• batmaniam@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I cannot emphasize enough how unwilling I’d be to interact with someone that has these.

    • BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Good thing that the kind of person who would were these in public doesn’t interact with others much anyway

  • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    Cool… now everyone can be a part of their respective surveillance states. While Meta makes a buck on selling your feed to governments and law enforcement.

  • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    25 minutes ago

    For me at least, the killer feature is going to be tagging faces with names. Face blindness sucks.

    Edit: For the downvoters, in case you’re unaware, I’m talking about a real life disability.

    Face blindness, or prosopagnosia, is a condition where individuals cannot recognize familiar faces, including their own, despite having normal vision and intellectual function. It can be congenital (present from birth), developmental, or acquired due to brain damage from injury, stroke, or disease. People with prosopagnosia rely on other cues like voice, hair, or clothing to identify people.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 hours ago

      And that’s also the main reason I don’t want these to exist. I don’t want to be identified by random people, and I especially don’t want police to have access to something like this. People I spend time with know who I am, and I’m fine missing out on random same place/same time coincidences with people I knew from high school or something.

      • Joelk111@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 hour ago

        I’d want them to use a local database that you’ve created. After you’ve met someone, the glasses could be like “remember this person?” and you could choose to save them or not, or something like that.

      • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Prosopagnosia, also known as face blindness, is a cognitive disorder of face perception in which the ability to recognize familiar faces, including one’s own face, is impaired, while other aspects of visual processing and intellectual functioning remain intact.

        I’m talking about recognising people I’ve met and know.

        • markko@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          39 minutes ago

          I don’t see how that could realistically happen without whichever company is behind the glasses taking all that juicy biometric data for themselves though.

          • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            30 minutes ago

            It’s up to the govts to protect the rights of the people. If you’re in the US, you’re already on the verge of losing all rights anyway. For the rest of the world, there’s no reason to think we couldn’t regulate it in a reasonably privacy-friendly way. Local face tagging and recognition could work without cloud access, so that you’d only have access to information you keyed in yourself about somebody.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          44 minutes ago

          Sure. My point is that same technology can and will be used to violate peoples’ privacy, and in some cases could create dangerous situations (e.g. domestic violence victim being recognized by their attacker).

          • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            33 minutes ago

            (e.g. domestic violence victim being recognized by their attacker)

            Not sure how or why the attacker wouldn’t be able to recognise them normally.

            My point is that same technology can and will be used to violate peoples’ privacy

            Every technology can be used to do shitty stuff, and in most cases has been. It’s up to the govts to protect the rights of the people. If you’re in the US, you’re already on the verge of losing all rights anyway. For the rest of the world, there’s no reason to think we couldn’t regulate it in a reasonably privacy-friendly way. Local face tagging and recognition could work without cloud access, so that you’d only have access to information you keyed in yourself about somebody.

    • yeehaw@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Yup, can’t wait to be tracked without my consent everywhere I go because of other people that want to pay money to become employed for free by private and government companies.

      • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Way to belittle people with disabilities. In case you’re unaware, I’m talking about a real condition.

        Prosopagnosia, also known as face blindness, is a cognitive disorder of face perception in which the ability to recognize familiar faces, including one’s own face, is impaired, while other aspects of visual processing and intellectual functioning remain intact.

  • Cybersteel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Oh man I’m wearing ray bans. I should get a new pair else I’d get lynched for it… again…

  • popjam@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    13 hours ago

    I wonder what the result of mass adoption of these will be on society - surely there will have to be “no smart glasses” rules set up in places where you would expect confidentiality like hospitals and classrooms. Also what the ability to instantly watch video content or listen to anything with the click of your fingers (without anyone knowing) will do to people’s attention spans. Things in public will have a much higher chance of being recorded by someone, for better or for worse. If someone like Elon Musk makes his own with his own “woke free” xAI (which he has so far been unsuccessful in moulding to his viewpoints), people could have an immediate propagandized perspective and answer for anything they see in real life.

