Meta along with Ray-Ban announced new smart glasses and the YT reviewers are praising it.

For me, I don't find them particularly good and being a Meta product, it will be horrible for privacy. Also people can record others without their knowledge with these, hell no!

top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 32 points 1 year ago*

It'll be a hard no for any smart glasses from Meta or Google.

However, in the very distant and not quite guaranteed future, I would consider smart glasses (again, NOT by Meta/Google/etc) for accessibility.

As someone with auditory processing disorder, it would be a game changer if I had the ability to read live closed captions of what someone is saying, while they are talking to me. That would be my only use case.

  • source
  • [–] 31 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    No, and I think they oughta be illegal. I don't want to be recorded.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 58 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    I'll be the outlier and say that given the perfect circumstances, I would buy Smart Glasses. BUT in no way, shape, or form would I buy META Smart Glasses.

    I work a retail job where I'm staring at shelves for like 80% of my shift, it would be dope as hell to have smart glasses and have a video playing in my vision while I'm working.

    But until there are more of an "open source" type Smart Glasses that aren't supported by one of the big companies like Meta or Apple, I'll join the rest of y'all on staying far away from them.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    There’s open source but not video capable. The Brilliant Labs Halo glasses coming in November are more of an informational companion with a peripheral-view display rather than a field of view overlay. So it’s not what you’re looking for now, but maybe a generation or two later it’ll meet your needs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

    No, none of this. It doesn't matter if there are "good guys" versions. It shouldn't be a thing at all because it never goes the good way. They'll be bought out by Google or apple, and add in ads and tracking software. Or they'll get big and change core values. Remember when googles motto was like, don't be evil, or something like that? It definitely isn't that anymore. There is no scenario where this kind of tech doesn't turn bad.

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

    A spec that can be 3d printed and hand assembled by the user (with the exception of the lenses) could work well - hard to enshittify that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago
    [–] 22 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    In concept, they're the kind of sci-fi shit I dreamed of as a kid. The reality is that they'll be locked-down useless trash that you pay out the ass to spy on you.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago

    I wouldn't use anything from Meta, no exceptions.

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

    No! Anyone who buys a phone on their head for $800 is the reason humanity is getting destroyed by corps

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago

    Tech isn't fun anymore. Why do I want to act as a spy camera for big corporations

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago

    Absolutely fucking not. I have literally no interest in being more online. That sounds depressing.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago

    I'm mildly interested in the technology, but I sure as hell wouldn't go anywhere near Meta-branded anything. For starters, based on the demo, the product fucking sucks, but then there's also the privacy and fascism issues.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    Is it a HUD or just a spy tool?

    I gotta wear glasses anyways so it'd be cool if I can get like a pathing over lay with maps and maybe customizable notifications.

    But video calling and just taking poorly framed pictures isn't interesting.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    I wanted a wearable computer with a head-mounted display real bad until the justified backlash against Google Glass ruined it for everyone.

    This is a category of device that cannot be allowed to be implemented as a surveillance-capitalist product, only as Open Hardware.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Even open source, it should not happen. Nobody should have a camera on them that isn't identifiable as recording them. Phones are bad enough but at least you know where the camera is pointing. It's why I keep my phone parallel with the ground in public. Cameras on glasses should not exist in any way, shape or form because you can't know if it's recording you or not. And honestly I want nothing to do with a cyberpunk future.

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

    I mean, pandora's box has already been pried open with a crowbar and the lid thrown into a woodchipper. Hidden cameras have been accessible to the mass public for almost a decade at this point.

    At this point having a model that could be assembled and controlled by the end user means that the recorded data is within their possession. It might be for naught tho, as passerby could have their Meta lenses recording without any knowledge of the consequences.

