Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Influencers face backlash over Meta 'pervert glasses' content

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 54 posts

Re: Influencers face backlash over Meta 'pervert glasses' content

#11

Post by solarkraft »

zhoBEENG wrote: post #9
ifwinterco wrote: post #6

Either Mark Zuckerberg is playing an elaborate practical joke on everyone, or this is further proof that the West Coast tech scene has become such a bubble people have lost all sense of how ordinary people think. There is just no way this was going to fly in 2026 given high and increasing negative sentiment globally towards tech, and I'm not sure what made them think otherwise

In the US, Meta sold 7 million glasses units last year and is projected to sell 25+ million next year. Waymos already record everything happening in most of the area of many cities, and use much more than just cameras. 6g standard has sensing built in. Perhaps it is not the West Coast that is in the bubble.

Waymos don’t precisely harass women and upload the footage to their instagram feed

Re: Influencers face backlash over Meta 'pervert glasses' content

#12

Post by cj »

ifwinterco wrote: post #6

Either Mark Zuckerberg is playing an elaborate practical joke on everyone, or this is further proof that the West Coast tech scene has become such a bubble people have lost all sense of how ordinary people think. There is just no way this was going to fly in 2026 given high and increasing negative sentiment globally towards tech, and I'm not sure what made them think otherwise

Meanwhile, Tesla drivers are driving around with a dozen cameras mounted on their vehicle pointing in every direction.

Who would have thought that would be socially acceptable in 2026.

Re: Influencers face backlash over Meta 'pervert glasses' content

#13

Post by solarkraft »

syrrim wrote: post #10
graceful6800 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, we can all agree that crushing puppies is a bad thing, but you should blame the people using the puppy crusher 9000 to crush puppies and not the technology itself. After all, it's made an amazing profit for shareholders! Sometimes a thing is bad in and of itself. A thing designed specifically and explicitly to do bad things is still bad even if it helps a small number of people.

I don't think that product exists, and I think an ordinary trash compactor would be far more likely to be used instead. Should we blame the people compressing their garbage for all the people crushing puppies?

If there is a repeated, ongoing problem with a lot of people using the devices to crush puppies, the manufacturers would be expected to come up with ways to make this less likely to happen (safety measures etc).

And if that didn’t help, there might be a push to limit access to these machines because clearly a too significant part of the population is unable to use them responsibly.

Re: Influencers face backlash over Meta 'pervert glasses' content

#14

Post by Planktonne »

RobMurray wrote: post #4

Can we maybe blame the people who use them irresponsibly instead of blaming the technology? These glasses have been a life changer for so many visually impaired people.

> These glasses have been a life changer for so many visually impaired people.

That's not why they're making them though; that's just insincere cover. If they were intended to be assistive devices, the marketing would be totally different.

Re: Influencers face backlash over Meta 'pervert glasses' content

#16

Post by syrrim »

solarkraft wrote: post #13
syrrim wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that product exists, and I think an ordinary trash compactor would be far more likely to be used instead. Should we blame the people compressing their garbage for all the people crushing puppies?

If there is a repeated, ongoing problem with a lot of people using the devices to crush puppies, the manufacturers would be expected to come up with ways to make this less likely to happen (safety measures etc). And if that didn’t help, there might be a push to limit access to these machines because clearly a too significant part of the population is unable to use them responsibly.

There isn't such a problem, it is at best an incidental use case that has been blown out of proportion. Such glasses would only be useful for illicit purposes in instances where a person is permitted to look at something, but not to photograph it. In such a case, they can be politely requested to remove the glasses, just the same as you would ask someone pointing a smartphone at you to put it down, even if they were just scrolling instagram. It's a non problem that spiraled into a moral panic.

Re: Influencers face backlash over Meta 'pervert glasses' content

#17

Post by mock-possum »

RobMurray wrote: post #4

Can we maybe blame the people who use them irresponsibly instead of blaming the technology? These glasses have been a life changer for so many visually impaired people.

Agreed, they’re cool tech that some people are using poorly. It doesn’t deserve the flippant ‘pervert glasses’ nickname.

Re: Influencers face backlash over Meta 'pervert glasses' content

#18

Post by voakbasda »

syrrim wrote: post #16
solarkraft wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there is a repeated, ongoing problem with a lot of people using the devices to crush puppies, the manufacturers would be expected to come up with ways to make this less likely to happen (safety measures etc). And if that didn’t help, there might be a push to limit access to these machines because clearly a too significant part of the population is unable to use them responsibly.

There isn't such a problem, it is at best an incidental use case that has been blown out of proportion. Such glasses would only be useful for illicit purposes in instances where a person is permitted to look at something, but not to photograph it. In such a case, they can be politely requested to remove the glasses, just the same as you would ask someone pointing a smartphone at you to put it down, even if they were…

It is not always immediately obvious when someone is wearing a pair versus normal glasses. Certainly not from any real distance.

Re: Influencers face backlash over Meta 'pervert glasses' content

#20

Post by syrrim »

voakbasda wrote: post #18
syrrim wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't such a problem, it is at best an incidental use case that has been blown out of proportion. Such glasses would only be useful for illicit purposes in instances where a person is permitted to look at something, but not to photograph it. In such a case, they can be politely requested to remove the glasses, just the same as you would ask someone pointing a smartphone at you to put it down, even if they were…

It is not always immediately obvious when someone is wearing a pair versus normal glasses. Certainly not from any real distance.

Who's taking creep shots from any real distance?
Post reply on HN