4 ms·

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/meta-trial-mark-zuckerberg-ai-glasses/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/meta-trial-mark-zuckerberg-ai-g... > Judge Carolyn Kuhl, who i

by fusslo 8mo ago

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/meta-trial-mark-zuckerberg-ai-glasses/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/meta-trial-mark-zuckerberg-ai-g... > Judge Carolyn Kuhl, who is presiding over the trial, ordered anyone in the courtroom wearing AI glasses to immediately remove them, noting that any use of facial recognition technology to identify the jurors was banned. I am not a believer in Zuckerberg's idea of humanity's future.

Refreeze5224 8mo ago
That's because you are intentionally not included in it. Only him and his rich owning class buddies are, the rest of us are only profit-generating NPCs.
- tosapple 8mo ago
  [dead]
- kurthr 8mo ago
  Epstein class fits here, might as well use it.
duxup 8mo ago
It's pointed AT US ... not for us.
newyankee 8mo ago
I was actually hoping it could be paired with speech to text very well and help along with hearing aids when the latter do not perfectly work. There are legitimate use cases.
- gmueckl 8mo ago
  Real time speech to text already exists on glasses with displays and works reasonably well.
- _carbyau_ 8mo ago
  Does that need a camera though?
  - newyankee 8mo ago
    Not an expert, but my suspicion is that the camera following lips can add an extra streaming data point making transcription accuracy much higher even at low volumes. Again a hunch and I guess the computational power and battery needs might still be insurmountable
- deleted 8mo ago
  [deleted]
- itishappy 8mo ago
  There are legitimate use cases and illegitimate ones. Unfortunately, I'm seeing more examples of the latter. I somehow suspect Mark's entourage aren't all hard of hearing.
socalgal2 8mo ago
> I am not a believer in Zuckerberg's idea of humanity's future. I don't know what Zuckerberg's idea of humanity's future is but I believe it's basically inevitable that most people will be wearing always on cameras on their face in the future. The same way they carry always on phones today. The use cases will be too compelling. There have already been demos. Ask the AI watching over your shoulder anything about your past and present and have it act on it. I'm sure as a hater of that future you don't beleive. For me, I'd pick 2040 as the latest that people wearing always on cameras will be as common as smart phones in 2010 and grow at or faster than smartphones when they get it to actually work and be stylish. I'm not saying I'll enjoy being watched by all of those cameras. I'm saying I don't believe I'll have a choice any more than I have a choice of people having smartphones today.
- sublinear 8mo ago
  That's way off base. There's a very significant chunk of people who rarely if ever use the camera on their phone right now. It's not even a matter of who they are or their personal opinions. Cameras simply aren't an exclusive gateway to anything critically important. In many cases a photo or video is an objectively worse format than text. Smartphones became common because they are now the only way to access certain information or authenticate. It's to the extent that we eliminated hard copy documents and changed publishing and proving identity irreversibly. People frequently use smartphones because they have to, and a smartphone without a working camera is still perfectly usable and always will be. This isn't a matter of the public being wooed by a sales pitch or wanting anything in particular. Images require less accessible and reliable methods of interpretation to convey information whereas text is the information. If you're not convinced then consider that both can be generated by AI. A generated image can be convincing and so can generated text, yet we depend on special forms of text such as keys which cannot be generated by AI and any image trying to encode the same is always inferior. An image is never acceptable as a sole or even primary means of authentication. For all these reasons and more, an image is never the only format available.
  - sprinkly-dust 8mo ago
    I would disagree that a smartphone without a working camera is perfectly usable. A lot of the world — especially in developing countries — runs on QR Codes for everything from restaurant menus to electronic payments. Without a camera, other stuff too, like KYC, just doesn't work. These are the sorts of changes that, as you mentioned, are forcing people to use smartphones. And they rely on the camera.
deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]
latexr 8mo ago
> Zuckerberg's idea of humanity's future. It gets worse. https://www.axios.com/2025/05/02/meta-zuckerberg-ai-bots-friends-companions https://www.axios.com/2025/05/02/meta-zuckerberg-ai-bots-fri...

by fusslo 8mo ago

Refreeze5224 8mo ago

That's because you are intentionally not included in it. Only him and his rich owning class buddies are, the rest of us are only profit-generating NPCs.

tosapple 8mo ago
[dead]
kurthr 8mo ago
Epstein class fits here, might as well use it.

duxup 8mo ago

It's pointed AT US ... not for us.

newyankee 8mo ago

I was actually hoping it could be paired with speech to text very well and help along with hearing aids when the latter do not perfectly work. There are legitimate use cases.

gmueckl 8mo ago
Real time speech to text already exists on glasses with displays and works reasonably well.
_carbyau_ 8mo ago
Does that need a camera though?
- newyankee 8mo ago
  Not an expert, but my suspicion is that the camera following lips can add an extra streaming data point making transcription accuracy much higher even at low volumes. Again a hunch and I guess the computational power and battery needs might still be insurmountable
deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]
itishappy 8mo ago
There are legitimate use cases and illegitimate ones. Unfortunately, I'm seeing more examples of the latter. I somehow suspect Mark's entourage aren't all hard of hearing.

socalgal2 8mo ago

> I am not a believer in Zuckerberg's idea of humanity's future. I don't know what Zuckerberg's idea of humanity's future is but I believe it's basically inevitable that most people will be wearing always on cameras on their face in the future. The same way they carry always on phones today. The use cases will be too compelling. There have already been demos. Ask the AI watching over your shoulder anything about your past and present and have it act on it. I'm sure as a hater of that future you don't beleive. For me, I'd pick 2040 as the latest that people wearing always on cameras will be as common as smart phones in 2010 and grow at or faster than smartphones when they get it to actually work and be stylish. I'm not saying I'll enjoy being watched by all of those cameras. I'm saying I don't believe I'll have a choice any more than I have a choice of people having smartphones today.

sublinear 8mo ago
That's way off base. There's a very significant chunk of people who rarely if ever use the camera on their phone right now. It's not even a matter of who they are or their personal opinions. Cameras simply aren't an exclusive gateway to anything critically important. In many cases a photo or video is an objectively worse format than text. Smartphones became common because they are now the only way to access certain information or authenticate. It's to the extent that we eliminated hard copy documents and changed publishing and proving identity irreversibly. People frequently use smartphones because they have to, and a smartphone without a working camera is still perfectly usable and always will be. This isn't a matter of the public being wooed by a sales pitch or wanting anything in particular. Images require less accessible and reliable methods of interpretation to convey information whereas text is the information. If you're not convinced then consider that both can be generated by AI. A generated image can be convincing and so can generated text, yet we depend on special forms of text such as keys which cannot be generated by AI and any image trying to encode the same is always inferior. An image is never acceptable as a sole or even primary means of authentication. For all these reasons and more, an image is never the only format available.
- sprinkly-dust 8mo ago
  I would disagree that a smartphone without a working camera is perfectly usable. A lot of the world — especially in developing countries — runs on QR Codes for everything from restaurant menus to electronic payments. Without a camera, other stuff too, like KYC, just doesn't work. These are the sorts of changes that, as you mentioned, are forcing people to use smartphones. And they rely on the camera.

deleted 8mo ago

[deleted]

latexr 8mo ago

> Zuckerberg's idea of humanity's future. It gets worse. https://www.axios.com/2025/05/02/meta-zuckerberg-ai-bots-friends-companions https://www.axios.com/2025/05/02/meta-zuckerberg-ai-bots-fri...