Now compare to the narrative clip.
"...Student learning outcomes: Glass can be used in situations where it is difficult to observe student behavior. For example, problem based learning and active learning (flipped) classrooms often require students to work in teams. Given the number of teams working simultaneously in large classroom settings it is difficult to observe each one long enough to see the arc of their interaction. Students working in groups can wear and use Glass to record what has been going on for self-evaluation and instructor review. In another example, students can use Glass to do field work that is later shared with the class for dissection, discussion, and shared learning."
From The Guardian (extracts with emphasis added):
"Keeping track of your emails and staying on top of your calendar might be hard enough, but for American software developer Chris Dancy, life doesn’t feel complete without several hundred data sets about his life being fed to him simultaneously at all times.
Today, Dancy is “travelling light”, only wearing seven devices: above his eyes sits the unmistakable horizontal bar of a Google Glass headset, which records everything he sees, while around his neck hangs a Memoto narrative camera, which takes a picture every 30 seconds for good measure. On one wrist is a Pebble watch, which sends him alerts from his two smartphones, while around the other is a Fitbit Flex, tracking his movement and sleep patterns 24 hours a day. And then there’s the stuff you can’t see: a Blue HR heart rate monitor strapped to his chest, a BodyMedia fitness tracker around his upper arm and, lurking beneath his waistband, a Lumoback posture sensor – “which vibrates when I slouch,” he beams.
“Right now I feel pretty naked,” he says, “because I can’t control the room.” Back at home in Denver, Colorado, all the data from these devices feeds directly into his ambient environment, which automatically adjusts according to his mood and needs.
“The house knows my behaviours,” he says. “If I get really stressed out and don’t sleep well, when I wake up the light is a certain colour, the room a particular temperature, and certain music plays. My entire life is preconditioned based on all this information that I collect in real time.”
“All this stuff [...] needs to be in my clothing. Why can’t your shoes have haptic sensors in them, so if you’re walking you don’t need GPS – your shoe just vibrates left or right? I think this low-friction, ambient feedback is really the future, but for now we have to strap all this stuff on and look silly.”
Dancy is perhaps the most extreme exponent [of] a community dedicated to tracking and archiving every aspect of their known existence. But might others also be watching them too?
“That’s a very real concern,” says John Weir, director of the Wearable Technology Show. “You can quantify yourself as much as you want, but a lot of that is fed back on the web, and a lot of the companies now hold immense amounts of data on their customers. Particularly with medical applications, where people will hopefully be feeding stuff back to their doctors, the ownership of data and privacy is going to become a big issue.”
Dancy shares these concerns, but is more optimistic about the beneficial power of mastering our data, as long as we stop giving it away. “We don’t have a sharing problem, we have a data intimacy problem,” he says. “It’s urgent that people look at the data they are creating and giving away – so much of it can be used to make our lives better, rather than lining the pockets of mega corporations.”
In reality, few have the software skills to ensure their personal data is not being harvested against their will, so maybe it’s for the best that most wearable tech still makes you look like an extra from Star Trek. For some, that’s a useful deterrent from ever wearing it."
"...I definitely see a revolution in how some people will work..."
Here are the ten core questions I asked of Mark today:
1. Mark, I have you down in my G+ circles as a colleague. I note you have 290 followers. How have you managed to keep such a quiet profile amidst your incredible achievements?
2. You claim not to be a #glassexplorer or at least not part of that online community. What do you call your developments then with #glass or at least with the wider sub-sets of alternative providers?
3. I met with you at ISMAR13 in Adelaide, South Australia. Shortly after that event another occurred in the same university with Professor Andrew Goldsmith, Cybercrimes. What do you see as the nexus between augmented reality (AR) and that of unmanned aerial systems? (UAS)
4. Christchurch is a lovely part of the world. Given you've just returned from Israel what do you consider to be the hotbeds of technology development in the world at present?
5. What does the term privacy mean to you?
6. In a world of big data, open data and the ripples still subsiding from the NSA and Snowden case what do you see as the greatest challenge for those who choose to route their quantified selves through servers in other countries (the cloud)? Is wearable technology responsible in some way for a shift in humanity?
7. The #glassroom - tell us who takes your C22: The Glass Class: Designing Wearable Interfaces and why ?
8. I take it your familiar with +Thad Starner - it appears 'empathetic' appears in both of your current discourses - can you tell us more about what you mean by using augmented reality to create empathetic experiences?
