The Invasion of The Privacy of Individuals and The Trend-shifting Product, Google Glass

Abstract: This paper examines both the optical workings of Google Glass, as well as the societal implications of the widespread use of such a device. After a history of optical breakthrough in HUD’s, the technical masterpiece that is Google Glass is closely examined. The rest of the time is spent discussing the possibility of Google Glass being used as a surveillance tool. The issue is first looked at with the perspective that the government and its spy agencies are the ones performing the surveillance, using Google Glass as a tool to monitor the unsuspecting user. Then, the issue is reexamined, looking at the power relationship that arises between an individual wearing Google Glass who encounters another man or woman who is not wearing the device. The main theme of these discussions is the invasion of privacy and Google Glass’ place as such a trend-shifting product.

Ever have that feeling you are being watched? Most people don’t anymore. The truth is, they are always being watched, and have simply grown accustomed to it. Curiosity kills the cat, but surveillance monitors its actions, documents all findings and sells the information to either the government or private corporations. Sales of George Orwell’s oft-quoted yet rarely-read landmark novel, “1984”, skyrocketed after the shocking revelation that the NSA was spying on its own citizens. All of a sudden, people were aware of the vast degree to which they were being monitored, from online activity to spending habits. In a miraculous coincidence of timing, Google’s lasted technological endeavor, Google Glass, entered final stages of research and development. Google Glass is not simply another fancy electronic gadget, but the first step in a direction that could possibly change our perceived limits and uses of technology in general, as well as create a entire new branch of tech: wearable technology. While achieving unique optical applications, Google Glass’ very existence and widespread availability makes us reexamine the morality of using wearable technology in addition to redefining power relationships regarding surveillance.

Google Glass got its inspiration from an electro-optical display called an HUD. An HUD (Heads Up Display) is essentially a transparent display that presents data without requiring the viewer to look away from their usual viewpoint. HUDs were initially developed for military use, as they allowed fighter pilots to view and process information much more quickly, allowing them to make quicker and more well-informed decisions during a flight. The basic HUDs developed and used in the 1950s were refractive optical systems. In this optical configuration, the CRT image is collimated by a combination of refractive lens elements. These elements were designed to provide a highly accurate display over a reasonable field of view. In order to be more practical, an internal mirror is used to fold the optical system in order to reduce its physical size. The HUD contains a combiner glass, which is a flat semitransparent plate designed to reflect approximately 25% of the collimated light from the CRT, and transmit approximately 70% of the real-world luminance. (Wood and Howells)

Once the HUDs were used extensively in military fighter jets as gun-sights, the pilots’ shooting became much more accurate. One unexpected result of incorporating the HUDs however, was that the pilots were becoming better at flying their aircraft in general. Optical designers realized the potential market for commercial aircraft, so in the late 1970s, they looked at ways to improve the system. One refinement that was drastically needed was to increase the display total as well as the instantaneous field of vision. This led to the development of reflective optical systems. As in the original refractive system, the displayed image is generated on a small CRT, about 3 inches in diameter. The new reflective system is essentially two separate yet distinct optical subsystems. The first is a relay lens assembly designed to re-image the CRT image source to an intermediate aerial image. This image is located one focal length from the collimator element. The second optical subsystem is the combiner element that re-images and collimates the intermediate aerial image for viewing by the pilot. As in the refractive systems, the pilot’s eyes focus at optical infinity, looking through the combiner to see the virtual image. To prevent the pilot’s head from blocking rays from the relay lens to the combiner, the combiner is tilted off-axis. The combiner off-axis angle, although required for image viewing reasons, significantly increases the optical aberrations within the system, which must be compensated in the relay lens to have a accurate virtual display. (Wood and Howells)

