4 ms·

I don't think we will get wider adoption of augmented wearables until we get something more like Deamon glasses - as light and wearable as a pair of glasses, bu

I don't think we will get wider adoption of augmented wearables until we get something more like Deamon glasses - as light and wearable as a pair of glasses, but also discreet.

mrklol 1y ago
Yep, that’s the way to go till we have something like contact lenses :D
- Molitor5901 1y ago
  I can't imagine the dystopian nightmare it will all bring, however. Knowing each human that I interact with is a possibility that I am being recorded in real time, analyzed, etc. It would change human behavior forever.
lesuorac 1y ago
I dunno, I think Google Glass if released today would do significantly better. I'm sure android phones could be paired to it now and you'd swipe using the phone against a keyboard displayed on the headset. It just seems like it should be much nicer to read things without crocking your neck.
- FirmwareBurner 1y ago
  >I dunno, I think Google Glass if released today would do significantly better. Why? Its users would still be called "glassholes" just like before. Nobody likes looking stupid in public, and wearing AR ski/diving goggles in public makes you look like a complete tool. Then there's the issue with privacy. People wouldn't want to be constantly filmed/scanned in public by other people's AR goggles. It would be like wherever you go people having their smartphones pointed at you. Apple VP is a niche solution looking for a niche problem. It's no iPhone moment.
  - Reubachi 1y ago
    Bit of a nitpick on one of your subpoints (I agree with your sentiment overall); GG won't/didn't fail due to the perception of "this person is filming me without my consent", that is a strawman meant to create more headlines than the less-sexy "it just doesn't have much purpose and is too expensive." Exactly like with VisionPro. We're already under 1080p surveillance 90 percent of our waking lives out of the house. A person wearing glasses with a UI layer and a camera walking down the street likely isn't saving that picture, footage, to their home server to then send me a citation over. But the commercial businesses, police, DOT etc sure are, and are all subpoena-able by courts. Less so with a guy wearing glasses.
    - JohnFen 1y ago
      That's assuming that the headset isn't sending the data to Apple as part of normal operation. But ignoring that, you're right -- one of those two things is certainly worse than the other, but they're both still bad.
    - FirmwareBurner 1y ago
      >We're already under 1080p surveillance 90 percent of our waking lives out of the house. Who's "we"? This is not the case where I live. I live in an EU country with very strict laws for privacy and restrictions on video surveillance. You aren't allowed to film random people on the street without their consent, except with some exceptions. AR glasses would require retooling of such laws, not to mention gaining the public's trust as "send all public images to some megacorp's severs without their consent" is not a popular public opinion here. In Germany for example Google street view was not allowed for a long time also because privacy laws and public outrage(justified and not). I also dislike your defetist line of thinking "well, we're under 24/7 surveillance anyway, so we might as well allow Apple and Google to spy on us in public now while we're at it". How about NO, how about they can fuck right off. Though I think long term enough into the future, it's inevitable that governments, even within EU, will allow these corpos to have this surveillance as long as the data is processed and hosted in the EU, and the EU gov gets front door access to the data to spy on its citizens to prevent us from voting right wing candidates.
- wkat4242 1y ago
  It wouldn't. I have a Google glass enterprise 2. It's still a product waiting for a niche even today. The display is too small and too high up in your vision that it's annoying to use, the input method (trackpad on the stem) is terrible. For once I don't blame Google for stopping it.

I don't think we will get wider adoption of augmented wearables until we get something more like Deamon glasses - as light and wearable as a pair of glasses, but also discreet.

mrklol 1y ago

Yep, that’s the way to go till we have something like contact lenses :D

Molitor5901 1y ago
I can't imagine the dystopian nightmare it will all bring, however. Knowing each human that I interact with is a possibility that I am being recorded in real time, analyzed, etc. It would change human behavior forever.

lesuorac 1y ago

I dunno, I think Google Glass if released today would do significantly better. I'm sure android phones could be paired to it now and you'd swipe using the phone against a keyboard displayed on the headset. It just seems like it should be much nicer to read things without crocking your neck.

FirmwareBurner 1y ago
>I dunno, I think Google Glass if released today would do significantly better. Why? Its users would still be called "glassholes" just like before. Nobody likes looking stupid in public, and wearing AR ski/diving goggles in public makes you look like a complete tool. Then there's the issue with privacy. People wouldn't want to be constantly filmed/scanned in public by other people's AR goggles. It would be like wherever you go people having their smartphones pointed at you. Apple VP is a niche solution looking for a niche problem. It's no iPhone moment.
- Reubachi 1y ago
  Bit of a nitpick on one of your subpoints (I agree with your sentiment overall); GG won't/didn't fail due to the perception of "this person is filming me without my consent", that is a strawman meant to create more headlines than the less-sexy "it just doesn't have much purpose and is too expensive." Exactly like with VisionPro. We're already under 1080p surveillance 90 percent of our waking lives out of the house. A person wearing glasses with a UI layer and a camera walking down the street likely isn't saving that picture, footage, to their home server to then send me a citation over. But the commercial businesses, police, DOT etc sure are, and are all subpoena-able by courts. Less so with a guy wearing glasses.
  - JohnFen 1y ago
    That's assuming that the headset isn't sending the data to Apple as part of normal operation. But ignoring that, you're right -- one of those two things is certainly worse than the other, but they're both still bad.
  - FirmwareBurner 1y ago
    >We're already under 1080p surveillance 90 percent of our waking lives out of the house. Who's "we"? This is not the case where I live. I live in an EU country with very strict laws for privacy and restrictions on video surveillance. You aren't allowed to film random people on the street without their consent, except with some exceptions. AR glasses would require retooling of such laws, not to mention gaining the public's trust as "send all public images to some megacorp's severs without their consent" is not a popular public opinion here. In Germany for example Google street view was not allowed for a long time also because privacy laws and public outrage(justified and not). I also dislike your defetist line of thinking "well, we're under 24/7 surveillance anyway, so we might as well allow Apple and Google to spy on us in public now while we're at it". How about NO, how about they can fuck right off. Though I think long term enough into the future, it's inevitable that governments, even within EU, will allow these corpos to have this surveillance as long as the data is processed and hosted in the EU, and the EU gov gets front door access to the data to spy on its citizens to prevent us from voting right wing candidates.
wkat4242 1y ago
It wouldn't. I have a Google glass enterprise 2. It's still a product waiting for a niche even today. The display is too small and too high up in your vision that it's annoying to use, the input method (trackpad on the stem) is terrible. For once I don't blame Google for stopping it.