you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 18 points 1 year ago (17 children)

I understand the gripes about Meta, but I don't understand how everyone clowns on this like the core concept is stupid or unwanted.

Easy $1000 sell: cycling / escooter accessory. People already regularly buy expensive sport glasses just for sun and wind protection. With a smart version of them like this, you add open ear headphone, and you add the potential for navigation directions, or even a Bluetooth rear view camera on the back of your helmet to get a virtual mirror.

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The core technology is impressive, and has legitimate use cases.

    But that doesn’t outweigh the enormous privacy concerns these devices raise. They aren’t being angled as an accessory for specific activities, but as everyday wearables. If smart glasses like these became common they would be unavoidable, creating leave of intrusion that’s concerning even without Meta being involved.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    As a cyclist, this is a terrible sell. I already have tech which does all this, and probably does it better, for less.

    I don't need a HUD constantly in my face obscuring the beautiful views. I have sun glasses which fit well with a helmet and wrap around my face to keep the wind out.

    I have a cycling computer, which offers GPS turn by turn, and pairs to power meters, heart rate and radar light. It is mounted on the handlebars in an easy to view place.

    I have bone conducting headphones for music.

    All of this is significantly less than $1000, and if something breaks, I can replace it all individually. I also don't have to wear ridiculous looking sunglasses to listen to my bone conducting headphones.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I don’t necessarily disagree, but this reads a bit like some of the comments on those old Slashdot threads clowning on the first smartphones.

    ‘these things will fail, I already have a camera, a cellphone, and an mp3 player, why would anyone want them all in one device?’

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Exactly my first thought.

    Hope it doesn’t turn out the same way this time around

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    I agree that head mounted displays can be useful, I'm contemplating getting something like it, but just no cameras, please. not in the frame, not backwards, not anywhere.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -3 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    People should still have an expectation of privacy in public spaces to some extent, otherwise the only way is to move to the foresf. One should not have to be concerned about being recorded, especially children (a pdfile can take photos to pick “targets”, so to speak).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The pdfile will do it anyways. What concerns me is all those data will be streamed to Meta. They will relay it to Palantir. The best mass surveillance you can think of.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [+] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Unless society gets revolutionized so that people can remain in their homes as much as they want (and even then), that is not an option.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)