Nearly sixty-four years since the first practical application of a HUD system, we have had the next major development in the product that is Google Glass. While Glass is still a heads up display at heart, there have been significant adaptations and advancements on the previous generations of HUDs. In 2011, Google unveiled a 8 pound prototype, developed by Google X. Last year in 2013, when it was offered to consumers, it was lighter than the average pair of sunglasses. Google Glass contains the fundamental bits of any computer, including a CPU, sensors such as GPS, speakers, microphone and a battery, to which are added a tiny projector and a prism that redirects the light onto your retina. Each component is neatly embedded in the frame. While still technically an HUD device, Google Glass has simplified all the defining features of an HUD, and utilized (and sometimes revolutionized) modern technology by condensing everything. There is a battery in the frame of the glasses which powers the CPU. In the main compartment, where the technical aspects are stored, exist speakers, a microphone, a camera and a projector. The glass cube rests in the the top right corner of the wearer’s field of vision so as not to obstruct vision. This glass slide displays the information, just like the HUDs of old, as well as contains a prism which redirects the light towards the wearer’s eye. According to Google’s official website for Google Glass, looking at the display is equivalent to viewing a 25-inch, high-definition screen from eight feet away. In reality, the prism projector has a resolution of 640 by 360 and occupies as much of your vision as a quarter held six inches from your eye. (Google Glass Official Website)

Now that we have discussed both the history of HUDs in general, as well as the specific optical components of Google Glass, it now seems time do examine its technological capabilities. From a hardware perspective, Google Glass comes with 16GB of internal storage, and is powered by a TI OMAP 4430 processor and 1GB of RAM. Without installing any additional applications, the capabilities are somewhat limited, yet impressive nonetheless. While using Glass, one can search Google for information, just like on a web browser, listen to music through Google Play, make phone calls, send and receive text messages, use it as a GPS, take pictures, record video, stream live video to anyone in your contacts, get news alerts, post comments on Facebook or Twitter and a myriad of other social media sites, as well as start a “hangout” in Google+. Of course, these are only the basic uses. Once developers start writing applications, the potential for Google Glass is limitless. Of course, it is this very potential that concerns policy makers and the average citizen alike. Apart from the worrying trend to incorporate technology into every aspect of our daily life, individuals are concerned about the surveillance aspects of such a device.

Google has tried to maintain its position on valuing the importance of privacy by making it fairly obvious whenever someone tries to take a picture, or video. The user must first audibly say the words, “OK Glass, take a picture”, and people around the user will see the display light up. However, even though the product is merely in beta stages of development, hackers have already discovered ways to circumvent Google’s restrictions. Hacker Stephen Balaban is already building an alternative operating system that runs on Glass but is not controlled by Google. Some specific hacks are incredibly intrusive on individual privacy. One such tweak adds facial recognition technology to Google Glass. Another lets an individual take a picture simply by winking with the right eye. Two California Polytechnic grad students created an app called Malnotes, and described it as a simple notetaking app for Glass. However, what the app actually did was take a picture every fifteen seconds, and upload those images to the internet without the knowledge of either the wearer or anyone around him/her. Perhaps the most frightening, one hacker developed a QR code which can remotely hack Google Glass. A QR code is simply a black and white image usually used by advertisers to allow individuals to visit their website when taking a picture of the code, without having to search for it manually. However, this particular QR code that the hacker developed is linked to a malicious virus that installs malware on the Google Glass. If an individual is tricked into taking a picture of the QR code, his/her Glass will be invaded by spyware without the wearer’s knowledge. Once this malware is installed, the hacker has complete control over the Glass. He/she can access the livestream feature at any moment, viewing the wearer’s private life. The hacker will have the ability to see you type in your passwords for various sites, type in your access code for an ATM, see your credit card number, enter door codes, take pictures of your keys, and records what you write using a pen and paper. Nothing is safe once the Glass has been hacked. (Greenberg)

