Google Disqualifies Many Glass Contest Winners
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.
Do they come in Trifocals ??
And how many places are preemptively outlawing these devices?
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.
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.
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.
Oh that's good... ROFL
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?