9. Is artificial intelligence (AI) set to leapfrog wearables as the revolution or do we have to wait and see #glass sweep across Australasia first?
10. Will #glass cause revolt, upturn apple-carts, challenge stereotypes, ubiquitously slip amongst the tools of the K-2 educator? What the key challenges that we face as humanity with #glass or is this set to be a US based phenomena only?
Taking everything you know about the world of computers, the history of screen experience and the trajectory of emerging technologies—say with Google Glass, for example—combined with this culture’s love affair with instant gratification, recording, surveillance, narcissism, and control; what could one be left looking at?
The Entire History of You explores some of these ideas in a world where most people have an implant behind their ear called a ‘grain’ which records everything they do, see and hear. Memories can be played back either in front of the person’s eyes or on a screen—a process known as a ‘re-do.’
Nothing is off limits. Everything is recorded, archived, and scrutinised.
Scrutiny comes to social events too. ‘Re-dos’ are done with friends and family, analogous to the current culture of social media ‘sharing’ and the solipsistic sense of self lived vicariously through screens.
In this world—and of our own—what are the myriad personal, interpersonal and social implications? What do the profound repercussions for relationships and even individual existential experience look like?
The Entire History of You is part of a series of films called Black Mirror which explore different aspects of “the way we live now—and the way we might be living in 10 minutes’ time if we're clumsy.”
More to come...
It is with great joy that MG and I write to let you know that the Uberveillance edited volume is finally in stores and available for purchase. We encourage you to ask your libraries to purchase the volume. Of significance are the coming together of well-known voices in the surveillance field to discuss the definition and impact of uberveillance, including Katherine Albrecht, Roger Clarke, Mark Gasson, Kevin Haggerty, Steve Mann, Ellen McGee, Kevin Warwick, Marcus Wigan and numerous authorities on the topic of microchipping people. This volume contains 17 book chapters, and 7 interviews and panel presentations as well as full referencing of source materials in some 500 pages.
PART A The Veillances
Chapter 1 Introduction: On the “Birth” of Uberveillance (pages 1-31) M. G. Michael (University of Wollongong, Australia)
Chapter 2 Veillance: Beyond Surveillance, Dataveillance, Uberveillance, and the Hypocrisy of One-Sided Watching (pages 32-45) Steve Mann (University of Toronto, Canada)
Chapter 3 Uberveillance: Where Wear and Educative Arrangement (pages 46-62) Alexander Hayes (University of Wollongong, Australia)
PART B Applications of Humancentric Implantables
Chapter 4 Practical Experimentation with Human Implants (pages 64-132) Kevin Warwick (University of Reading, UK), Mark N. Gasson (University of Reading, UK)
Chapter 5 Knowledge Recovery: Applications of Technology and Memory (pages 133-142) Maria E. Burke (University of Salford, UK), Chris Speed (University of Edinburgh, UK)
PART C Adoption of RFID Implants for Humans
Chapter 6 Willingness to Adopt RFID Implants: Do Personality Factors Play a Role in the Acceptance of Uberveillance? (pages 144-168) Christine Perakslis (Johnson and Wales University, USA)
Chapter 7 Surveilling the Elderly: Emerging Demographic Needs and Social Implications of RFID Chip Technology Use (pages 169-185) Randy Basham (University of Texas – Arlington, USA)
PART D Tracking and Tracing Laws, Directives, Regulations, and Standards
Chapter 8 Towards the Blanket Coverage DNA Profiling and Sampling of Citizens in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland (pages 187-207) Katina Michael (University of Wollongong, Australia)
Chapter 9 ID Scanners and Überveillance in the Night-Time Economy: Crime Prevention or Invasion of Privacy? (pages 208-225) Darren Palmer (Deakin University, Australia), Ian Warren (Deakin University, Australia), Peter Miller (Deakin University, Australia)
Chapter 10 Global Tracking Systems in the Australian Interstate Trucking Industry (pages 226-234) Jann Karp (C.C.C. Australia, Australia)
Chapter 11 Tracking Legislative Developments in Relation to “Do Not Track” Initiatives (pages 235-259) Brigette Garbin (University of Queensland, Australia), Kelly Staunton (University of Queensland, Australia), Mark Burdon (University of Queensland, Australia)
