4 ms·

I'm not finding it to be any different from "Four eyes!"

by BeetleB 4mo ago

smokedetector1 4mo ago
zuck is trying to push bad, ugly glasses to profit at the expense of causing nefarious social impact. the blog is mocking the ugliness of the glasses. it represents how out of touch zuck is. i’m not sure how you got to “four eyes” from there
- BeetleB 4mo ago
  > zuck is trying to push bad, ugly glasses ... > i’m not sure how you got to “four eyes” from there I'm guessing you're younger than me. In my youth, having glasses meant being ugly.
  - smokedetector1 4mo ago
    i know what it means. you’re projecting something completely inappropriate, i’m guessing from your own life, onto the blogs criticism.
  - bigfishrunning 4mo ago
    It doesn't mean that anymore. But having "smart glasses" does mean "jerk".
  - rpgbr 4mo ago
    You use normal glasses to see better. You buy a smart glass to record people without their knowledge. The only thing similar in these objects is that your wear them on your face.
- soiltype 4mo ago
  although it's true and funny that rich assholes often have terrible taste, it's important that criticism of pervert glasses doesn't make their ugliness load-bearing. what happens if the next gen looks good, we're suddenly okay with them?
  - smokedetector1 4mo ago
    i dont think the blog is proposing a long-term criteria. the ugliness is funny and worth noting now because its currently happening and a great symbol of them pushing plainly horrible stuff down our throats
  - anigbrowl 4mo ago
    It's not about taste! They're literally too big to function effectively! If you bed over to look at something they will fall off your face. It's like offering running shoes with kilogram-weight batteries on the bottom, a basic failure to understand the problem. I can't believe people are trying to make excuses for a product that is clearly not ready for consumer applications.
vkou 4mo ago
Prescription glasses are a medical device that corrects for a disability. This shit ain't it. Why are you trying so hard to shoehorn inappropriate criticism of people with disabilities... Into appropriate criticism of this technocrap?
zerobees 4mo ago
In this instance, it's directed at people who are literally at the top of the world, having amassed almost unthinkable power and influence, and want to start a fashion trend specifically to grow their business empires. So yeah, it's a tiny bit different than bullying a classmate for having bad eyesight.
- BeetleB 4mo ago
  > it's directed at people who are literally at the top of the world The very first sentence in the article associates people who wear these with "pervs". So no, this is not merely directed at "the top of the world". As an aside: VRs were "the cool thing" in the 90's and 00's. They never became practical, and fell out of favor. "Normal" people never stopped mocking those who used them. Now that Meta has made glasses that actually come close to looking normal, tech folks mock back ...? I just don't get it. Yes, I get all the privacy concerns. But making fun because of very subjective reasons like appearance? It undercuts all the privacy concerns. People need to grow up.
  - bigfishrunning 4mo ago
    This would be a great argument if there were any non-pervy application for these glasses. They're marketed at people who already have screens and better cameras in their pockets and on their wrists. "Clandestine" use cases are the only application here.
    - Brendinooo 4mo ago
      Ugh, trying not to get baited into stuff like this but - There are absolutely non-pervy reasons why your hands might be occupied but you want to record a video.
      - bigfishrunning 4mo ago
        This is why gopros exist.
queenkjuul 4mo ago
... These are people with fine vision, wearing ugly glasses by choice. It's not at all comparable. I can criticize anyone's choices. Needing glasses is not a choice. Wearing Meta creep-shot raybans is a choice i will never stop criticizing

I'm not finding it to be any different from "Four eyes!"

by BeetleB 4mo ago

I'm not finding it to be any different from "Four eyes!"

zuck is trying to push bad, ugly glasses to profit at the expense of causing nefarious social impact. the blog is mocking the ugliness of the glasses. it represents how out of touch zuck is. i’m not sure how you got to “four eyes” from there

BeetleB 4mo ago
> zuck is trying to push bad, ugly glasses ... > i’m not sure how you got to “four eyes” from there I'm guessing you're younger than me. In my youth, having glasses meant being ugly.
- smokedetector1 4mo ago
  i know what it means. you’re projecting something completely inappropriate, i’m guessing from your own life, onto the blogs criticism.
- bigfishrunning 4mo ago
  It doesn't mean that anymore. But having "smart glasses" does mean "jerk".
- rpgbr 4mo ago
  You use normal glasses to see better. You buy a smart glass to record people without their knowledge. The only thing similar in these objects is that your wear them on your face.
soiltype 4mo ago
although it's true and funny that rich assholes often have terrible taste, it's important that criticism of pervert glasses doesn't make their ugliness load-bearing. what happens if the next gen looks good, we're suddenly okay with them?
- smokedetector1 4mo ago
  i dont think the blog is proposing a long-term criteria. the ugliness is funny and worth noting now because its currently happening and a great symbol of them pushing plainly horrible stuff down our throats
- anigbrowl 4mo ago
  It's not about taste! They're literally too big to function effectively! If you bed over to look at something they will fall off your face. It's like offering running shoes with kilogram-weight batteries on the bottom, a basic failure to understand the problem. I can't believe people are trying to make excuses for a product that is clearly not ready for consumer applications.

vkou 4mo ago

Prescription glasses are a medical device that corrects for a disability. This shit ain't it. Why are you trying so hard to shoehorn inappropriate criticism of people with disabilities... Into appropriate criticism of this technocrap?

zerobees 4mo ago

In this instance, it's directed at people who are literally at the top of the world, having amassed almost unthinkable power and influence, and want to start a fashion trend specifically to grow their business empires. So yeah, it's a tiny bit different than bullying a classmate for having bad eyesight.

BeetleB 4mo ago
> it's directed at people who are literally at the top of the world The very first sentence in the article associates people who wear these with "pervs". So no, this is not merely directed at "the top of the world". As an aside: VRs were "the cool thing" in the 90's and 00's. They never became practical, and fell out of favor. "Normal" people never stopped mocking those who used them. Now that Meta has made glasses that actually come close to looking normal, tech folks mock back ...? I just don't get it. Yes, I get all the privacy concerns. But making fun because of very subjective reasons like appearance? It undercuts all the privacy concerns. People need to grow up.
- bigfishrunning 4mo ago
  This would be a great argument if there were any non-pervy application for these glasses. They're marketed at people who already have screens and better cameras in their pockets and on their wrists. "Clandestine" use cases are the only application here.
  - Brendinooo 4mo ago
    Ugh, trying not to get baited into stuff like this but - There are absolutely non-pervy reasons why your hands might be occupied but you want to record a video.
    - bigfishrunning 4mo ago
      This is why gopros exist.

queenkjuul 4mo ago

... These are people with fine vision, wearing ugly glasses by choice. It's not at all comparable. I can criticize anyone's choices. Needing glasses is not a choice. Wearing Meta creep-shot raybans is a choice i will never stop criticizing