    • magguzu@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 hours ago

      surely there will have to be “no smart glasses” rules

      They have this rule for ebikes at the lake I love to walk and the kids are zooming by anyway. I think we’ll struggle to enforce it and that really sucks. I hope this fails. It’s hard not to be pessimistic about it, as much as I can see some legitimate use cases. I just don’t trust big tech with it, least of all Meta.

  • masterspace@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    14 hours ago

    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.

    • thehatfox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      10 hours ago

      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.

    • OrgunDonor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      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.

      • MurrayL@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        6 hours ago

        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?’

        • jve@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Exactly my first thought.

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

        • magguzu@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Heh…these days I kinda long for devices for for specific purposes again 😅 and I’m a software engineer.

      • masterspace@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

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

        Oh yeah, totally valid point you raise, I’m sure every single cyclist for all eternity going forward already owns every bit of cycling technology and no one will ever have to buy new ones.

        I mean why didn’t they ask whether or not /u/orgundonor already bought a cycling computer before they developed a new one? What were they possibly thinking???

        I don’t need a HUD constantly in my face obscuring the beautiful views.

        Yeah, good thing it’s a small transparent display that can just pop up a small arrow when you need it. This is totally a death knell for the technology as a whole, and not a minor quibble about software design.

        I have sun glasses which fit well with a helmet and wrap around my face to keep the wind out.

        Yes, just like the display-free cycling smart glasses that Meta released alongside these. It’s not hard to imagine the next version of them including a display.

        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.

        You know where’s easier to view? You know what you can view even if you’re running, skate/snow boarding, etc?

        I have bone conducting headphones for music.

        Hey, everyone, check out this guy’s bone conduction headphones!

        I also don’t have to wear ridiculous looking sunglasses to listen to my bone conducting headphones.

        LMFAO you bought cycling specific sunglasses. Yes, you already do look ridiculous. Everyone is already making Tour de France wannabe jokes, but you don’t care because they’re practical. The same will be the case here.

        Literally everything you said is just dumb hater bullshit. If I want to see someone be as pessimistic as possible to the point of being blindly inaccurate, I would just go rewatch black mirror.

    • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Sell your bike to afford them. Easy. It’s another pointless gimmick, like 3D TV or the Metaverse and virtual shopping. Zuckerberg had one idea and got lucky, it’s been wasting money since.

    • horse@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 hours ago

      To me it seems like a thing that sounds kinda cool on paper, but is not actually that useful in practice. We already have the ability to do real time translations or point the camera at something to get more information via AI with our smartphones, but who actually uses that on the regular? It’s just not useful or accurate enough in its current state and having it always available as a HUD isn’t going to change that imo. Being able to point a camera at something and have AI tell me “that’s a red bicycle” is a cool novelty the first few times, but I already knew that information just by looking at it. And if I’m trying to communicate with someone in a foreign language using my phone to translate for me, I’ll just feel like a dork.

      • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        8 hours ago

        real time translations or point the camera at something to get more information via AI with our smartphones, but who actually uses that on the regular?

        Anybody living in a foreign country with a different language.

    • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      14 hours ago

      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.

      • FreedomAdvocate
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        13 hours ago

        If you don’t have cameras you instantly lose a tonne of potential amazing functionality.

        If you’re in public you have no expectation of privacy, so someone being able to photograph you or record you with glasses is no different to being able to do it with a camera or phone.

        • thatonecoder@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          12 hours ago

          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).

          • d7sdx@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            12 hours ago

            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.

  • FishFace@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    19 hours ago

    most people do not generally wear glasses

    I don’t know about other countries but about two thirds of Americans wear glasses. A good number of them will be older adults with age-related long-sightedness for which they may only wear reading glasses, but this is a basic mistake.

    • Telorand@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      …but this is a basic mistake.

      They just fell prey to one of the classic blunders!

