31 ms·
Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses
- pzmarzly 3y agoI really hope it'll be possible to use the cameras in voice calls. First person PoV would be way better than phone camera PoV, and it would free my hand from carrying the phone in front of me.
- itomato 3y agoWhen I see something like this the first thing I think is “what sinister thing is disguised as harmless accessory?” The proven benefit for meta outweighs any potential I might be sold.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- rychco 3y agoI like the idea, as long as I can use it 100% independently of Facebook/Meta services (which I don’t use).
- ToDougie 3y agoI'm having very complicated feelings about this.
- pstuart 3y agoIndeed. The tech is impressive but the the unintended consequences make me very uneasy.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- TwoFactor 3y agoInteresting that the price is only around $100 more than regular Ray-Bans
- tpmx 3y agoSubsidized by Meta for getting them more data? I would also imagine that Meta is paying them handsomely for the obvious brand risk here - getting Ray-Bans associated with glasshole behaviour. The Ray-Ban brand is owned by the Italian-French EssilorLuxottica conglomerate. Market cap 74B EUR. (Meta market cap: 770B USD.)
- KaiserPro 3y agolol, facebook can barely get the glasses to play sound reliably, they aren't spying on you with these glasses.
- tpmx 3y agoThere's very often a large difference between the v1 capability and the long term aspiration, both in technical capabilities and market capture. Compare Windows 1.0 (https://winworldpc.com/product/windows-10/101 https://winworldpc.com/product/windows-10/101) with Windows 10/11.
- capableweb 3y agoAnd also teams within the product pushing for different things, like the recent Google Marketing Team vs Google Chrome Team wanting different approaches.
- KaiserPro 3y agoWindows 1.0 was release 38 years ago, microsoft has changed persona at least three times since then. Not that we shouldnt be suspicious of facebook, but we really must actually seek evidence rather than just decry them as witches. It lets other companies get away with loads simply because they are well liked.
- tpmx 3y agoWhich is it, they are incompetent or they are just misunderstood?
- dangerlibrary 3y agoThe only lesson learned from google glass was "these look dorky, but are otherwise perfect."
- maxwell 3y agoHaha a guy wore them in a bar in downtown Vegas in 2013, and I watched multiple people approach him and tell him to take them off and stop recording everything. I never saw another pair IRL again.
- netsharc 3y agoIf I were working for the Zuckborg, I wonder how I could make these things socially acceptable. Host an event with A-list beautiful people and pay them to wear these things and post all over social media, to make the glasses be desirable for the influencable? Though not many celebs might want to be associated with the Zuckborg, nowadays.
- cvccvroomvroom 3y agoLike the college student at open mic night who can't sing but has a gaggle of supportive friends and family who applaud profusely, there's a cult of toxic positivity surrounding him who refuse to be honest, adult supervision.
- maxwell 3y agoSounds a bit like Tony Hsieh, who got us all out to the bars in downtown Vegas in 2013 in the first place. Does seem like Zuck has healthier hobbies and a different sort of discipline. That said, yes, the first time I met Tony he was sitting at a bar with a meat grinder, yes I spotted him swinging around Slim Jims in a mariachi suit atop a mecha grasshopper shooting flames out its mouth one time, but I guess I don't image he ever killed a mammal for no reason and served it cold to a vegetarian (he loved his llamas! RIP)
- spaceprogrammer 3y agono display? too bad
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- WesternWind 3y agoI'm not personally in love with the idea of smart glasses that don't have a display of some sort.
- throwaway-blaze 3y agoThe technology for displays (resolution, battery/power needs, field of view issues) is so many years away that it makes sense to try and go with basic touch/swipe and audio UI now. There are great use cases for a device like this...no doubt with a display ability it would be truly incredible but no reason not to be working on this today.
- operatingthetan 3y agoIs there a market for this? Stealth smart glasses that force you to indicate you are recording? Are live-streamers going to use this? Don't people want to be using their phone anyway? >The Capture LED lets others know when you’re capturing content or going live. If the LED is covered, you’ll be notified to clear it.
- jejeyyy77 3y agofor sure - ppl are strapping go pros to their heads.
- l33t7332273 3y agoThey do this generally while doing some kind of movement based activity, the kind of activity where you need to strap a camera on, not wear a set ofglasses.
- function_seven 3y agoCan you list activities that you're thinking of? Because a lot of active sports are compatible with "wearing glasses". Surfing, snowboarding, rock climbing, water skiing, mountain biking, etc. Sure, scuba divers still need some specialized gear, but there's tons of room in the sports segment for this kind of product.
- operatingthetan 3y ago> Because a lot of active sports are compatible with "wearing glasses". Surfing, snowboarding, rock climbing, water skiing, mountain biking, etc. I would not say any of those are compatible with wearing fashion-style sunglasses. I've lost pairs of glasses paddleboarding and kayaking before. I'm a mountain biker as well and crashes can be violent, I wouldn't trust glasses to stay on your face. All of those sports require firm attachment for a device worth more than say $100.
- robertlray 3y ago
- sp3000 3y agoAny good argument that anyone can think of for a scenario where smart eyewear will not be as ubiquitous as smart phones eventually? I understand the privacy argument, but that is not going to be enough. The ability to think or blink in a certain way and capture anything you see is too powerful a tool, alongside the augmented reality that is coming.
- packetlost 3y agoNah, I think it's the future. We don't have to have cameras on them, but it does greatly hinder their utility.
- parl_match 3y agoEventually? Sure. Maybe. It wont be a capture story, it'll be a consumption and interaction story. The biggest thing preventing that future is hardware, and considering how you're brushing up against hard physics, I honestly don't see smart eyeglasses that look like normal eyelgasses playing out in any serious capacity for a looooong time.
- ChicagoBoy11 3y agoI was one of the ridiculous-looking people who had a Google Glass when it came out. It was clunky, and lasted a very short time, and your face would get hot, and it had no real AR interaction with the real world. But. If you could squint at the rough edges, and project forward what this could be like with more advanced tech, it was a no-brainer for me that it will be a far superior form factor for what we do with the phone. For 2 weeks, I tried hard NOT using a phone and just using it. While it was difficult (mostly because I couldn't have a conversation with anyone that didn't begin with them asking what was on my head), when I went back to the phone I so strongly noticed how much I was craning my neck, how annoying it was to interact with tech like that, and it kinda felt terrible.
- parl_match 3y agoGoogle Glass user here as well, and the one thing that form factor is missing is input (possibly solved by AVP with its eye and finger gestures).
- nrki 3y agoThe Circle's "completely transparent" vibes.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- jejeyyy77 3y agofinally, smart glasses that look good.
- cvccvroomvroom 3y agoHave you seen or worn them in real life? The previous gen looked normal online but absolutely craptastic in person.
- zip1234 3y agoThey are slightly bigger but not everyone has the same face shape. Looks like they made them even slimmer in this gen and have more options.
- DiabloD3 3y agoCan dang do something about the corporate spam that keeps popping up on HN? I don't think meta, or Apple, or the rest of these companies need help advertising products.
- Philpax 3y agoWell, I don’t think you can really stop people from talking about new technology on a forum for hackers…
- mometsi 3y agoA tech giant is using luxury branding to encourage people to put networked cameras on their faces. I think that's worth my attention even if I'm not the intended customer.
- toyg 3y agoBecause YCombinator is not "corporate"...? Dude.
- gruturo 3y agoI dislike Facebook as much as the next guy, probably more, but this stuff is news for hackers. And it's not even particularly beneficial for them to be featured on HN, we're a rather critical audience.
- dredmorbius 3y agoYou can: 1. Flag content you feel isn't appropriate for HN. 2. Email mods at hn@ycombinator.com requesting that specific sites be deprecated and/or penalised. As for the latter, I'm aware that general news and ideological sites are deprecated. I'm not aware that any mainstream corporate sites which have not engaged in vote-juicing practices are penalised. There are those who share your weariness of promotional material from ... a certain commercial toothed segment, let's say.
- dang 3y agoThe test for a good HN post isn't whether something is corporate, it's whether it gratifies intellectual curiosity. I of course agree with you that most corporate PR and advertising doesn't remotely clear that bar, but occasionally it does and such posts are fine on HN. This is one of those cases where it's really helpful to know specifically what we're optimizing for and what we don't need to worry about: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=curiosity%20optimiz%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor....
- ziziyO 3y agoI don't understand how putting a camera on a pair of glasses is what meta/rayban wanted to spend time on.
- cush 3y agoYeah it’s their looooong term bet.
- ProllyInfamous 3y ago"For sunglass creeps to capture more long-term memories." —Some Rayban Executive, probably.
- standardUser 3y agoI wonder how much the acknowledged the creep factor internally, or if they just kind of danced around it. But it must be their target demographic.
- ProllyInfamous 3y agoMeanwhile: Apple's internal teams already acknowledge this... by showing [digitally, with outward-facing LCDs] the wearer's "eyes" whenever they are able to see [and where they're looking, approximately?].
- mike10921 3y agoI'm no fan of either company but the general concept is that Meta specializes in software not fashion, so partnering with Rayban will allow people to feel fashionable while using Meta's device (and of course allowing meta to follow their every move).
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- e4e5 3y agoWhy when I press accept cookies it just reloads the website and shows me the same banner? Not even Facebook can get this to work?
- galbar 3y agoAfter three tries it loaded the right page. Disgusting pattern, IMHO
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- bjnewman85 3y agoif you cover the LED notification light you will get a notification to uncover it. Surely that will stop anyone from covering it.
- its_ethan 3y agoIt could notify you and then disable any recording until it's uncovered again..
- pseudalopex 3y agoIt could. But why would they not say it will?
- CapsAdmin 3y agoSurely that would be a PR disaster so I must assume they don't allow recording when covered.
