Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Google Disqualifies Many Glass Contest Winners

By - Source: Google | B 18 comments

Someone obviously fell asleep while approving submissions for the Google Glass content.

Just days after Google said it has begun notifying winners of its Google Glass contest held in February, the company says it's now forced to disqualify some of the lucky winners for good reasons.

For those now appearing on Google's new blacklist, disqualification means they won't be required to drive to New York, Los Angeles or San Francisco to shell out $1,500 for an early "Explorer" release of Google's wearable tech. As it stands now, the retail version is expected to arrive in 4Q13, but the release could be pushed back into 1Q14 if any issues arise.

Based on several previously qualifying applications that are now being rejected by Google, it seems that a number of hopeful testers weren't really out to gain a pair of Google's specs at all. Instead, they were obviously just trolling Google for a few laughs and/or to see if they could gain entry… and somehow succeeded.

"It’s become clear that a few applications that don’t comply with our terms have slipped through the cracks, and we’re going to have to disqualify applications like these," the company said via Google Glass.

No other details were given, but the terms of the contest clearly state that submissions will be disqualified if they are "derogatory, offensive, threatening, defamatory, disparaging… or otherwise does not comply with the theme and spirit of #ifihadglass."

"Unfortunately your application didn’t comply with our terms, and has been disqualified," Google told one previously approved applicant via Twitter. "We’re sorry for the confusion."

One potential winner's contest entry stated that "I'd throw it in your face" while another said she would "cut a bitch!" So how did these submissions get through Google's filters? Obviously, someone was asleep at the wheel when picking and choosing potential Explorer testers. Or maybe Google didn't read them at all and just decided to use the first 8,000 submissions.

Google Glass is at the forefront of a new wave of wearable computing. It pulls many tasks off the smartphone and places them in the user's field of view. That means less rubbing on the smartphone's screen and more hands free, voice-controlled tasks. The specs come packed with an embedded camera that has already caused them to be banned from one Seattle bar.

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Display 18 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 14 Hide
    jdw_swb , March 29, 2013 6:33 AM
    After wining the right to buy it, they were disqualified for not having the required funds to purchase their prize.
Other Comments
  • 14 Hide
    jdw_swb , March 29, 2013 6:33 AM
    After wining the right to buy it, they were disqualified for not having the required funds to purchase their prize.
  • -5 Hide
    DRosencraft , March 29, 2013 8:00 AM
    And, once again, trolls have ruined a potentially good thing. Although, you can't discount the terrible job that was done in reviewing the applications. You have to wonder how often this takes place in other contests and giveaways...
  • 6 Hide
    kanoobie , March 29, 2013 9:59 AM
    Maybe Google did it for free press.
  • 5 Hide
    Wisecracker , March 29, 2013 11:16 AM

    Do they come in Trifocals ??

  • 5 Hide
    COLGeek , March 29, 2013 12:02 PM
    "D'oh!!!"....Homer Simpson
  • 6 Hide
    g-unit1111 , March 29, 2013 12:15 PM
    They cost $1500???? :ouch: 

    And how many places are preemptively outlawing these devices?
  • 4 Hide
    beayn , March 29, 2013 2:38 PM
    g-unit1111They cost $1500???? And how many places are preemptively outlawing these devices?
    Any place that already has a ban on cameras and video cameras for privacy reasons?
  • -6 Hide
    11796pcs , March 29, 2013 3:29 PM
    I'm sorry Google but this whole concept is just ridiculous. Computer glasses? WHY???
  • 3 Hide
    falchard , March 29, 2013 3:48 PM
    I wish they would have posted the disqualified ideas.
  • -1 Hide
    teh_chem , March 29, 2013 4:08 PM
    falchardI wish they would have posted the disqualified ideas.

    Sadly because you have to do "something" in order for people to think you're relevant. For google, it's been Glass. For others, it's been phone-tethered watches (an ergonomically-terribad idea). But while the mobile tech industry slightly stagnates momentarily, you still need to push something through, whether or not it ends up being the next blockbuster success.
  • 0 Hide
    anort3 , March 29, 2013 4:16 PM
    It still blows my mind people "won" the right to pay $1500. Along with paying to get themselves to New York, San Francisco or LA. What a great contest Google. Way to be one of the richest companies in the world. Way to "do no harm" in a recession that still has 7.7% unemployment. Golf clap.
  • 0 Hide
    g-unit1111 , March 29, 2013 5:16 PM
    Quote:
    g-unit1111They cost $1500???? And how many places are preemptively outlawing these devices?
    Any place that already has a ban on cameras and video cameras for privacy reasons?


    There's more than just that - I've seen stories of bars, casinos, movie theaters, airlines, businesses, tons more places banning these things due to more than just privacy reasons.
  • 1 Hide
    Solandri , March 29, 2013 7:28 PM
    teh_chemSadly because you have to do "something" in order for people to think you're relevant. For google, it's been Glass. For others, it's been phone-tethered watches (an ergonomically-terribad idea).

    Contrary to popular belief, competition doesn't work because people think up brilliant ideas for products and sell them.

    It works because people think up all sorts of ideas for products. Most of them are stupid and die in obscurity. A few are good and go on to success. Many of the ones which die seem brilliant, and some which succeed seem stupid (e.g. Pokemon cards). The market is the final arbiter, not your nor my opinion. If we blocked product ideas on the basis of people calling them stupid, technology would never progress. Most people thought the Wright brothers were going to get themselves killed trying to build a flying machine.
  • 1 Hide
    ckholt83 , March 29, 2013 7:55 PM
    Seriously, would you stop mentioning the stupid bar in Seattle in every Glass article? The owner is obviously attention whoring, and you're artificially inflating the value of his opinion. Nobody cares.
  • 0 Hide
    dimar , March 30, 2013 12:57 AM
    I hope Google is going to work on a "mind-controlled tasks" unit.. How is the user going to control it if there's a huge crowd or lots of noise..
  • 0 Hide
    spentshells , March 30, 2013 4:32 AM
    ne potential winner's contest entry stated that "I'd throw it in your face" while another said she would "cut a bitch!"

    Oh that's good... ROFL
  • -3 Hide
    hella-d , March 30, 2013 4:21 PM
    google-glass sounds like a redicolous idea count me out
  • 0 Hide
    blazorthon , March 30, 2013 4:54 PM
    g-unit1111There's more than just that - I've seen stories of bars, casinos, movie theaters, airlines, businesses, tons more places banning these things due to more than just privacy reasons.


    Movie theaters would do it for obvious reasons- they don't want to make bootlegging easier. Bars doing it are mostly the same bars that ban cameras according to what I've read. Casinos doing it would be for similar reasons. Airlines would do it for security reasons. Need I go on?