      • felbane@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        13 hours ago

        The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less well known is this: Never go in against a septuagenarian when blindness is on the line!

    • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      18 hours ago

      There are also plenty of people who wear glasses who don’t need them. It’s weird to act like Plano lenses don’t exist.

        • Frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          I sorta do, too, but in a specific way. I don’t strictly need glasses. In my late 20s, distant objects starting getting a little fuzzy, but not enough that driving was a problem. I’m in my early 40s now, and my prescription is basically the same as what I got back then. I’m sure that will start to change in my mid 40s (the muscle that controls your eye lens tends to weaken by then), but I basically spent all my genetic lottery points on my eyes.

          Anyway, I wear glasses with a suit to kink events. If it didn’t come off as slightly oppressive, suits wouldn’t be used in BDSM.

  • Fizz@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    21 hours ago

    These glasses are actually insanely cool. I’d pay so much for an open source pair and the band.

    It sucks that no matter what cool new hardware meta comes out with will always be ruined by them stuffing in “meta integration”.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      They certainly are, but they’re also a bit dystopic. I don’t want random people looking up stats about my online presence, and I certainly don’t want the police doing that either.

      I can see tons of cool applications, but also tons of ethical issues.

    • melfie@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Agreed, I’d totally buy a Meta Quest as well if they didn’t zuck up all their devices with spyware that can’t be removed.

      • masterspace@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        It would be really nice if every country would enact digital privacy laws so that Meta’s business model was just forced to be better. They genuinely have some of the best and most accessible VR/AR hardware available.

        It would of course be nicer if a more ethical competitor stepped up in a serious way but no one seems that interested. It’s interesting that the vast majority of Meta’s business model is being extremely good at copying or buying out competitors but with VR they’re basically the only ones actually sinking serious money into making it a thing.

    • QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Seriously, an open source version would be awesome. You could connect it to your own server running whatever local models you want without needing to worry about that audio/video being processed by some large corporation willing to sell you out along with your data.

      • thehatfox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        10 hours ago

        An open source smart glasses platform would be a much better direction.

        But that only provides security assurances for the wearer of the glasses. Anyone else interacting with them doesn’t know how they are configured, and what is being recorded and/or shared.

  • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    21 hours ago

    I can think of one useful function. I have a lot of friends who are totally blind, and there’s an app called Be My Eyes, where a sighted person can take a look at something through your phone’s camera. But, being blind, a lot of blind people are absolutely terrible at aiming cameras, because they can’t see what they’re aiming at.

    In this case, the object ends up out of the camera’s field of view, or at an angle, or upside down, etc. etc. etc. Whereas, I think having a pair of smart glasses on your face would make the camera platform be much steadier.

    • eldebryn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      19 hours ago

      I can imagine that haptic/soft vibrations could also be used to steer a blind person towards an object that needs more focus by the camera.

      As you say, it has a lot of potential for accessibility and people with handicaps like that, but it’s not direction that tech, the economy, or the world itself is interested in right now…

        • eldebryn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          18 hours ago

          Yeah great. Capitalist market without socialist values means the elite can overcome their handicaps and live long lives with a physical form sculpted to their wants.

          Call me when it’s done without a metric tonne of exploitation.

          • FishFace@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 hours ago

            This comment seems to lack perspective. In countries where medicine is socialised, this technology wasn’t invented. Could it have been? Yes, absolutely. But in the reality we are faced with, it was invented with capitalist values. Now it can be assessed and potentially taken up by public health systems.

          • Aneb@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            13 hours ago

            I’ll give you an upvote. I feel thats fair. Like you guys if you can’t make buck you lose a buck. (Any of you read Uglies?) We really need a reset on the capitalist regime imo and instate a socialist platform that is by the people and for the people. Fuck with this AI nonsense too

            • eldebryn@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 hours ago

              It’s really bad yes. I’m no communist but I really think we should have had mixed economies and better tax policies to keep the rich in check. AI and other automation could have led to us working 20hrs a week on average while everything runs smooth, if used for the benefit of all.

