[Noisebridge-discuss] Google Glass at the space?

Alfred Perlstein bright at mu.org
Sun Apr 13 23:06:43 UTC 2014


On 4/13/14 3:54 PM, Nick Owens wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 03:37:13PM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>> This really is in no way a constructive response.  I would expect
>> that there would be a reasoning behind it as opposed to just a
>> "that's a bad idea" sort of reply.
> okay.
>
> for starters, there's an item in the anti-harassment policy about
> 'harassing photography or recording'. ostensibly glass could be used to
> do that.

I assume that trusted members noisebridge would use the glass only for
1) experiments
2) to review footage if there is an incident of theft of assault while 
they are making use of the glass at the space.

>
> secondly, a lot of folks at noisebridge just plain don't like people
> photographing or recording them. it's common courtesy at the space to
> ask everyone who could possibly be photographed or recorded if they
> consent to such.
Sure, if I was a laptop thieving junkie I wouldn't want people recording 
me doing drugs or stealing things either.

>
> on top of that, it's just plain stupid to expect that these devices will
> in fact remain at noisebridge. such an expensive and in-demand item
> would surely not last long.
Are you saying that the top echelon of noisebridgers (the board) are not 
trustworthy enough to be loaned some hardware?  Remember we are talking 
about a select few that have already been vetted as being trustworthy by 
the community.  That said if the glass does happen to disappear then it 
would be a very strong statement about the viability of noisebridge as a 
safe and trustworthy space.

Let's say we give glass to A and A's shortly disappears, we can easily 
surmise that this person is not responsible nor trustworthy of their 
other noisebridge responsibilities.

>
> not only that, there's plenty of people in sf that just don't like
> glass. including many businesses in the near vicinity of noisebridge.
>
> http://www.glasshole-free.org/

This would be for exclusive use inside the space, so I don't know what 
your site has to do with anything I am proposing except that maybe we 
ought to put a sign on the exit to remind people to remove the glass 
before venturing into our unsafe neighborhood.

>
>> We can all agree that anything learned via experimentation is worth
>> the money invested AND if we can get more security at the space it
>> would be an added bonus!
> https://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/2013-January/034191.html
>
> i echo Martin's sentiment. draw your own conclusions.
>
> i apologize for being short with you in my first reply. i hope this
> email clears things up.
>
I think Martin should have installed tracking and surveillance measures 
into the items he left out.  He could have very easily rid the space of 
thieves.  Seems like a missed opportunity to me.

-- 
Alfred Perlstein



More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list