- pseudalopex 3y agoCameras designed for covert recording are sold without public outcry.
- netsharc 3y agoI wonder if the easy mod would be to replace the LED with invisible IR LED (then again the makers have probably considered this).
- RockRobotRock 3y agoat that point make your own glasses with a much tinier and less obvious camera.
- bragr 3y agoI'm not interested in this particular device, but after almost being hit by cars several times this month while walking my dog, I am starting to warm to the idea of some form of "dash cam" for walking.
- maxwell 3y agoWhat are you going to do, bring footage to your local police station and get laughed out?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- colpabar 3y agoTo play devil's advocate: be careful what you wish for. With the way that things are going, police will probably have zero issue getting whatever video from your "dash cam" they deem necessary to do their jobs.
- sneak 3y agoPer bragr's comment, they are not doing their jobs now. What makes you think they will do their jobs in the future?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- tempsy 3y agothe only people who will buy these are creeps who want to secretly record other people in public
- function_seven 3y agoThis isn't true. For one, it'll not be secret. The LED will be on. Also, these glasses do not match the appearance of their "analog" namesakes. I just compared the Wayfarers on that page to the pair I have right here, and the thickness is quite noticeable. These things are chunky! I think having it to record snippets of my golf game would be neat. Every par 3 I tee off is a hole-in-one opportunity, and how cool would that be to have that moment captured? Or grabbing some footage of a concert without holding my phone up like a dick. A lot of uses cases for chest-strapped GoPros will switch to these for sure.
- dredmorbius 3y agoBlack tape and paint both exist. Requiring The Rest of The World have 100% situational awareness to look for the glowing specs is also frankly ridiculous.
- function_seven 3y agoI guess. Meta claims these will know when the LED is blocked, but that's probably circumventable as well. And little hidden cameras also already exist, and people filming in public is already a thing, so I don't really see how this specific product will change things in any significant way.
- dredmorbius 3y agoThis specific product is backed by one of the largest corporations on the planet led by an absolute ruler who is at best amoral if not absolutely immoral, and has a long, long, long, long, long history of violating privacy, breaking promises regarding privacy,[1] and of refusing to accept responsibility of the consequences arising from doing so. There are other amoral and immoral players out there, certainly. Few have Facebook's resources, however. "The trust me, dumb fucks" still seems to be his guiding compass. As for hidden cameras and unauthorised video: regulation is required. I'd suggest attacking the trade, transfer, and publishing of such video, as well as a strong right-to-privacy legislation. I'm not holding my breath, however. ________________________________ Notes: 1. "Why Zuckerberg's 14-Year Apology Tour Hasn't Fixed Facebook", Zeynep Tufekci, <https://www.wired.com/story/why-zuckerberg-15-year-apology-tour-hasnt-fixed-facebook/ https://www.wired.com/story/why-zuckerberg-15-year-apology-t...> 2. <https://www.esquire.com/uk/latest-news/a19490586/mark-zuckerberg-called-people-who-handed-over-their-data-dumb-f/ https://www.esquire.com/uk/latest-news/a19490586/mark-zucker...>
- golemiprague 3y ago[dead]
- 4ndrewl 3y agoGood news for those who don't want to be caught on camera "The Capture LED lets others know when you're capturing content or going live. If the LED is covered, you'll be notified to clear it." So that's nice.
- luckluckgoosed 3y agoMakes me think of the power dynamic between smart glass wearers and bystanders as a social problem and not a technical one: https://spectrum.ieee.org/ar-glasses https://spectrum.ieee.org/ar-glasses
- trey-jones 3y agoThe jailbreak will be out tomorrow.
- wilsonnb3 3y agoBlack nail polish is out today
- knodi123 3y ago"If the LED is covered, you will be required to uncover it."
- ladzoppelin 3y agoCan you post where it says that, all I can find is "you will be notified"?
- wildrhythms 3y agoIt's right on the linked page, but you're right it doesn't say anything about being 'required' to uncover it. >Bystander privacy >The Capture LED lets others know when you’re capturing content or going live. If the LED is covered, you’ll be notified to clear it.
- xyst 3y agoDid we not learn anything from the failure of “Google Glasses” lol
- clintfred 3y agoI feel like's it's inevitable that these types of devices will eventually become useful enough and stylish enough to start catching on. Companies have to start somewhere. Google Glasses were a neat toy, but pretty far ahead of the tech's capabilities. One could make a similar argument for these new glasses as well, since they have no AR component.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- jcims 3y agoI just pre-ordered one. I like the concept. It’ll probably suck but it’ll be fun to try.
- nerdjon 3y agoI can't help but feel like "smart glasses" is really pushing what this is? I feel like the vast majority of people when they see the words "smart glasses" they probably think some sort of AR tech, or at the very least some sort of screen. And yet this is really just glasses with something like AirPods stuck in it with a camera connected to your phone. Super smart. Society is far far from ready to answer the privacy questions of something like this, but when has Meta ever cared about that so why not just release it...
- cvccvroomvroom 3y agoThey're voice assistants with a button on the glasses. It's a half-baked idea that lacks utility.
- nerdjon 3y agoThat is what I don't understand, I can do that with my AirPods already. The only "innovation" here is the camera. But while isn't horrible is far from anything I could call "smart glasses". I mean it isn't like it is even all self contained, it's tethered to a phone. I just don't see what this is really bringing to the table.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- 14 3y agoI have to give it to Meta on this one. These look stylish and cool and they are at a price point that I could justify. About $400 Canadian. That means a lot of people can adopt this technology. I think Google was just a bit premature for peoples comfort level but I really wanted to see it expand. The con I see is pretty soon there will be no privacy. Facial recognition will make a record of where you are and someone will have caught your face on camera. But in a world heading towards deep fakes maybe this will be a good thing. These are going to also be awesome for Youtube videos I can not wait to get a set and start doing motorcycle repair videos where what I see is what you see so you can know exactly what I am looking at.
- manc_lad 3y agoI don't wear glasses. I don't live in a sunny country. Unless I'm wearing flat and clear lenses I would infrequently wear these casually. I like the concept. Just not sure about market fit outside a people who wear glasses, sunny locations and hardcore fans. Although that's a lot of people!
- Zaheer 3y agoReminds me of Snapchat's Spectacles: https://www.spectacles.com/ https://www.spectacles.com/ Forgot those even existed.
- euniceee3 3y agoUsed these for a year. Great content, but the stabilization is trash. That and exporting without using the Snapchat app made me question if it is really worth sharing the most intimate moments.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- cobertos 3y agoDidn't these fail[1]? How are these glasses different? I can't imagine the market for this sort or thing has gotten _that_ much bigger since Snapchat's try at this. [1]: https://mashable.com/article/snap-spectacles-warehouse-demand https://mashable.com/article/snap-spectacles-warehouse-deman...
- Gh0stRAT 3y agoDid Snapchat's have really good audio quality that doesn't disturb the people around you? Pair that with modern AI assistant breakthroughs and it starts to seem pretty compelling. They also look way less dorky than Snapchat's attempt.
- throwaway2562 3y agoRecording everything you see is the very opposite of “living in the moment” as they describe their product promise. Not to mention, of course, the intrusion into the lives of the people you’re recording, whose “moment” is not your moment to record. Their language positively reeks of lies. I’m sure the glasses will be popular, and there’s nothing we can do about it.
- hintymad 3y agoWe should really give it to Meta for their tenacity. While Google canceled its projects left and right, including Google Podcasts to celebrate their 25-year birthday and Google Glass, Meta perseveres and pushes the state-of-the-art.
- cvccvroomvroom 3y agoThere's no tenancy here. They're not AR. They're not even at par with Glass.
- theodric 3y agoThis looks to me like a rehashing of 2016's Snapchat Spectacles combined with the bone-conduction bluetooth temples available on numerous cheap AliExpress sunglasses.
- jansan 3y agoMeta is absolutely despearate. They bet their farm on the Metaverse thing and are trying everything to make that thing get some momentum.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Justsignedup 3y agoReminds me of google glasses and the "glasshole" mentality. But because these are pretty stealth people won't realize it. It does have strong surveillance state vibes, everything I look at is recorded and replayable. Gonna take the cancel culture (in both the positive and negative aspects) to overdrive. In any case, let's see the price tag. When that tag goes sub-$100 we'll see some real stuff happening. Also would be interesting to see the cultural shift as most people may end up wearing glasses with AR built into them.
- ortusdux 3y ago"Bystander privacy - The Capture LED lets others know when you’re capturing content or going live. If the LED is covered, you’ll be notified to clear it." So at least there is that.
- Justsignedup 3y agoEh its not about stealth, its about availability.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- cvccvroomvroom 3y agoThey're not stealth because they're unfashionable and chunky obvious in real life.
- MilStdJunkie 3y agoAs a shooting enthusiast, my first thought is what this does in pistol competitions. Shooting a pistol is, perhaps unintuitively, more difficult than a long arm, because the rear sight is effectively floating around "out there", and you need practice to get your rear eye in the right place (even if using a flip-up red dot reflex sight). When moving around, re-acquiring always takes time, and it slows you down. With the smart glasses (and a teensy tiny accelerometer-thngy on the barrel), your point of aim is always in your field of view, and you don't need to slow down or even acquire. You could hip-shoot accurately from a dead sprint. It's gonna be pretty rad. They're gonna have to do eyeware examinations, or else it's going to be dominated by smartglass shooters. Like, "dominated" as in "someone is using a cheat code" dominated.
- meheleventyone 3y agoThere's no screen so, not yet. But it does sound pretty much like having a laser on the gun no?