    But hey, now you can expose your workplace abuse with video evidence in court! XD

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

    That's just straight up not a good future.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    Every idiot wearing this dystopian Stasi shit needs to be punched in the face.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    Remember Google Glass?
    Same story here. Neat tech but no chance buddy

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    If they weren't a dystopian, privacy invading nightmare and had more actual useful features rather than awful AI, and weren't owned and controlled by an evil corporation, then I might be inclined to try them.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    i'd buy glasses that would scramble the vision of smart glasses

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago

    I would not wear one and would never trust anyone that would.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    I saw how impossible it was to actually take the WhatsApp call for Zuckerberg himself.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    Never, and I would be offended if I noticed someone with them looking at me.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Just in a dream scenario where they are

    • Seamless, Not bulky
    • GrapheneOS version for it
    • Physical kill switch for mic, camera and sensors
    • Tor routed, or VPN friendly
    • Only open source software
    • Environmental and Fair wages commitment
    • 100% Repairable and pro-consumer ownership
    • Up to date law for these technologies

    I feel like a phoneless future is quite interesting, even though we will face new issues like not knowing if a person is paying attention to you or not.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago

    When some foss alternative releases at an affordable price, yes.

    See y'all in 2077

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I have a strong use case. As a hearing aid and earpods. Regular in ear units never stay put and aren't comfortable. Once I find a set that is affordable and can take my prescription, (and meet the need) I'm in.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    No, even if it were open source, I don't want to normalize an instrument with such potential for privacy violations.

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

    ... like surveillance cameras and phones? These are quality bad, no?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Haven't given too much thought to be fair. Taking video on the phone is much more obvious, while someone with camera glasses could make the excuse "I'm not recording!" and you'd be hard-pressed to prove it. For surveillance cameras, you could know where they are and evade, throw a rock, or drape something over them, whereas you'd have to go up and snatch the glasses off the wearer.

    I also wouldn't be against it if it were used legitimately to help with a disability, or for specific tasks like a HUD with vitals, etc when doing surgery. But for general use, I'm not comfortable.

  • source
  • parent
  • Unless it can connect to my own server, no.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    I don't think I want my face to be any more punchable than it already is

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    Literally the only thing I would want β€œsmart” glasses to do is play videos or show messages from select apps. Ditch the shitty camera, don’t ever connect to an β€œAI” service, and for the love of god, don’t be made to lock into a big tech company..

  • source
  • I would kinda like glasses that could display my heart rate and running pace, so I would not have to look at my watch.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Nope. I can wait for the chip implant to broadcast ads in my sleep.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago
    [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    Fuck no. I don't need to record my life to share it with the world. Even if people would be interested in it, why do I need to be sharing so much of my life.

  • source
  • From meta? Not a chance unless there's a way to completely free them from any meta related software.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Not from Meta for sure.

    And for all the people hating on these there are real world applications that could truly help folks. I’m very ADHD. My brain goes on tangents. I forget mid sentence what I was going to say. I have a terrible time remembering peoples names. These are all things this type of technology could help me with. But they would have to be implemented with the correct privacy guards in place. And I wouldn’t touch anything from Zuck with a 39 Β½ foot pole.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago*

    These are valid reasons that I'd consider getting one for myself. But big tech says fuck accessibility, let's cram it full of bullshit instead. And that's on top of the privacy concerns that they seem focused on shoving under the rug rather than making it obvious if someone's using these.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    I would buy smart tech in the future but only once capitalism has disintegrated into a new world social order (i.e. the distant future) otherwise the motives of the tech company might be questionable and who knows what secret control crap they might add without your knowledge.

  • source
  • Oh awesome can't wait to have my privacy invaded by every random yahoo dipshit tech bro fuckwad on the street with these bloody glasses. Love being recorded and logged for Zuckerberg's data wank bank.

    Won't buy them, won't interact with people who have them. Will cut off friendships over this, no problem.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Isn’t tech already creepy enough, how’s this going to make things better, I can see limited good uses cases as opposed to how it’s being used most of the time right now

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    The use-cases that I see advertised are not things that I do in my day-to-day. I usually place my phone on a drawer or leave it in my backpack - I definitely don't want it on my face.

    So, to me, smart glasses feel like an uncomfortable gimmick at this point. Maybe there is something amazing about them that has not yet clicked with me, but for the time being I don't see me buying one of these for the foreseeable future.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Depends which company makes them. Probably not

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    I love the idea of smart glasses, and would happily buy them. However, it'd 1. Need to have 3rd party app support and 2. Be able to work without connecting to any tech company's servers. I've gotten used to my android phone that doesn't have google play services, and I'll never go back to having a device that phones home without my permission. In a perfect world I'd like to have some FOSS firmware and OS to run on them, but I'd be willing to go without as long as I could disable traffic to all major tech company servers.

