fresh developments. Mediated reality isn’t simply a case of dropping your new phone into your pocket when firing off tweets or snapping Instagram images isn’t acceptable; the whole idea of digitally augmenting your world is that it’s a persistent thing. Just as much in the face of others as it is on your own, and for all of Google’s protestations that “people don’t even notice it,” it’s undoubtedly going to add another degree of perceived separation and difference between you and those around you without wearables.

To those who have been following the development of wearable technology for any length of time, Professor Mann is a pioneer. For everyone else, he’s a guy with a strange – and potentially suspicious – contraption, something unfamiliar and disconcerting. Google may find it easy to whip up developer enthusiasm for Glass, but we’re a world away from wearables being generally accepted among society as a whole.

More on Mann’s research – and augmented reality in general – in our full timeline.

Wearable Worries: Glass could trigger more than just virtual violence is written by Chris Davies & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.