- MilStdJunkie 3y agoSeeing a laser dot at any serious range is pretty much impossible, at least in my experience. There's also a lot of airborne material at shoots as multiple rounds impact the target/ground/etc. They consistently time slower than reflex sights, and sometimes even iron sights. That's not considering the problem that in fog/dust, the beam is a "HERE I AM" arrow. Not a problem in competition though. But it underlies the primary use of lasers: IR beams with nightvision. THAT'S the golden ticket for lasers, and you can see where your buddies are aiming too. Now, if you're fighting someone else with nightvision . . hey, good thing we can choose who we fight, right guys? Guys?
- MilStdJunkie 3y agoAh criminy, no screen? The hell is the point.
- 0xbadcafebee 3y ago> You could hip-shoot accurately from a dead sprint. It's gonna be pretty rad. Sounds pretty terrifying to me. A real life aimbot, that any human being can use for 1 shot 1 kill.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- TrueDuality 3y agoThe only appealing thing for me with smart eye-wear is a personal display. Doesn't need to be big or rich, enough for notification filtering much like smart watches give me. A camera on these is frankly still kind of in the creepy realm to me, but I do get it and it'll probably be a necessary component for any kind of proper AR. The Meta AI integration is also a massive turn off to me. To each their own, but I want to keep the smart bits mostly in the smart phone. The assistants so far have been anything but assistive on my devices and usually both get in the way (since for a while everyone was really pushing you to use them, only Google seems to have not gotten that particular message) and are privacy nightmares in their own right.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- 7moritz7 3y agoThey look way better than expected, almost exactly like the regular models. Issue being that the cameras are clearly visible and make the impression that you are either a voyeurist or a secret agent
- cvccvroomvroom 3y agoHave you bought and worn these in real life outside of a store? They look good online but in person, they're absolutely ugly and cheap looking.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- anonzzzies 3y agoUgh that battery life. I am happy with my xreal glasses because it has ton of battery via my phone and then can be charged on the go even more.
- renewiltord 3y agoI like it. It's a pity about this stuff, though, because it's the equivalent of holding your phone camera up to everyone you're talking to. The form factor is so useful but the camera lens just makes everything weird.
- api_or_ipa 3y agoPricing is interesting. $299 for the Wayfarer model when the base Wayfarer goes for $171 on the Rayban website. If (and this is a big if) you assume Luxottica takes the same cut on both models, then Meta is selling a camera, headphones, etc, conveniently packaged into a very small form-factor for $128. If I were in the market for a new pair of sunglasses, it isn't hard to seem me splurging another $128 for something that could potentially replace my airpods for taking calls while I'm away from home. Personally, not a fan of sticking a camera everywhere I look though. I get why companies want to push that feature (more data!) but I just don't see a reason why consumers need a camera pointing at everything they're doing. Kinda cool nonetheless.
- lm28469 3y agoFor me, and probably a lot of people, it's the opposite, I'd pay more if needed to get the non tech version
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- dwighttk 3y agoif facebook were business smart, they'd sell these for less like the TV screen people...
- quickthrower2 3y agothey are business smart!
- dwighttk 3y agoBusiness smarter then I guess
- KarlKode 3y agoIn my local sunglass store iI can buy genuine Wayfarers for a bit more than 100$ so I guess Luxotica’s margin is even higher than expected…
- hacful-tonteg 3y agoi'd love a pair of jf rey smart glasses
- tastyfreeze 3y agoFeeding Meta more video and audio is the least interesting use case for smart glasses. The hardware looks like a nice start for smart glasses but the lack of AR display and required tethering to Meta makes these undesirable to me.
- trey-jones 3y agoProbably the most convenient thing I can think of is just putting my whole phone in my glasses. By my whole phone, let's say I'm talking about my whole dumb phone. So calls, texts, camera - this seems reasonable. And if I can ask for information and get quick answers that's a bonus. Disregard privacy concerns for the moment - that's obviously important and will be a bit sticking point. I would replace my phone with these if it was standalone. Or maybe this + watch in tandem would be neat. If I didn't already need to wear glasses, that might change how I feel about it as well.
- cvccvroomvroom 3y agoExcept they're not Quest or phones. They're glorified BT speakers with a GoPro.
- cheeze 3y agoSounds awesome if I can get some additional features like calling and SMS, etc.
- smath 3y agoAny word on whether they will let custom code/apps run on this, or is it a walled garden? Whisper + LLM with these would be nice. These glasses could also be great for vision impaired folks.
- l33t7332273 3y agoCan you explain what use case whisper and an LLM would have here?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- smath 3y agoI was thinking of an audio-based personal assistant running on the sunglasses, a la https://twitter.com/ggerganov/status/1640416314773700608 https://twitter.com/ggerganov/status/1640416314773700608
- crakhamster01 3y agoIt sounds like they have that planned in the short-term, and from the presentation, multi-modal AI "sometime next year" (e.g. answering "What is this building that I'm looking at right now?").
- kstrauser 3y agoI don't hate them. I just wish it were almost any other giant company that was making them. If someone showed up at my house wearing them, I think I'd make them take their glasses off before they came inside, in much the same way (and for the same reasons) that some people don't allow shoes in the house. I don't want someone tracking Facebook into my living room. Maybe the only worse maker would be Twitter. If a friend came over wearing Musk glasses, I'd probably rip them off their head and stamp on them for their own good. I definitely would not allow them into my house.
- samtheprogram 3y ago> Maybe the only worse maker would be Twitter. If a friend came over wearing Musk glasses, I'd probably rip them off their head and stamp on them for their own good. I definitely would not allow them into my house. You might have gotten caught up in an ideology. I make fun of Elon and what he's doing to Twitter as much as the next guy, but... What do you imagine would be so harmful about them? Tracking, like with your Meta/Facebook example, or "omg those are Musk glasses, they must be destroyed!"
- callalex 3y agoMusk companies have a proven track record of handling private data inappropriately. For example Tesla employees were caught sharing footage from vehicles on private property with their friends. https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sensitive-images-recorded-by-customer-cars-2023-04-06/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sens...
- samtheprogram 3y agoGreat point. I was more opposing their discourse and lack of any examples.
- kstrauser 3y agoThat was exactly it. It's not a matter of animosity, but of privacy. I wouldn't want Twitter hardware in my house or on my Wi-Fi, even less than I'd want Facebook gear.
- no_wizard 3y agoLack of HUD is why I wouldn't get these. I suppose if I was taking more pictures / video I might be more interested, like at the beach or something, but I don't find myself doing these things as much. Maybe this would make it easier for me to capture my life around me (my SO thinks i don't take enough pictures or video of our life), could alleviate having to remember to pull out the phone and such. Add a HUD like google glass had and you may have a more compelling use case.
- pxmpxm 3y agoThis - having an actual display that doesn't look gaudy would be great. For pictures and video, Google already tried the glasshole thing.
- devmor 3y agoYeah I don’t really consider these “smart glasses” - they’re a sunglass frame with built in airpods and a go pro. If someone could take the epson moverio and make it cordless, that’s more like what I want from smart glasses.
- gruturo 3y agoThese things lack a display. I don't want cameras strapped to my head, I want a lightweight display I can wear unobtrusively and doesn't make anyone near me nervous (doubly so since this is from a company known for invading privacy), even if it's a fairly low resolution one. Version 1 could even be 4 lines of text and I'd still pay for it - I already wear glasses every waking moment of my life anyway. Pair it with my phone, give me driving directions which don't require me to take eyes off the road. Remind me of things when I arrive home or get in the car. Let me read texts. Overlay that 9-minute pasta timer in a corner of my field of view until it runs out. Blink in a corner to remind me that my lawn sprinklers are still running, so I don't go to sleep forgetting to turn them off (ahem). I'll probably learn to use a swype-style keyboard while keeping the phone in the pocket and looking ahead through the glasses. Come on, I grew up awed at the HUDs of Robocop and Terminator, give me a damn HUD, it's 2023.
- kart23 3y agoI mean, this is obviously where its going, but the tech isn't there yet without seriously compromising on some axis (looks, size/weight, etc) I think its a great way to get people used to the paradigm of smart glasses and further develop the other components that are already mature on phones (camera, compute, speakers, etc.)
- hcazz 3y agoGoogle Glass was released almost a decade ago, I'm not convinced the tech isn't there. I also had a RECON Mod Live HUD for my Snowboard Goggles which was released in 2011 which had a unit size not that far off from the Google Glass. It's disappointing that in 2023 there isn't something even remotely close (or better) to tech that was available 10+ years ago in the case of the RECON Mod Live.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- anjel 3y ago...which is why its available for the already chunky wayfarer frames and not the svelte Aviators. Past camera spy glasses were so chunky as to be obvious if you know to look what to look for. Can't say how unobtrusive or obvious the lens is for the Metas but the Temples are not discernably thicker or different in appearance from non-enhanced Wayfarers. Wishing they'd Add an inertial sensor making them quite useful for tort / crim evidentiary purposes.
- kart23 3y agoThe livestreaming usecase is honestly incredible. I really wonder how they managed to pull it off given the insane battery and size constraints and the technical details. I would be surprised if it could do more than 20 minutes of continuous livestreaming at an acceptable resolution.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- flax 3y agoThese seem almost worth trying. I'd love to play with them if: 1. It's completely open for me to write my own apps to interface with it. 2. It had even the most rudimentary display (text only would be fine!) 3. It had nothing to do with Meta.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ginkgotree 3y agoNo way would I keep a camera on my head that is directly uploading image (and audio?) data to a Meta owned and operated platform. No. F*&(king. Way.
- expertentipp 3y agoIf they'll figure out one "wow how convenient" killer feature or killer app, everyone will be wearing it within 2 years.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- bajsejohannes 3y ago> Designed for living in the moment > Capture life's best moments and live-stream to Instagram and Facebook. Now with a 12 MP camera and 5-mic system. Stay connected with hands-free calls and messages and listen to your favourite tracks through built-in speakers. I have a very different idea of what "living in the moment" means.