    Unfortunately these requirements will likely mean I won't be getting smart glasses any time soon

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago*

    Made by Meta - hell no.

    Made by someone else - possibly.

    My main interests are navigation guidance on a HUD, real-time translation, and to a lesser degree teleprompting for speeches or presentations.

    Wouldn't even really care if they had a camera or not - though what I've seen from the ones that do, being able to look at something that is in another language and ask it to translate it for you is pretty seriously cool. Can't imagine I'd use cameras for much else - but honestly with how uncomfortable they'd make everyone around me, I'd be quite willing to just forego them and pull out my phone to snap a pic and translate something that is text.

    I was looking at the Even G1 pretty hard but then read some reviews that say the real-time translation is TERRIBLE, and to make it slightly less terrible you have to pay subscription fees, so I unsubscribed from their mailing list pretty quick.

    Saw one on a Kickstarter recently that also piqued my interest, but they have cameras and were pretty bulky ... I may wait a generation or three for them to shrink down a bit more.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Camera, full color discreet display, and open source/*nix based? Yes, I would throw a couple grand down for that.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I know it would be cool but it's still fked up if everyone could film one another without even noticing

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    That seems to be the common complaint in this entire comment section. I believe this is something than could be regulated by the law maker. For exampleβ€”as far as I've heardβ€”phones must make a shutter sound when taking photos in Korea. A reasonable proposal would be to add a red light off to the side of the glasses that must blink if you are actively recording by law.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    I'd rather strap my cell phone to my face.

  • source
  • [+] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    So many confidentiality violations with these. And if at the gym? Yikes. Hard no.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    No. They'll probably find a way to put ads in your field of vision momentarily.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Nothing smart technology promises over dumb technology is something I ever wanted in the first place.

    I just want phones to be phones, TVs to be TVs, and glasses to be glasses.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Not a chance in hell.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I'd love them, but like others have said, not if made by Meta, and not if they rely on sending all my data to cloud services to function.

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

    I would love a pair of smart glasses to augment what I'm seeing... Give me context, keep me informed, allow me to monitor things closely, yet passively, and let me do it all inconspicuously and unobtrusively! Even better if it has eye tracking navigation.

    Oh, and make sure the hardware and software are open source and self-hosted. If it has all of that I'm in, 100%.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    Open source and self hosted doesn't protect others from you recording surreptitiously. You're totally understanding the problem.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Apparently, the Glasshole lesson was not learned.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Only of its running open source. Otherwise, probably not.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    its possible. Its hard to say until you start using something. It would make it more like it if it was basically a screen and maybe camera and mic.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago
    [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Why would I?

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Maybe if I wore glasses already I would potentially consider one, if it had no camera and was open enough to let me do whatever I wanted on it.

    But I don't wear glasses so it would still be an extra thing I would need to carry with me and for that purpose I have a phone already.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Not unless they had some sort of UI in the glass that you can focus on, and some sort of visual Augmented reality system.

    If it's just a bullshit piece of plastic with a camera that speaks to you then why the fuck would i stick that on my face? Just make it a necklace or something there's no reason for it to be glasses.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    I want to be able to instantly snap a picture of what I am looking at when I am riding my bike.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    So here's the deal. I can't understand people. Between the ADHD and general hearing issues I would pay a lot to have the ability to have subtitles on people. I feel left out on a lot of conversations due to not being able to follow along.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Nice try, industry shill.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    No. I have no need for this piece of equipment. I don't want to wear the internet on my face. We asked for hoverboards, holograms, and flying cars.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago*

    probably not unless I'm developing software for one, I think the angle meta is aiming for is kind of dumb but I do see how they could be useful in industrial settings.. but then again I guess microsoft tried and failed at that with the hololens

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago
    [–] 1 point 1 year ago
    load more comments
    view more: next β€Ί