This is a horrifically simplistic argument that doesn't stand up.
We are right to be cynical about everything. Things (technology, products, whatever) need to prove themselves before they are worthy of awe. Especially when the potential ubiquity of things like Glass impacts everybody, not just those who choose to subscribe to the latest whatever.
To see the value of that, you need to have failed (or seen things fail) in the real world. I think this is why those who are having an OMGasm about Glass are either younger than late-20's or professionally biased (ie. tech journos).
We are right to be cynical about everything. Things (technology, products, whatever) need to prove themselves before they are worthy of awe. Especially when the potential ubiquity of things like Glass impacts everybody, not just those who choose to subscribe to the latest whatever.
To see the value of that, you need to have failed (or seen things fail) in the real world. I think this is why those who are having an OMGasm about Glass are either younger than late-20's or professionally biased (ie. tech journos).