- Sheeny96 3y agoAnyone notice that these meta links open a new tab, then close the tab you're on, not allowing you to use the back button to navigate back to the previous page? Horrendously user hostile behaviour.
- idlewan 3y agoThat might be Firefox's Facebook container's fault. I don't like this behavior either, you lose the tab history and the ability to recover it, unfortunately.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- mvdtnz 3y agoCould you please not record me while I'm eating a slice of pizza? Fuck absolutely very far off with this.
- howmayiannoyyou 3y agoThis is the most insightful comment on this topic. Ubiquitous visual and audio recording makes an already self-absorbed, anxious and self-conscious youth (and adults for that matter) MUCH worse. You put body cameras on police, whose adherence to uniform policies & procedures is in the public interest. You don't equip the general population with 27/7 cameras where the many mistakes of being human - mistakes we all make - are now fodder for the voyeuristic consumption of the masses, and the nefarious/political motivations of self-interested bureaucrats and politicians.
- jmoak3 3y agoRelevant: https://www.socialcooling.com/ https://www.socialcooling.com/
- ActorNightly 3y agoGenuinely curious - what is the issue with someone doing this?
- solardev 3y agoSometimes people get self-conscious when they're chowing down on something, especially a greasy floppy blob like a pizza.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Conscat 3y agoMy favorite glasses right now have little cat ears above the lenses. Meta stays behind state of the art as always.
- haunter 3y agoGen 1 had horrible picture quality. Casey Neistat made a review and it wasn't nowhere near good as an iPhone 5 from 2012 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PF3iysOyelg&t=280s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PF3iysOyelg&t=280s If this has a better picture quality, like up to the ~2023 smartphone camera standards then I'll buy one. I really like the idea.
- deanCommie 3y agoHonestly my biggest beef with this isn't the quality but the field of vision. It's so incredibly narrow and not at all how we imagine a "first person perspective" looks like for a human. (I know we lie to ourselves, and think that our peripheral vision is better than it is, but it doesn't matter)
- baby 3y agoI think they did this so that it’s compatible with instagram/phones. But I expect that you’ll be able to take normal videos too
- parentheses 3y agoYes. I think this was a conscious choice. The field of view allows for a more compelling AR/VR projection.
- sqldba 3y agoOh yes the field of vision is very bad! I liked to take snapshots out when with my wife, and I'd turn my head and she wouldn't even be in the field of view. You have to turn your head 180 degrees like an owl and have them dead centre in front of the camera side to get them on film.
- notJim 3y agoWhat would you use it for? I kind of like it conceptually, but hard to imagine how I'd actually use it.
- Lorenzo45 3y ago
- KaiserPro 3y agoI have a set of original rayban stories. They are excellent hardware hampered by shite, shortsighted software, both on the glasses and on the app. 1) The killer feature is not the camera, but the sound. Having bluetooth audio with you, without stuff in/over your ears is really really great. 2) The physical button action is swapped. single press is video, long press picture. 3) the touch pad is hard to find and there is no texture difference. Not only that but its really easy to trigger music playing by holding them in your hand. Over all the hardware is great. Firmware, however, is utterly shite. For the first year, the maximum time you could get them to play music was about 15 minutes. They'd just stop, disconnect from Bluetooth and need a power cycle to get back again. They would randomly disconnect for shits and giggles. worse than cheap bluetooth headphones. Whom everlet them out the door in such a poor state, then compounding it by not actually fixing the problems, just shitting out half backed features, should be told off (I'm looking at you Boz). Then there is the assistant. Functionally limited, I don't use them because you have to say "hey facebook" as the wake word. I'm not saying that in fucking public. who though that was a good idea clearly has been with the company too long. The app is called "view" its now only just been integrated into the ios photoroll. for the longest while it had its own photo gallery, and you needed to manually sync the photos you wanted. Whats even more odd is there is no integration with either instagram or facebook, so getting the photos and videos into either of them is a multi-app multi-stage faff. TLDR: Great hardware, shit firmware, lots of promise squandered by a total lack of QA or attention to quality or detail in basic flow.
- SebaSeba 3y agoNow if Meta would only get that website layout of theirs working on this Chrome browser that runs on my two year old Samsung Android phone, they would be a whole lot credible to me.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- yodon 3y ago> The Capture LED lets others know when you’re capturing content or going live. If the LED is covered, you’ll be notified to clear it.
- smcleod 3y agoAs someone else here said - I don’t care about a camera, I want a display, and I certainly wouldn’t want a camera from Facebook.
- expertentipp 3y agoIt's not about what you want, it's about what ad industry wants.
- smcleod 3y agoexactly
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> it's about what ad industry wants On what planet would an ad exec choose this over a pair of sunglasses with a screen? We don’t currently have the technology and/or industry to sell a decent $300 screen on your face. That is why we don’t have it.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- cvccvroomvroom 3y agoI tried the previous ones. Those were chunky, cheap looking plastic like a kids toy, inconvenient, and expensive. There's no display, they're basically just worse than earbuds.
- expertentipp 3y agoCannot wait for having to charge yet another thing, which haven't needed charging by now.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- DueDilligence 3y ago[dead]
- ChicagoDave 3y agoCan’t wait to see casinos banning these things.
- coolandsmartrr 3y agoYou remind me of Edward Thorp, who counted Blackjack cards and later became even wealthier with his hedge fund. He has envisioned of wearables making counting easier.
- alex_young 3y agoThe 4 hour battery life will probably save us for a bit, but do you really want to walk around in a world where a bunch of strangers are taking pictures of you just by looking in your direction? I don’t. Who cares about the LED.
- serf 3y ago>but do you really want to walk around in a world where a bunch of strangers are taking pictures of you just by looking in your direction? given that the social stigma of phone photography and who it targets has just about disappeared, I think the "I don't want to be photographed' ship has sailed.
- JohnFen 3y ago> the social stigma of phone photography and who it targets has just about disappeared It certainly hasn't disappeared in my neck of the woods.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- mempko 3y agoSecurity cameras are everywhere. You are always being watched.
- lannisterstark 3y agoYou have 0 expectation of privacy in public anyhow.
- sneak 3y agoThis is a USA doctrine, and fewer than 4% of people live there. Just because this is a fact of life in the USA doesn't mean I want ALPR devices on every street corner telling Zuckerberg et al every time I go out of my driveway and where.
- ineptech 3y agoI'm excited about the use cases, and leery-but-cautiously-optimistic about tying the experience to meta, but am I the only one worried about buying hardware from a company that's synonymous with monopolistic price-gouging? (Ray-Ban is owned by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxottica https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxottica )
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- archontes 3y agoI'm sorry, but cautiously optimistic about tying the experience to meta? You must be the only one not worried about buying hardware from a company that's synonymous with blatant privacy violations. (Meta is owned by https://www.esquire.com/uk/latest-news/a19490586/mark-zuckerberg-called-people-who-handed-over-their-data-dumb-f/ https://www.esquire.com/uk/latest-news/a19490586/mark-zucker...)
- hoherd 3y agoRay Ban Wayfarer's are $171 without the included tech.[1] The included 12mp camera, 5 mic system, network connectivity, battery, microelectronics small enough to be hidden in fashionable eyewear all seem to add up to more than $128 worth of value. It seems to me that these are subsidized by Meta. I'll leave it to the reader to speculate on why Meta would do such a thing. 1. https://www.ray-ban.com/usa/sunglasses/RB2140%20UNISEX%20original%20wayfarer%20classic-black/805289126577 https://www.ray-ban.com/usa/sunglasses/RB2140%20UNISEX%20ori...
- zip1234 3y agoI see a lot of people complaining about display. These are not meant for that use case. Maybe someday the tech will be available to have a display. That said, I have v1 Rayban Stories and use them as my daily driver sunglasses. I use them mainly for answering calls or listening to music but take occasional photos.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- will5421 3y agoHopefully these will be banned
- vagab0nd 3y agoAt the very least it should flash a red light when recording.
- bluescrn 3y agoThere's cameras literally everywhere already. If you leave your home, you get recorded. That's just the world we're in now. If somebody wants to record anything covertly, there's surely better options out there already - there's crazy stuff like cameras concealed in screw heads.
- Aditya_Garg 3y agoIt does flash a light when recording. If you cover the light then the camera functionality is disabled.
- joemi 3y ago> If you cover the light then the camera functionality is disabled. Is this confirmed yet? The website just says "If the LED is covered, you’ll be notified to clear it." Note that it does not say the camera won't work.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ianbicking 3y agoThese could be pretty incredible if the platform was more open. You get highly available image and voice input, and good voice output. Imagine if you could take a picture of anything, add a little note, have it filed away. Not necessarily an awesome Instagram picture, but just a picture of some mail you got, a tool you are putting away, any thing you want to record and save. Heck, why not a picture of your computer screen? Pair that with quickly available audio transcriptions and you can also dictate anything, thoughts, small notes, information associated with the images. That all could be great... if the library of things you made was useful. It's pretty clear how it could be useful now; do some OCR and other detection on images, use a vector store for both that and transcripts, and hook it all up to an LLM assistant. It's a bit complicated, and a bit expensive to run, but at least for a prototype you could make something pretty incredible. Meta might make something like that... but they aren't doing that yet, and they might never do that. If the platform was open people could explore these things right now. And it doesn't even need to be radically open, you don't need to be able to hack the firmware; but it has to be more open than the preview Ray-Ban glasses, and I'm assuming more open than this revision.
