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

Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

meta.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 967 posts

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#81

Post by meheleventyone »

MilStdJunkie wrote: post #54

As 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 t…

There's no screen so, not yet.

But it does sound pretty much like having a laser on the gun no?

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#82

Post by audunw »

sp3000 wrote: post #8

Any 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.

Why glasses? I’ve paid a lot of money not to have to wear glasses.

I might use some kind of camera attached to my head if it was something most people used. Would be nice to be able to capture moments instantly.

I haven’t seen a use-case for low quality augmented reality that would make me use glasses daily. Then again, I personally don’t find smart watches worth it and lots of people use those.

I think the Apple Vision kind of illustrates what it’d take for really compelling augmented reality. If it can replace my TV I might actually use it. But then they clearly don’t intend for you to use them outside. And I’m still not sure if it’s worth the discomfort of wearing tightly fitting glasses.

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#83

Post by operatingthetan »

toyg wrote: post #59
operatingthetan wrote: post #7

Is 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.

They are not "stealth smart glasses", they are the first iteration of AR glasses. Recording is one of the many things they do. And I'd buy them in a second if it means I don't need to take my phone out every few minutes (and if I had the money, I expect them to be uber-expensive); or I don't need to look away from the road to check directions as I drive; or I don't need to reveal in-shop that I'm checking online pric…

>they are the first iteration of AR glasses.

You seem to be forgetting a lot of previous products. If anything these are a really late reply to Snap's Spectacles.

Also, these don't have a display. Many of your listed use cases don't apply unless you count audio replies, which we already have, all over the place. Please read about what a product does before correcting someone in the future...

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#84

Post by Eji1700 »

sp3000 wrote: post #8

Any 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.

Cost and interface mostly. Also to some extent privacy issues.

Phones being $1000 is already an issue, and they're by default more robust. Glasses, assuming we can get them to a similar cost, are probably even more likely to be lost or broken. For comparison think of foldable smart phones, which exist, but are mostly seen as a trendy luxury item due to their durability issues.

The interface, I think is huge. Smart phones took off because apple figured out a good interface. People like to rip on them for just copying an idea that already existed and hadn't taken off, but they ignore that apple nailed the hell out of getting it so the average person could use it.

You need it to be clear, obvious, and responsive.

All the examples i've seen of these smart glasses (website isn't loading for me so I can't check this) are the sorts of things that nerdy people like me (typing on a cornish zen) would find fine, and will never be smooth enough for the average user, ESPECIALLY at current costs.

While things like the air pods pro have changed my opinion on the average user adopting tactile controls, I still think that voice activation and mostly reference-less tactile controls is NOT mass adoptable. And this is before we get into just the hassle of glasses (smudges and the like).

From what I can tell, these are basically just "headphones + camera" on your face. So it's not displaying anything, at which point this is like airpods with a camera. Is there a group of people who want that? Sure, this looks tailor made for luxury influences. Is that a use case for the average person? I don't think so.

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#85

Post by sgjohnson »

ArekDymalski wrote: post #64
sp3000 wrote: post #8

Any 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.

> Any good argument that anyone can think of for a scenario where smart eyewear will not be as ubiquitous as smart phones eventually? I see 2 potential scenarios: 1. Some series of safety/privacy mishaps will lead to social/media hysteria which will push politicians towards a ban for such devices. 2. Initial price set too high will cause vicious circle of: low userbase -> lack of interest from developers -> lack of v…

> 2. Initial price set too high will cause vicious circle of:

These are listed at $299. Hardly expensive, compared to how much ray bans cost.

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#86

Post by Justsignedup »

ortusdux wrote: post #63
Justsignedup wrote: post #53

Reminds 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 b…

"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.

Eh its not about stealth, its about availability.

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#87

Post by LeifCarrotson »

sp3000 wrote: post #8

Any 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.

Eyeballs are pretty optimal for getting data out of a computer and into a brain. I think professionals will continue to use a high-resolution large-format desktop monitor, but a high-resolution large-format display on a pair of glasses is unambiguously superior to a phone screen, no matter how much resolution they pack in or how much larger than a pocket they get.

What I wonder is where the keyboard is going. I have an imagination that can draw and abstract things with (I think?) about as much fidelity as my eyes can take in, but there's nothing that even comes close to that for getting that data out of my brain and into the computer. Not keyboards, not mice, not touchscreens or pen/tablet, not game controllers, not voice-to-text. Not my Leap Motion gesture sensor or Spacemouse, though those are interesting products. With lots and lots of training, I can get hundreds of WPM of text into a computer, with exotic, high-information-density syntax if required (text entry speed doesn't really seem to be the bottleneck for productive work, but that's beside the point IMO).

The optimal input mechanism is definitely not blinking, though I can imagine that eyeglasses with gaze tracking tech (and some training for "wink to click" or similar) may someday be of comparable or greater utility to a mouse pointer. But how close can we get to "think to text" or "think to image"?

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#88

Post by hinkley »

ChicagoBoy11 wrote: post #24
sp3000 wrote: post #8

Any 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.

I 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…

I wonder if we will see an inversion of the clip-on sunglasses design but with corrective lenses.

Clip your prescription to a pair of sunglasses instead, or to your smart glasses.

You might have to clip them to the backside to get it all to work out. But in that case variations in lens shape will be less visible, because sunglasses.

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#89

Post by trey-jones »

Probably 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.

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#90

Post by Jeff_Brown »

rdtsc wrote: post #74
sp3000 wrote: post #8

Any 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.

> Any good argument that anyone can think of for a scenario where smart eyewear will not be as ubiquitous as smart phones eventually? Yes, if it is clunky and doesn't look like an ordinary accessory people would wear anyway. Smart watches are popular enough as people might wear a watch. Smart glasses could be popular if they look like actual glasses. Smart pants? Sure, if they can be worn like pants, thrown in the la…

I recently saw an ad, probably on facebook, for a camera with a form factor the size of a USB stick, that you could clip on your belt or lapel or whatever, and record whatever was around you with a wide angle lens.
Post reply on HN