I'm in too. Fuck that guy, he's a bell-end, a fucking hack. But I'd still rather talk to him for five hours, than half the people in the comment section for five minutes.
It's not wearing Glass that makes you an asshole, you're an asshole if you are an asshole about wearing Glass. That article is so ludicrously self-congratulatory it's laughable.
It's not wearing Glass that makes you an asshole, you're an asshole if you are an asshole about wearing Glass. That article is so ludicrously self-congratulatory it's laughable.
So, yeah, welcome to everything Adrien Chen has ever written.
It's not wearing Glass that makes you an asshole, you're an asshole if you are an asshole about wearing Glass. That article is so ludicrously self-congratulatory it's laughable.
So, yeah, welcome to everything Adrien Chen has ever written.
What other particularly egregious articles has Chen written that are on par or near the stupidity of this one?
It's not wearing Glass that makes you an asshole, you're an asshole if you are an asshole about wearing Glass. That article is so ludicrously self-congratulatory it's laughable.
So, yeah, welcome to everything Adrien Chen has ever written.
What other particularly egregious articles has Chen written that are on par or near the stupidity of this one?
Well, the best way to find that out is to look at a list of Adrien Chen's past work, roll a die, then take that number and immediately forget about it because they're all the fucking same.
A large part of Gawker's strategy seems to be saying controversial contrarian bullshit just to get pageviews from riling up the Internet. Adrian Chen is the embodiment of that strategy.
Dissapointing: So did some person whose entire essay was "If I had glass, I'd cut a bitch" and another lass who suggested an AR FPS-alike display for when she went to her local school so she could track her high score.
Personally I think it's dissapointing that Google gave out Glass on the basis of tweets in the first place, but it's understandable due to the flood of applications they probably got. I really hope those who made joke applications simply don't accept or can't pay, and it's opened up to the next people down the line.
The main one is that you have to drive to LA or NY to get it, at your own cost, and pay $1,500 for it. So it's like Valve saying you can have a review copy of Half-Life 3 for $500 if you can get to Bellevue on your own dime. Oh, and it might not be the finished product. Congrats.
The main one is that you have to drive to LA or NY to get it, at your own cost, and pay $1,500 for it. So it's like Valve saying you can have a review copy of Half-Life 3 for $500 if you can get to Bellevue on your own dime. Oh, and it might not be the finished product. Congrats.
They told everyone that before they started the application process. If you weren't willing to do that, you shouldn't have applied in the first place.
Google is essentially doing a kickstarter for a Glass beta test. They straight up told you this when they opened applications. No one should be surprised or disappointed about the terms of participating.
The main one is that you have to drive to LA or NY to get it, at your own cost, and pay $1,500 for it. So it's like Valve saying you can have a review copy of Half-Life 3 for $500 if you can get to Bellevue on your own dime. Oh, and it might not be the finished product. Congrats.
They told everyone that before they started the application process. If you weren't willing to do that, you shouldn't have applied in the first place.
Bullshit. You're saying that if a company has a monopoly on a product or idea, you should be happy with the implementation of that product or idea, no matter how broken.
I knew you had to pay $1500 for it, but I didn't know they required you to drive to their office to get it. What's the reasoning for this? Make sure you're you? Show you around the device? They don't want to deal with shipping them? Make you sign some paperwork in person?
The main one is that you have to drive to LA or NY to get it, at your own cost, and pay $1,500 for it. So it's like Valve saying you can have a review copy of Half-Life 3 for $500 if you can get to Bellevue on your own dime. Oh, and it might not be the finished product. Congrats.
They told everyone that before they started the application process. If you weren't willing to do that, you shouldn't have applied in the first place.
Bullshit. You're saying that if a company has a monopoly on a product or idea, you should be happy with the implementation of that product or idea, no matter how broken.
I'm saying that the fact you had to pay a lot of money and go to NY or LA to pick it up was extremely widely publicized when they first announced this program. If you weren't willing to deal with those problems, you should not have applied in the first place.
I knew you had to pay $1500 for it, but I didn't know they required you to drive to their office to get it. What's the reasoning for this? Make sure you're you? Show you around the device? They don't want to deal with shipping them? Make you sign some paperwork in person?
Pretty sure they're having a "learn how to use the damn thing" kind of event.
Comments
http://gawker.com/5990395
EDIT: And possibly place a mule's head image over his own face. I said it.