- jperras 3y ago> Imagine if you could take a picture of anything, add a little note, have it filed away. Not necessarily an awesome Instagram picture, but just a picture of some mail you got, a tool you are putting away, any thing you want to record and save. Heck, why not a picture of your computer screen? Pair that with quickly available audio transcriptions and you can also dictate anything, thoughts, small notes, information associated with the images. I know HN already has too much cynicism for my own liking, so it pains me to say: you can already do this with the phone you have in your pocket. Have a shortcut that enables audio dictation/photo mode/etc., and you're good to go. The workflow for glasses (either these or some other hypothetical ones) would involve hitting a button and then having to either speak the command out loud or hit some other button to capture video/audio/etc., which seems more cumbersome than the phone approach that exists today.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> hitting a button and then having to either speak the command out loud or hit some other button to capture video/audio/etc., which seems more cumbersome than the phone approach For the mass market, perhaps the right place to put the camera is on headphones. (I’m already talking to my AirPods.) This product doesn’t appear to be positioned for the mass market, however, but instead influencers.
- gffrd 3y agoAm I the only one who doesn't understand the obsession with ramming tech in to existing accessories? Why must sunglasses also be a camera? Or Alexa? It's not for lack of knowing the answer. Because you're already taking your sunglasses with you everywhere, anyway. Because there's no way you're carrying around another thing. Because it's the most convenient way of securing a more intimate relationship with customers. I'm with the others: I thought the future would be more exciting than this.
- itissid 3y agoBecause there is no way meta can challenge Google and Apple's dominance on the mobile platform(e.g. look at how the they have monopolized location services and apple has dented their ad market) and they are desperate to redefine what the next generation of communication and mobility devices look like. This is also the first generation of mobile wearables. Expect more will come in the next two years paired with other devices.
- adamrezich 3y ago> This is also the first generation of mobile wearables. is it? Google Glass was like a decade ago, and Snap Spectacles were released sometime after that. they keep trying to make this happen every few years and it never seems to stick.
- itissid 3y agoI mean meta's first gen(they had glasses last year but they were not that good and were more of a test run).
- phire 3y agoWhen I hear "smart glasses", I'm thinking either a display, or some kind of active optics. It's a total letdown to click on a product like this and it's nothing more than a camera, a touchpad, and some crappy speakers near my ear.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ctippett 3y ago[*] Home surveillance cam — Check [*] Car dash cam — Check [*] Bike helmet cam — Check [*] Drone follow cam — Check [ ] Face cam Those of us in the FreeCam community have been dreaming of something like this for a long time.
- theodric 3y agoGoogle Glass offered customers a face-mounted camera in 2013. Snapchat released their Spectacles in 2016. This is not a novel concept, even in the consumer electronics space, to say nothing of Steve Mann's work which stretches back decades.
- xnx 3y agoWhat's the FreeCam community?
- ctippett 3y agoIt's entirely fictitious – it was an attempt on my part to use satire to bring attention the various products in market designed to passively capture and record video. If such a community were to exist I'd imagine they'd fit somewhere in the Venn diagram between smart-home enthusiasts and the quantified-self movement. Apologies for misleading you!
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Workaccount2 3y agoOoof, just in time for the death of the thick rimmed glasses trend of the last decade. It's all wire frames now guys.
- lopkeny12ko 3y ago> If the LED is covered, you’ll be notified to clear it. How does this work?
- nadavami 3y agoI would guess there is photocell next to the LED and comparing the amount of light to the ambient light the cameras get. They might also be doing something clever and using the LED itself as a photo diode.
- Groxx 3y agoI wish I could find more things talking about this, but there's this classic demo of the technique: https://cs.nyu.edu/~jhan/ledtouch/index.html https://cs.nyu.edu/~jhan/ledtouch/index.html It has always felt under-utilized to me. Maybe it needs power-sensing hardware that's too sensitive / too fast for most scenarios / costs?
- JohnFen 3y agoIt's actually not that hard to use LEDs in this way. I think it's not done a lot because in applications that need a light sensor, a purpose-built light sensor works a whole lot better, and it's rare that space is such a premium that having one is an issue. Glasses may be a use case where space is at a premium, though, so it could make sense there.
- geephroh 3y agoWhat company would I trust less than Google to deploy wearable technology with potentially staggering privacy issues? OK, it's probably Twitter; but still, I'm sure as hell not buying anything tied to Meta, either.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- bparsons 3y agoI don't know anyone who would want this. Nobody wants to be around someone in social situations who might be surreptitiously filming them. Wearing glasses with a camera on them is a great way to be labelled a creep by everyone around you.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- itissid 3y agoI am wondering how they will build out Wifi-Index for positioning(GPS sucks in cities) assuming they want to do location based targetting for any number of purposes(ads, recommendations, location based geo-fencing etc). The critical piece for attribution is linking Wifi based position to a PoI(for location based anything). This takes a few years to build. Google has a great map blue dot has good fidelity with location because they have a phone collecting all that Wifi data for many years..
- ianbicking 3y agoThese glasses appear to be pretty closely tied to your phone (like the previous revision), so they can just use whatever positioning your phone has.
- itissid 3y agoThey can but remember, having location always on, collected when the app is backgrounded, is a deeply buried permission, once turned off it's hard to turn it back on(or in apples case reminding user with a map to tell you "xyz app has collected your location"); Google is poised to make it more difficult to activate. Now the Thing is even though background collection is bad in principle because apps must indicate purpose of use for such a sensitive permission and it's hard to think how apps can make a case for it; Google and apple apps still do it for their own apps by default!(Apple does not even have a wifi scanning API) The only way to get any location based notif while backgrounded for 3p apps is Geofencing which is narrow and not workable for location targeting.
- anyoneamous 3y agoAny other company and I might be excited, but Meta can get in the bin.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- rcpt 3y agoI think it'd be nice to blink and automatically post to Instagram everytime some driver does something unhinged while I'm on my bicycle. Not sure I can think of any pro-social use cases though.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- solardev 3y agoThe animations on that page are misleading. They show some sort of detached floating HUD next to each person using the glasses, but I don't think the actual product has anything like that? At first I thought it projects an image onto the actual lenses, but that doesn't seem to be the case. It's just (deceptive) marketing =/ These aren't really smart glasses, they're just spy glasses.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- crashingintoyou 3y agoAm I the only one who saw almost-exclusively-vertical-format video and thought "I'll pass"?
- Bellend 3y agoThe headline was enough for me personally
- hotnfresh 3y agoNo but also all of us are rapidly approaching “old man yells at cloud” on this issue. Major video social media has settled on vertical. That’s what folks in that world expect. I don’t think that trajectory has a chance of changing until something replaces the cell phone (which’ll probably me some kind of glasses, assuming it turns out to be possible to build a version of them that’re any good as a replacement for a cell phone interface)
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- xwdv 3y agoI’m curious, if we had a thick enough frame could we integrate some kind of telephoto camera with a long optical zoom?
- the_arun 3y agoHow is this different from Google Glasses that were launched earlier?
- jackbrookes 3y agoNo display, 2 cameras, much thinner form factor
- rockemsockem 3y agoThe biggest difference is that they don't have a display. These are oriented around sound for a lot of i/o with cameras for pictures/videos.
- tempestn 3y agoAside from being glasses with tech and a camera, they're very different. Google Glass had a screen, for one thing, so it was an early attempt at AR. It didn't have lenses, and didn't look anything like regular glasses. This is designed to look and function like regular glasses or sunglasses, with the addition of a camera and speakers.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- monological 3y agoAm I the only one who doesn't want this dystopian future? "Designed for living in the moment"?...no, this is definitely the exact opposite of living in the moment.
- pvg 3y agoYou can scroll through the thread to check.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- knodi123 3y ago> The Capture LED lets others know when you’re capturing content or going live. If the LED is covered, you’ll be notified to clear it. Wonder how that works. Maybe the capture LED has a light sensor next to it that detects reflections? It solves an interesting problem, although the prevalence of cheap spy camera glasses on amazon make it an uphill battle.
- didntcheck 3y agoI'd presume via the same type of proximity sensors that disable your phone screen when it's held to your ear
- seabass-labrax 3y agoThat wouldn't work with all materials that could be used to cover the camera. The proximity sensors that you describe are designed specifically to measure the change in capacitance due to proximity to a human; they can't detect something like a blob of glue that causes no change in capacitance.
- Agentlien 3y agoFor some reason this really doesn't work for me. I have also enabled the extra feature of locking the touch screen when in dark places, too. I still regularly get my pocket navigating my browser and my ear starting songs on Spotify mid-call.
- farkanoid 3y agoLEDs can effectively be used as light sensors when wired in reverse - About a decade ago there was a post where someone turned an 8x8 LED matrix into a touch sensor. Edit: Found the link, here it is: https://mrl.cs.nyu.edu/~jhan/ledtouch/index.html https://mrl.cs.nyu.edu/~jhan/ledtouch/index.html Analog Devices has an excellent article about using LEDs as sensors in this way: https://wiki.analog.com/university/courses/electronics/electronics-lab-led-sensor https://wiki.analog.com/university/courses/electronics/elect...
- Saris 3y agoThey could pulse the LED quickly and while it's off use it as a light sensor for ambient light.
- idopmstuff 3y agoI had the original version of these (Ray-Ban stories), and I had to return them three times because they kept dropping the Bluetooth connection. I more or less only wore them while running, so my best guess is moisture from my sweating got into them. Given that they were advertised heavily for sports stuff, that was disappointing. The return process was also complicated and annoying. Overall, I'd recommend against buying the first generation of these new glasses.
- tchaffee 3y agoSeems like it could be fun to use these but no way am I trusting Meta with more personal info.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- asah 3y agofor prescription, visit the ray-ban website ==> no way to order prescription glasses
- rockemsockem 3y agoIt'd be great if I could get these and not have to login to any account.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- duxup 3y agoHow are people going to feel if people walk into a bathroom wearing these?