Chapter 12 Uberveillance, Standards, and Anticipation: A Case Study on Nanobiosensors in U.S. Cattle (pages 260-279) Kyle Powys Whyte (Michigan State University, USA), Monica List (Michigan State University, USA), John V. Stone (Michigan State University, USA), Daniel Grooms (Michigan State University, USA), Stephen Gasteyer (Michigan State University, USA), Paul B. Thompson (Michigan State University, USA), Lawrence Busch (Michigan State University, USA), Daniel Buskirk (Michigan State University, USA), Erica Giorda (Michigan State University, USA), Hilda Bouri (Michigan State University, USA)
PART E Health Implications of Microchipping Living Things
Chapter 13 Microchip-Induced Tumors in Laboratory Rodents and Dogs: A Review of the Literature 1990–2006 (pages 281-317) Katherine Albrecht (CASPIAN Consumer Privacy, USA)
PART F Socio-Ethical Implications of RFID Tags and Transponders
Chapter 14 Privacy and Pervasive Surveillance: A Philosophical Analysis (pages 319-350) Alan Rubel (University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA)
Chapter 15 Neuroethics and Implanted Brain Machine Interfaces (pages 351-365) Ellen M. McGee (Independent Researcher, USA)
Chapter 16 We Are the Borg! Human Assimilation into Cellular Society (pages 366-407) Ronnie D. Lipschutz (University of California - Santa Cruz, USA), Rebecca J. Hester (University of Texas Medical Branch, USA)
Chapter 17 Uberveillance and Faith-Based Organizations: A Renewed Moral Imperative (pages 408-416) Marcus Wigan (Oxford Systematics, Australia & Edinburgh Napier University, UK)
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Compilation of References
About the Contributors
EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD
Roba Abbas, University of Wollongong, Australia
Greg Adamson, University of Melbourne, Australia
Katherine Albrecht, CASPIAN, USA
Anas Aloudat, University of Jordan, Jordan
Michael V. Arnold, University of Melbourne, Australia
Emilia Belleboni, Universidad Politecnica de Madrid, Spain
Rafael Capurro, University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee, USA
Kenneth Foster, University of Pennsylvania, USA
Amal Graafstra, Amal.net, USA
Mireille Hildebrandt, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Peter Hyland, University of Wollongong, Australia
Nicholas Huber, Accenture, Australia
Indrawati, Institut Manajemen Telkom, Indonesia
Eleni Kosta, K. U. Leuven, Belgium
Ronald Leenes, Tilburg University, The Netherlands
Avner Levin, Ryerson University, Canada
Michael Loui, University of Illinois – Urbana-Champaign, USA
Noëmi Manders-Huits, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
Keith W. Miller, University of Missouri – St. Louis, USA
Lyria Bennett Moses, University of New South Wales, Australia
Christine Perakslis, Johnson and Wales University, USA
Laura Perusco, Macquarie Bank, UK
Kenneth Pimple, Indiana University – Bloomington, USA
Joseph Savirimuthu, University of Liverpool, UK
Alan D. Smith, Robert Morris University, USA
Charles Smith, Mesa State College Alumni, USA
Judith Symonds, Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand
Samuel Fosso Wamba, Rouen Business School, France
John Weckert, Charles Sturt University, Australia
HOW TO CITE THE VOLUME
Michael, M.G. and Katina Michael. "Uberveillance and the Social Implications of Microchip Implants: Emerging Technologies." IGI Global, 2014. 1-509. Web. 24 Dec. 2013. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-4582-0
Michael, M., & Michael, K. (2014). Uberveillance and the Social Implications of Microchip Implants: Emerging Technologies (pp. 1-509). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-4582-0
Michael, M.G. and Katina Michael. "Uberveillance and the Social Implications of Microchip Implants: Emerging Technologies." 1-509 (2014), accessed December 24, 2013. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-4582-0
"....Hi! We're Amanda and Ville from Sweden. We got the mission to find out what lifelogging is. So we went on a trip around the world and met with people on the forefront of the lifelogging trend. People like Thad Sterner who's working with Google Glasses and Gordon Bell who is a researcher at Microsoft and Steve Mann who is the founding father of the whole lifelogging movement. We filmed the whole trip and the material will be edited into a documentary premiering later this winter. Stay tuned, and follow us on blog.memoto.com!"