              Right now they have snowballed so much money and power and tech that I just can’t see how we can out of outside of revolts. Democracy has been corrupted almost everywhere and people are being manipulated into thinking other religions or immigrant are the problem.

              There was a time we banned cloning to prevent the rich from making armies to exploit. But religion/ethics made that easy. We never considered doing the same with tech and important means of production.

    • JackDark@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      18 hours ago

      That’s intentional.

      Smart glasses also raise many privacy concerns, as their cameras and microphones may be recording at any given time, which can be unnerving to people. When Google launched their Google Glass smart glasses, this led to the coining of the term ‘glasshole‘ for people who refuse to follow perceived proper smart glasses etiquette.

  • Zak@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Smart glasses also raise many privacy concerns, as their cameras and microphones may be recording at any given time, which can be unnerving to people.

    This reaction has always struck me as, at best ill-informed. If I search for spy camera glasses on Amazon, I can find much cheaper and less obvious options to record people without their knowledge. If glasses are getting extra scrutiny lately, maybe I’d be better off with a spy camera pen or something like this which can be disguised as part of a button-up shirt.

    Of course actually using any of these to record people without their consent in most situations makes you an asshole, but that capability already existed and is continually expanding.

    • JustTesting@lemmy.hogru.ch
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      20 hours ago

      sure, but there the spying is the purpose, whereas with the glasses it’s incidental.

      you don’t buy such gadgets if you don’t intend to spy, but people would buy meta glasses for other reason, and meta being able to spy on you is just a side-effect. Plus it’ a matter of scale, this has the potential of being much more prominent than some spy camera.

      • Zak@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Meta spying is its own issue, and I think a very legitimate concern.

        I’m understanding the concern the article mentions about smart glasses in general (independent of who manufactures them) being the user recording people. That’s what people seemed to be upset about when Google Glass launched as well.

        • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          13 hours ago

          I think the reason this is a problem with smart glasses but not with spy pens is that smart glasses are more accessible. I mean, you don’t just keep a spy pen on your person, or even buy one, in case it will be useful, right? but the smart glasses are just there, on your head. and why not take a few stealthy photos if I can just click and its one, nobody knowing? or even just that you take a photo of something, but there are others in the field of view who have no idea.

          and not just with Meta. I don’t think other companies either can be trusted with tech like this. Certainly not in this age.

          • a4ng3l@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 hours ago

            Whoever exhibits that mentality you describe hasn’t waiting for meta to be a creep.

            • petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              9 hours ago

              Yeah, they do. You never heard of a crime of opportunity?

              Why do you lock your doors at night? You know that anyone who wants to get in can just rake the god damn lock, right? Most people don’t want to get into your house, and the ones who do will be able to enter anyway, so what pathology drives you to waste your time like this?

      • Telorand@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        “Incidental”—this is Meta we’re talking about, and you can exchange them with any other technofacist and it still applies.

        But I wholly agree with you that they know exactly what they are doing. This is how they get people to “participate” in their platforms and algorithms, whether they want to or not.

        • JustTesting@lemmy.hogru.ch
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          I don’t disagree. I meant for users it is incidental. Most users probably wouldn’t buy them with spying as the main purpose(they just also don’t really care that it can spy). making them much more widespread than something where spying was the main use-case, making the problem worse.

          And as someone else mentioned, once you did get it, the temptation for using it for spying is there for a user. Making it worse than e.g. a spy pen imo, as with that you’d need the intent to spy first, and then buy it, but with this, you buy it for whatever reason and then think “oh, I could just spy now” since you already own the device, which I’d argue leads to more overall spying, so to speak. Maybe you see a video online and go “oh, I can just do that, right now, no effort on my part, since I already own this device”.

          And for Meta it’s like tracking cookies on crack

      • Zak@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        18 hours ago

        This was never the concern that caused people to call users “glassholes”.