- artursapek 3y agoViolated and threatened, as they should
- paxys 3y agoIf you want to secretly record people in the bathroom there are a hundred more discrete ways of doing so than these glasses. Someone's shirt button could be doing it right now.
- duxup 3y agoGlasses seem pretty good route. Normal things people wear…
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- pianoben 3y agoWhat do I need to use these? ... - a valid Meta account Well, I'm out then. Glasses look cool but I couldn't be happier with my choice to ditch Facebook, et al.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- artursapek 3y agoOk guys you know what to do. Mercilessly ridicule and degrade anyone who wears these to continue the very justified stigma against wearing a discrete camera on your face.
- loufe 3y agoIn my industry, mining, I can see this sort of integration into a miner's helmet working its way into sites as a sort of situation analysis tool pretty easily. It would make a lot of things so much easier for folks on the surface to be able to quickly see 3-D scans (lidar would be amazin) of broken rock, or new tunnel, or cracks, etc. I am with others for the desire for more opennness. I would never hop on this loaded with proprietary restrictions. 100% data control for personal use would be a must.
- giantrobot 3y agoFor the livestream it seems you can do that right now with an action camera attached to a miner's helmet and streamed via their smartphone.
- p3rls 3y agoEventually everyone in the trades is going to have to wear these things.
- euroderf 3y agoI foresee a new subgenre of reality shows.
- tsumnia 3y agoIt will absolutely get integrated sooner rather than later. The Microsoft Hololens is still bulky compared to these, but is getting tested out right now by the US military to view the insides of aircrafts [1]. After a few more size and cost decreasing iterations, it will get quickly adopted. Granted, I'm a tech luddite by modern standards, so as a retail consumer I still fear ads all over my FOV. But for businesses there's absolutely a need, use case, everything for it. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IV4EQ1Ltujs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IV4EQ1Ltujs
- paganel 3y agoBleak and creepy at the same time. Fortunately, I feel that the vibe shift related to this bleakness has already got going, and people seen wearing these abominations will instantly get branded as not-cool and worse. Come to think of it, Ray-Ban was also on its way down well before this.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- promiseofbeans 3y agoSo... spy glasses?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- fillskills 3y agoReally shocked by the lack of controls around privacy. Its absolutely crazy that someone can now be filming my family members with a very inconspicuous device. On top of that it could be streaming or uploading live! Where is the outrage?!?! Am I missing something?
- kome 3y ago> If the LED is covered, you’ll be notified to clear it. then i don't want it. what's the point of putting a led there anyway?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- anotherevan 3y agoAnd here I just got my Vocalskull bluetooth audio glasses a few weeks ago. https://vocalskull.com/ https://vocalskull.com/
- jacobsenscott 3y agoLol. These are just headphones with a creepy camera attached.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- jprd 3y agoThe company that delivers an ability for me to just randomly capture video/pictures "in the moment" has my VR/AR/Glass-hole vote from Day One. My kids will (and I approve, to be honest) REFUSE to repeat what they just did for the camera, and if they see it out, will sometimes shutdown whatever AMAZING thing they just re-invented. The supercomputer taking "T3h B3st P1ctur3 Ev@R" in my pocket cannot solve that problem, but some rando "glasses"/"contacts" solution that could has been just out-of-reach for this use case for what feels like decades ;)
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- bentcorner 3y agoOn one hand it's creepy, on the other being able to "DVR" unique events is going to fill YouTube with some pretty wild videos.
- tamimio 3y agoWhat’s needed? >A valid Meta account Pass.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- nikolay 3y agoNo Rx?
- tapvt 3y ago> Imagine if you could take a picture of anything, add a little note, have it filed away. I'd use that regularly while working on my truck. It'd be a lot easier than stopping during every disassembly step to snap a picture with my phone.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- anonu 3y agoWearing Google Glass made you a glasshole. Snapchat Spectacles spectacularly never took off. I hope these Smart Glasses make you look dumb and nobody buys them. I think the major issue is the camera, for me ... What i would pay for is minimalist eyewear with a heads-up display. That would be useful
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- EMCymatics 3y agoGoogle hurt me before. Please dont hurt me meta.
- adbutterfield 3y agoWelcome to the era of true pov porn!
- lucasyvas 3y agoI hate to bring Apple into this, but these are a lot less shitty looking than I expected - I wonder what Apple could produce without the Meta baggage.
- danShumway 3y agoIt is absolutely incredible to me that Facebook thinks it still has the social capital to pull a product like this off. To me the question of whether smart glasses are a good idea in general either socially or commercially is somewhat secondary to the elephant in the room: "would I wear glasses made by Facebook?" And... no, of course not, of course I wouldn't do that. I guess people buy Oculus still so it's not like Facebook has zero success with its hardware, but I think a big part of that is that it's the lowest-priced option on the market and is aiming at a product category where consumers are not particularly privacy-conscious: ie, games. And from my perspective I look at Oculus with its required account links and all of the privacy and TOS drama that has come out of that hardware, and I just can't imagine buying a hardware product from Facebook at all, let alone a hardware product that has a camera attached to it and requires me to install an app on my phone to use it (which is likely a bigger data-trove for Facebook than the camera is). It feels like almost any other company would be better equipped to try and build a market around this.
- phkahler 3y ago>> It is absolutely incredible to me that Facebook thinks it still has the social capital to pull a product like this off. Maybe not Facebook, but surely Instagram.
- danShumway 3y agoFair, that's a really good point. I don't distinguish between the companies and I don't think they're tangibly different in regards to privacy, but definitely agreed that Instagram has a better public image than Facebook does and I could see that making a pretty big difference. I guess they're launching this under "Meta", they're not using either Facebook or Instagram as the branding. I don't have any data to know whether people are more likely to see Meta and think of Instagram or Facebook.
- TheHappyOddish 3y ago> It is absolutely incredible to me that Facebook thinks it still has the social capital to pull a product like this off. I'm surprised you think they don't. Average people don't know who Meta are and that they own WhatsApp, Instagram and Facebook. Their properties have billions of daily active users and WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger are _seperately_ two of the biggest messaging platforms in the world. Most Quest users have never heard of Oculus. Remember the Quest 2 sold 10s of millions of units. Sorry to tell you, but most people don't have the same concerns that you (and I) have, and even then many people will still put their trust in anyway.
- karaterobot 3y agoWhat I hope happens is that a few people with actual power are caught on camera by one of these things, and feel their privacy was violated, and then consent laws around recording in public change as a result. The ones we have are pretty old, and not ready for the future that is already here, let alone the one that is coming. I'm not holding my breath for this, it's just what I can imagine being the best outcome.
- jejeyyy77 3y agolol
- aemreunal 3y agoThe issue with that is that it's a very slippery slope. Same laws could be used against people recording police interactions in public, for example, or other interactions where a private citizen is harassing another private citizen. It really needs to be carefully worded to avoid those pitfalls and I have a feeling that a lot of lawmakers would want to keep it intentionally vague.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- wetpaws 3y ago[dead]
- romusha 3y agoThing that will die out 2 years from now:
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- backtoyoujim 3y agoI can't believe that people think that they need to give META yet even more access to human life. I just don't believe in the upside being reality.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ge96 3y agoBoo it's not AR. I wish RayBan would make oled-infused corrected lenses.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- metadat 3y agoFuck Luxottica. One of the jerkiest and most abusive companies on Earth. They bought Ray-Ban and every other glasses company, and then enshittifyied each and every one. The worst. It's unfortunate FB has chosen to bed together with such a trash.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- expertentipp 3y agoYeah I was wondering how come every sunglasses cost north of EUR 150, and then learned about Luxottica.
- unsated 3y agoSmart glasses + Video + AI => What's the social score of the person I am looking at?
- quickthrower2 3y agoYou missed + Global Social Database, which is of course Facebook.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- CamelCaseName 3y agoIf these can be made prescription, and as a result, purchased with insurance, sales will be through the roof.
- menshiki 3y agoI would rather shoot myself than say "Hey Meta" in public.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- zmmmmm 3y agoJust struggle to be interested in glasses that have no display at all. That is really the future I'm waiting for.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- possiblydrunk 3y agoSo when Google Glass came out, people using them were "Glassholes" because of the ability to record surreptitiously, albeit for a very short period. And there was no mistaking Glass. Meta's look normal and I doubt the LED indicator will draw enough attention this time around. Plus as others have noted, by the time you notice it's already too late and anyway the onus is on you to ask the wearer to stop. And this is worse, as it streams directly to social media. There should be some (legal) way to jam these devices within a certain proximity radius.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- tjpnz 3y agoA punch in the face would work.
- ladzoppelin 3y agoHow are they allowed to legally do this? https://www.meta.com/help/smart-glasses/articles/assistant/how-information-is-processed-for-assistant-on-ray-ban-stories/ https://www.meta.com/help/smart-glasses/articles/assistant/h...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- BenFranklin100 3y agoThis technology creeps me out. I can’t imagine interacting with someone who’s wearing a pair of these, much less have a conversation. It would be like trying to talk with someone who’s sticking their smartphone in your face. Better looking and more refined tech, but fundamentally Glasshole 2.0. Zuck is the perfect ambassador after Brin.
- kbrannigan 3y ago[flagged]
- zyang 3y agoI hate everything about this tech. It invades people's privacy in-exchange for monetization and there's no way to opt-out. People made this happen should take a long walk and think about what they are doing with their lives.