While this breach in security is alarming by itself, it becomes doubly so when we take into consideration the government’s tendency to use “unconventional” methods to gather information. Last year former CIA employee Edward Snowden informed major international media outlets that the NSA (National Security Agency) was domestically spying on American citizens. According to The Washington Post and The Guardian, the NSA has direct access to user data of 9 Internet giants: Google, Facebook, Skype, Apple, YouTube, Yahoo, AOL, Microsoft and Paltalk. Snowden claims that through the NSA data collection effort, they had access to both live communications and stored data. Even more alarming, an NSA program called DROPOUTJEEP installs spyware on iPhones with a 100% success rate of intercepting SMS messages, contact lists, microphones and cameras, and tracking phones, according to leaked documents shared by German news magazine Der Spiegel and security researcher Jacob Appelbaum. Given that the NSA possess both the capability to access private data as well as the will to circumvent the Constitution, a tool with such capabilities as Google Glass becomes extremely alarming. The documents Snowden released all seem to suggest that the NSA possesses the aptitude to gather and view all the data one accumulates when wearing Google Glass. A team of amateur hackers clearly already have. It would be erroneous to believe that there is some barrier to prevent the NSA from doing it, be it technical or legal.

However, even if we choose to believe that the NSA will not have access to the data, it is still alarming that such a large private corporation such as Google has unlimited access to all our data. When someone uses Google Glass, it becomes possible for Google to build an infinitely more detailed profile of that individual. The search engine giant will not only know what you’ve been searching for, but where you’ve been and even what you’ve been looking at. It will have both the ability and desire to provide this information to advertisers, in exchange for monetary return. It is not clear what will be worse: technologies like Google Glasses exclusively in the hands of large private companies or in the hands of countless hackers and nerds, politically uncontrolled secret services, and the like.

While this leap in technology obviously plays a part in the ease to which the government collects our data, the real issue here is the underlying mindset of the American public. After all, as much as internet critics like to draw comparisons between the NSA and the government of 1984, there exists a fundamental difference, one not foreseen by Mr. Orwell. In the fictitious country of Oceania, there exists telescreens monitoring both public streets/buildings as well as private residences. The defining quality of the telescreens was that they are government-installed and greatly resented by the people. This surveillance society differs greatly from our own. While some of the data gathering is unwarranted, there is a tremendous tendency towards self-surveillance. After all, when the NSA collects data off of Twitter accounts or Facebook walls, all that information is public knowledge. The government is not making anyone post status updates, or reveal their location through GPS-focused apps such as Foursquare. Americans do this voluntarily. Likewise, Google Glass is not a government program made to reveal the every action of various civilians, but simply a product that individuals purchase and use willingly.

While there has been a great deal of public concern over the potential use of Google Glass as a government surveillance tool, and rightfully so, another area of extreme focus has been use of Google Glass on the streets, or between two non-government citizens, as it were. There has been a great deal of vocal criticism from concerned citizens who fear their privacy is being invaded not by the government, but by the wearer of Google Glass. Even though Google Glass is only in a beta testing stage, signs banning the device have already popped up around bars, nightclubs and various enterprises around major cities, from LA to New York by individuals attempting to ensure their customer’s privacy. Other establishments, including but not limited to movie theaters, concert venues, museums and stages for various performance shows, are equally uneasy about the ability of customers to record the entirety of the show/event on Google Glass, preemptively banning it as well. The primary reason people object to the use of Google Glass in public is its ability to record video or take pictures without the knowledge of anyone around the wearer. While it is true that people perform self-surveillance all the time, uploading pictures to social networking sites, that surveillance is very much censored. Individuals need to retain control over their online social presence, and the underlying assumption is that Google Glass takes that away.

And this issue of surveillance is only one of the many concerns being raised about Google Glass. There are very serious questions being asked about how Google Glass and wearable technology will cause an unhealthy dependance on technology. Also, psychologists are unsettled by the amount to which Google Glass tracks the subconscious movements of the wearer’s eyeball, which can reveal what and who the individual is attracted too and if he/she is lying or telling the truth. While Google Glass is undoubtably a major optical breakthrough in the field of HUDs, it will have an unforeseeable level of impact on US legislation and privacy laws. In some ways, Google Glass is the symbol of the battle between surveillance and privacy in the American 21st century.