Could someone explain the title text, please? I'm afraid I don't understand the irony mentioned. 22.214.171.124 11:37, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Yes. And also why 2007? Not like him to pick a random year. Was it something to do with the new laser classification and warning/labeling regulations that went into place that year? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_safety) -- Drjoe047 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
- It should be the iPhone, the first generation was released on June 29, 2007. It was a similar technical revolution as Google Glass will be.--Dgbrt (talk) 13:12, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
I don't think that the explanation needs to include the description of Black Hat. He has his own page. Regarding his desire not to blind people, he's about to shine a laser in the police officers' eyes. He has no problem blinding people. In addition, I don't think the title text is ironic. Black Hat is a hacker. He's always embraced technology. He just embraces it his way. -- Theo (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
- Wouldn't Google Glass be a nuisance for Black Hat? If everyone goes around always recording everything, it gets much harder to pull off nefarious plans in secret... 126.96.36.199 17:11, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
"The best defense is an discriminate offense." Might this be a play on the idiom "The best defense is a good offense"? The "indiscriminate" part strongly reminds me of NSA's justification that their massive surveillance program was not warrantless search & seizure because it's indiscriminate, i.e. no one person is targeted. Kind of like in this comic, where the device automatically targets any nearby Glass user but no one user(s) in particular. 188.8.131.52 08:46, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
- Dunno about the NSA reference, but it is an obvious play on that adage. I've added a one-sentence explanation of the reference and a link to the Wikipedia page. --V2Blast (talk) 06:08, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
Could Black Hat's attachment be for Google Glasses? Somehow the attachment has to see the targets and process this information ... The Kids will be running around and shooting each other. Sebastian --184.108.40.206 10:12, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
The explanation should be changed in order to remove a number of errors, inaccuracies and grammatical faults.
1. The laser is aimed at the eyepiece of the device, not at the eye of the wearer
2. Therefore it could not blind the wearer
3. No explanation of why mailing them to the children of google executives would disrupt the project.
5. Clumsy double use of the nothing phrase "plays off".
6. Unsubstantiated and extremely unlikely link to a real news event.
7. Starting the final paragraph with the word 'However'.
8. No explanation of the reference to the year 2007.
9. Use of the word "hate" seems misplaced. Black Hat is unemotionally evil.
Go for it. 220.127.116.11 02:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
The reason I left that incomplete template there, with only "Incomplete?", is because it was there earlier, and I didn't know what was incomplete about it. 0100011101100001011011010110010101011010011011110110111001100101 (talk page) 23:24, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Regarding #3 above: Children likes toys. Glasses with a laser pointer attached looks like a toy. Children would run around using and playing with these glasses/toys. They would eventually meet their parents. Their parents being Google executives, there's a high probability they would be wearing Google Glasses. They would be aware of the annoyance created by Black Hat. Without being able to fight back this annoyance, they would feel best to shut down the Google Glass project. 18.104.22.168 04:25, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
The last-panel peephole request can be intended to blind cops' filming gear rather the cops' eyes? And the phrasing could be an hint to the MIB movie/cartoon/comics franchise said pre-neuralyzering / pre-neurolysering someone?