- pj_mukh 3y agoJust to clarify the cameras are very well fit into the profile of the glasses, so it doesn’t look like “camera” glasses in person. Ray ban did a good job here. But on the flip side it’s very obvious when you’re filming (bright white light comes on), so it’s less creepy. Oh and obviously unless you’re an influencer and streaming the camera aren’t always active. I agree it’s weird to hang out with streaming influencers. The way this + my Apple Watch has reduced my phone usage when on the go I truly appreciate. I wish Facebook sold it with that point in mind but they won’t for obvious business cannibalization reasons.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- pierat 3y agoWhy should I care about any technology of a company that was founded to nonconsenually rate the fuckability of Harvard undergrads, and then a whole lot worse?
- mmaunder 3y agoGlassholes all over again?
- lnxg33k1 3y agoHow is privacy dealt with? I am not sure, but we are already tracked by meta without even being signed up, are we going to be tracked even offline for taking a walk? Is this piece of disgrace company and the piece of shit that work for it just so uninterested of what their products to do people? Is it possible to inject some common sense in big tech?
- bamboozled 3y agoImagine the creepy stuff people will be doing with this and deep fake tech? Taking a bunch of video of the cute girl who works at the bar and converting that into whatever sick fantasy you like. Imagine all the intimate footage you’re sharing and will lose when Facebook eventually gets hacked… Kind of keen for someone to develop a portable EMP device…
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- unsupp0rted 3y ago> designed for living in the moment while expressing yourself to the max. Why would they write copy like this? Surely it causes a visceral cringe reaction in anybody over 35, say. Is Generation Z a clean slate for 1980s vague hyperbolic ad-speak?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- arnonejoe 3y agoDidn’t Google already try this with Google Glass?
- chrischen 3y agoNo, but Snapchat did. Also Facebook did too.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Coryodaniel 3y agoLeast cool thing I’ve ever seen.
- RagnarD 3y agoDid Facebook (er, Meta) completely overlook the extreme backlash to the same concept 10 years ago with Google Glasses? Just look up articles from that time, e.g. https://nypost.com/2014/07/14/is-google-glass-cool-or-just-plain-creepy/ https://nypost.com/2014/07/14/is-google-glass-cool-or-just-p... What makes them think it's different this time? From 2014: "“Glasshole” has become the term du jour, and outrage has spiraled so out of control that San Francisco has seen a series of reported attacks on users. New York City’s not immune to the backlash, either. Gottfried chased down a man who had stolen his Glass right off his face. (He also had an incident at a San Francisco bar where drunken patrons accused him of recording them. He insists he wasn’t.) In April, a techie war erupted when East Village restaurant Feast kicked out Glass-user Katy Kasmai after she refused to remove her device. Kasmai vented online, and hundreds of Glass groupies rallied against Feast on Google, accusing the eatery of discriminating “against people who are into new technology.” Feast co-owner Brian Ghaw is unapologetic. He says Feast’s no-Glass policy is for guests’ peace of mind. “They just felt uncomfortable about having somebody who could potentially videotape them,” explains Ghaw. “If someone were sitting at a table with their smartphone constantly pointing in a certain direction and you didn’t know what they were doing with it, you’d feel pretty uncomfortable as well.”"
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Lich 3y agoHm, might be useful when capturing fishing videos. Instead of strapping a gopro or insta 360 to your body, just wear these and you get the added plus of polarized glasses. The video doesn't seem to have any stabilization yet though, so maybe a few generations later would be better.
- fragmede 3y agoThat's just a software thing though. Not sure why they didn't run it through a stabilizer.
- TaylorAlexander 3y agoHardware stabilization is superior to pure software stabilization. Software (aside from real fancy neural nets) can't fix pixels which are blurred from the camera rapidly moving while the shutter was open. My Panasonic GH5 has optical stabilization in the lens as well as a five axis linear motor system to move the camera sensor, and these systems work together to keep the image pipeline frozen in space even when the camera is physically moving. Makes a huge difference in image quality and overall camera system capabilities. I was curious if this is in use in smartphones. This reference [1] suggests that all iPhone 13 models have sensor shift stabilization, and I assume they have continued with this trend on newer releases. So yeah, proper stabilization is a hardware thing. [1] https://www.mysmartprice.com/gear/sensor-shift-stabilization-vs-ois-whats-different-in-the-iphone-13s-camera/ https://www.mysmartprice.com/gear/sensor-shift-stabilization...
- fragmede 3y agoTIL, ty!
- fomine3 3y agoHardware stabilization is better but it takes space. For pure software stabilization, it can be done by PC or powerful smartphone so it's better to not to have on glass frame for saving battery.
- pdntspa 3y agoThe relentless surveillance state marches ever onward...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ConcernedCoder 3y agoso where's the virtual HUD ?
- seydor 3y agoAgents Smith walking all around
- vinay_ys 3y agoI seriously hope this doesn't take off and fails spectacularly like Google Glass. I don't want a society where the people I'm interacting with are always recording everything around and giving it to a private profit corporation who can change their minds about what they will do all that private data any time they like.
- dmje 3y agoAgree. And the hilarity of selling this as "being in the moment"... Urgh.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Al-Khwarizmi 3y agoActually I find the idea of recording everything (or maybe not everything, but seamlessly recording whenever I want) quite attractive. I have a bad memory and would love to be able to rewatch good moments of my life. The part about all that data being in control of powerful corporations, though... that's what makes me thing that I'd prefer it to fail as well. I wish we could have this sort of tech outside of the framework of modern capitalism.
- plugin-baby 3y agoAll the bad moments would be recorded too, and many of the recordings would be outside of your control.
- Al-Khwarizmi 3y agoI would choose what to play, but of course, the "outside my control" part is the problem.
- plugin-baby 3y agoMany may be unable to resist the temptation to watch things that won’t make them happier.
- danskeren 3y agoThey look amazing but it feels like a huge mistake to even include a camera (unless it's only inward-facing).. they should focus on Audio + AR + AI. The camera quality will be terrible compared to what you can get from the phone that's already in your pocket, and it just going make a huge portion of the population feel creeped out by it.. whereas there would be no real pushback against a HUD that provided real-time transcript (big win for deaf people) and translations powered by Llama.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- 5041us 3y agoFor those who enjoy reading sf short stories and wonder about the implications of recording one's entire life, I can recommend the remarkable short story 'The Truth of Fact, the Truth of Feeling' by Ted Chiang.
- tomduncalf 3y agoGreat recommendation, I feel like most people on this site would enjoy his two short story compendiums. I’m not even a big SF reader but they’re among my favourite books I’ve read.
- simon1573 3y agoOne of them is what Arrival (2016) is based on.
- jeffreyq 3y agoThank you so much for sharing that short story. I've found my new favorite author.
- PeterStuer 3y agoHow is this any less creepy than a common shirt button spycam? If you are going to mention the led, think how fast this will be bypassed. https://gadgetsspy.com/button-camera/ https://gadgetsspy.com/button-camera/
- mosselman 3y agoBecause it is RayBan and your aren’t spying for yourself, but for Meta. /s
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- andreyk 3y agoIncidentally, I just bought the Gen 1 of these before departing on a trip to Japan a week ago. I gotta say, I'm very happy with the purchase - being able to take photos/videos for memory-capture type stuff (ie I don't care a lot about it being the best quality) without taking out my phone and pointing it at stuff has been great, and the speakers are surprisingly nice to use when I don't want to block out the sounds of my surroundings. To me the benefit is not being able to constantly or secretly record stuff, it's just a nicer way to use a camera to record memories on a trip that does not involve staring at a screen half the time.
- ahmedfromtunis 3y agoI'm curious about the quality of the footage — not the video itself, but in terms of stability and clear (re)watchability.
- tjpnz 3y agoOperating such a device in Japan puts you in a legal gray area, and depending on your behaviour could result in unwanted police attention. They will respond to reports of such devices being used near spaces frequented by women or children. Act responsibly.
- gumballindie 3y agoAs it should be. I am not comfortable with the idea that creeps are just walking around taking photos of me or my family.
- surfingdino 3y agoVloggers will love it.
- rado 3y agoThat wonky carousel breaks the whole page: https://i.imgur.com/TkTKE06.png https://i.imgur.com/TkTKE06.png I wonder how many more millions of $ and megabytes of frameworks it would take to just make a decent web page which isn't broken.
- mvkel 3y agoI got a pair of the original Stories and they are my most favorite device released in the past decade except for the AirPods. Countless times I've wanted to capture something with my kids, or on a drive, or on a bike ride. I can just tap the button on my glasses and that's it. I'm not taken out of the moment at all. It's great. as for the other stuff, Bluetooth speaker included, I wish they would rip it all out.
- trollied 3y agoThanks for your review, Zuck :)
- mvkel 3y agoUgh. I hoped this "tHanKs, ShILl" attitude was walled off from HN.
- AlecSchueler 3y agoIs there anything that makes it clear to the people around you that they are being recorded?
- logbiscuitswave 3y agoThere’s an LED on them
- sschueller 3y agoIgnoring the fact that I don't like this kind of product due to privacy implications especially in places like Switzerland and Germany. What I find sucks here is that meta is able to create such products but no one else can because instagram and facebook live are locked down. There is no way for me to live stream to either platform without using meta's proprietary apps. At least over at google and twitch I can send my live stream from any device.
- jhugo 3y agoBoth Instagram and Facebook Live support receiving your live stream over RTMP.
- sschueller 3y agoThanks, last time I checked it was not possible but it appears there is now something since Nov 2022. https://about.instagram.com/blog/tips-and-tricks/instagram-live-producer https://about.instagram.com/blog/tips-and-tricks/instagram-l...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- xarope 3y agoThe UX for the page is terrible, or else I'm too used to reading reference manuals. I can't figure out if the glasses can be used standalone, or need constant connection to a smart phone, nor battery life. Why? I actually think they might be quite useful for e.g. sports, where the athlete doesn't have a hand free for camera/smartphone.
- thomasfl 3y agoYou may be a "glasshole" wearing this glasses. But you'll be a "glasshole" in timeless RayBan style.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- cik 3y agoAdversarial clothing startups could very easily become more important.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- demarq 3y agoFinally someone understands. The glasses are the main point not the tech. A lot of previous product design in this area, has emphasised on shouting the tech and making it super loud that these are "tech" glasses. Here the tech is "inside" and the form and fit of the glasses takes priority. This is a big Win for meta
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- aubanel 3y agoThis page has an original way to force the user to accept cookies : present the cookie banner in a way that blocks the content. If the user clicks "Refuse optional cookies", just reload the page and present them the same choice again. That is illegal in the EU now.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Animats 3y agoCamera sunglasses are available from others, and the others are better looking. How did Luxottica produce something so ugly?
- rafaelmn 3y agoMention some ? I googled quickly and could only find cheap crap stuff - nothing in this class ?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- dzonga 3y agoanyone remember "snapchat is a camera company" ?
- napo 3y agoFor me it says "unavailable" on all items. Is it the case for everyone? I'm wondering if it's because I'm based in France or if it's sold out.
- chmod775 3y agoSame in Germany. However since they're advertising it in both French and German, likely not for long. Not that I was going to buy that.
- octatrack 3y agoDoesn't seem to be available in the EU.
- neom 3y agoWhen you load the page it says right at the bottom in a banner "Available now for pre-order in the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom"
- Snoddas 3y agoBesides any privacy issues, a someone that wears glasses full time the 4hour battery limit makes this a no starter
- atoav 3y agoI cannot view the contents of the page as declinging the optional cookies sends me... back to the page where I need to decline optional cookies. True professionals at meta.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- forgotusername6 3y agoDoes anyone else get stuck with it just refreshing the page if you decline optional cookies?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- elif 3y agoAs a google glass early adopter, I must say that these glasses are 10x creepier because they are totally inconspicuous, higher quality camera, directly configured for immediate and even live internet upload, lets you cover the capture LED, has AI built into it, and is built by Facebook, Yet society will treat these as 10x less creepy because fashion.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- marsknight 3y agoThere... https://nostrcheck.me/media/public/nostrcheck.me_9952119383397537331695892790.webp https://nostrcheck.me/media/public/nostrcheck.me_99521193833...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- happytiger 3y agoAm I the only one that finds the idea of live streaming from a pair of glasses utterly dystopian? You don’t control the platform, and *everything you generate becomes irrevocable property of Meta forever*. Seems so very, very unwise to me.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- marsknight 3y agoThere... https://nostrcheck.me/media/public/nostrcheck.me_9952119383397537331695892790.webp https://nostrcheck.me/media/public/nostrcheck.me_99521193833... Is my opinion about it.
- bilekas 3y agoIf they made these without the camera and just kept the call functionality I would definitely be interested! My only concern is do they require a facebook account ?
- amjnsx 3y agoThat will probably come much later, once they have sold enough units. It's what they did with Oculus
- fbnbr 3y agoThis is way better than google glasses and less nerdy as apples vision
- Taniwha 3y agoGargoyles!
- happytiger 3y agoI wonder how much of wearables is going to evolve to be just a mechanism to collect training data for AI (without having to pay for it)? Pretty valuable data.
- derangedHorse 3y agoIt's kind of underwhelming as a product. I don't see the average individual desiring this so they can take pictures or livestream to Instagram and Facebook. It could've been a cool tool for streamer if it allowed streaming to Twitch, Kick, etc, but Meta technologies limits its viability for that.
- whywhywhywhy 3y agoThink it's pretty clear that they're trying to make AR glasses in this form factor, like Apple has been trying to both are hitting up against technology very hard limits. Apple's approach seems to be now, make a VR headset with extremely high quality passthrough and hope they can solve it down to glasses over the next decade. Meta's approach seems to be make a really good stand alone VR headset (already done) and now make a glasses form factor with whats possible today and hope to make them meet in the middle some how eventually. Both these product roadmaps are from a pre-ChatGPT world and seem strange now especially Vision Pro. I fully expect Meta to move more into trying to retool the glasses into a AI assistant led product and slowly move the full AR Glasses to the backburner.
- washywashy 3y agoWe need to invent something that does the opposite now where individuals could wear something that prevents them from showing up in someone else’s content without explicit digital consent (some sort of personal scrambler). I don’t think the LED feature listed on this product page will often be honored by most people who will use these shades
- rollcat 3y ago> some sort of personal scrambler We're nearly at the "Foundation" levels of surveillance tech, but with no countermeasures in sight to oppose that. Even resisting web browser fingerprinting is difficult.
- barrysteve 3y agoNobody with an effective countermeasure is going to share it, or even let you know it exists. The days of open communication about privacy (lol) are long gone!
- washywashy 3y agoIt’s not so much having a countermeasure but having countermeasures be built in to the system. Similar to a concept called gevulot in the book Quantum Thief.
- barrysteve 3y agoThe gevulot is not good enough. Linking knowledge access to everybodies' consent doesn't work. There is another way...
- rollcat 3y agoThere are strong incentives for secrecy (military applications), hence encryption which provides solid foundations for private communication in civilian tech. I wonder if counter-surveillance tech could take the same route (e.g. ordinary soldiers can no longer afford to not carry a smartphone -> strong incentive to protect them from tracking; maybe I'm extrapolating too far).
- bArray 3y ago> Live-stream* > *Feature requires 5G Wi-Fi or mobile data and minimum ambient temperature condition of at least 5°C. Performance varies based on user location, device battery, temperature, Internet connectivity and interference from other devices, and many other factors. Connection is understandable (although in some cases 4G will actually be faster). But that temperature requirement for operation is actually quite strict. Any idea why that might be?
- Crosseye_Jack 3y agoJust thinking out loud. Battery damage at a guess. Video streaming can be pretty power hungry (you’re running the camera, encoding the video, and flinging those bits over the air) on a device that sits on your face. Depending on the construction of the device you can rely on the heat from doing that work to warm the battery up so not so bad (think your smart phone, which also spends most of its time in your pocket while outdoors so doesn’t get “that cold” to begin with), these glasses could have their battery further away from the electronics (thinking out loud prob battery in one arm, electronics in the other) and are probably more prone to be uninsulated form the elements while out and about.
- bArray 3y ago> Battery damage at a guess. Video streaming can be pretty power hungry (you’re running the camera, encoding the video, and flinging those bits over the air) on a device that sits on your face. I thought about that, but surely internal battery resistance would be lower at lower temperatures? The other thing I thought about is some movable part of the device, such as a lens that has some actuation. You might just refuse to work at near freezing temperatures to prevent damage to that?
- Crosseye_Jack 3y agoIts been a while since I did any major research on the matter (Thankfully I only deal with batteries indoors these days) but iirc when I used to build homemade RC airplanes, the internal resistance does start increasing the lower the temp gets and that the anode starts getting damaged (at least it wears quicker) discharging the battery at lower temps. My guess as to why they do it, is to maintain the "expected battery life cycles". >The other thing I thought about is some movable part of the device, such as a lens that has some actuation. You might just refuse to work at near freezing temperatures to prevent damage to that? Very possible. EDIT: However, if it was mechanical, why doesn't there seem to be such a restriction while taking photos?
- pcdoodle 3y agoLooks like e-waste in the dump in about 3...2....1 Don't wear these around me.
- barrysteve 3y agoSmart glasses are obviously a massive security threat for industrial espionage. You can ask people to keep their phones with security. Getting people to switch to contacts out of the blue, is much more difficult. James Bond's job is trivial with these. Elon Musk would lose his legs, if his nation-state competitors (whom probably build these glasses) walked into SpaceX and copy pasted the billion dollar plans to his rockets. American tech is the leakiest abstraction. If a President's daughter is caught doing something diplomatically controversial with these (or caught because of these)... they won't last long!
- nidnogg 3y agoI much preferred Google Glass's futuristic but minimal look that could fit into a bunch of different models. Personally I've never liked Wayfarers/Headliners (they also fit atrociously), so it's disappointing to see them take center stage here. At least the pricing is ok I guess? Fingers crossed for future models.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Andi 3y agoThe website is not usable. The cookie dialogue is shown again and again.
- yayr 3y agoVideo: Vertical default/1440 x 1920 pixels at 30 fps is disappointing. Future VR headsets will have a much higher resolution.
- leros 3y agoI looked at these at RayBan the other day. They're pretty cool especially for the price, but requiring a Meta account and Meta app ruined it for me.
- baby 3y agoWhat's wrong with that?
- ilrwbwrkhv 3y agoYup after what they forced us with oculus quest I'm never buying a meta device again. Also they are very poor on repairs and parts. I broke one of the quest controllers and never got a replacement.
- docmars 3y agoAmazing, after scrolling 75% down the huge-a$$ page, they finally show you what they look like after all the nearly useless features were showcased. Neato!
- standardly 3y agoThe same selling points are reiterated over and over again without much detail. It has a camera. It has speakers. It integrates with social media. I guess there isn't a HUD or anything AR-related? It's just a smart watch, except glasses? That is...marginally useful, but not that interesting considering what google glass was doing like 10 years ago. I just don't see a use for these.
- lobocinza 3y agoSoundcore experimented with smart glasses (audio only) last year but they discontinued them this year. https://us.soundcore.com/products/a3600013 https://us.soundcore.com/products/a3600013
- lostmsu 3y agoHow long can these record video for on a single charge? Do they have eye tracking?
- sqldba 3y agoI have the original model and they're fun, if not super expensive. Unfortunately the audio quality is some of the worst you can have; if there's ANY external noise you can't hear any of your music playing at all. This one says the audio is improved but I'd have to hear it before splurging again. I had read that bone-conducting audio is better so I'm a bit disappointed to see that this one doesn't have that.