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

291–300 of 967 posts

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#291

Post by JumpCrisscross »

jperras wrote: post #277
ianbicking wrote: post #259

These could be pretty incredible if the platform was more open. You get highly available image and voice input, and good voice output. Imagine if you could take a picture of anything, add a little note, have it filed away. Not necessarily an awesome Instagram picture, but just a picture of some mail you got, a tool you are putting away, any thing you want to record and save. Heck, why not a picture of your computer s…

> Imagine if you could take a picture of anything, add a little note, have it filed away. Not necessarily an awesome Instagram picture, but just a picture of some mail you got, a tool you are putting away, any thing you want to record and save. Heck, why not a picture of your computer screen? Pair that with quickly available audio transcriptions and you can also dictate anything, thoughts, small notes, information as…

> hitting a button and then having to either speak the command out loud or hit some other button to capture video/audio/etc., which seems more cumbersome than the phone approach

For the mass market, perhaps the right place to put the camera is on headphones. (I’m already talking to my AirPods.) This product doesn’t appear to be positioned for the mass market, however, but instead influencers.

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#292

Post by DoctorOetker »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #87
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…

our ears can speak.

the inner ear is a mechanical amplifier.

a device comparing the incoming acoustic spectrum with the otoacoustically emitted spectrum can see the mixer settings (controlled by the brain).

we could learn to type and communicate with our cochleas (assuming they weren't destroyed by wearing big headphones while cycling...)

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#293

Post by throwaway689236 »

majikandy wrote: post #283
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’d say “comfort”. Glasses aren’t comfortable for many people and neither are contact lenses. I have a mild prescription but the discomfort of the glasses (arms, nose bridge, turning head more) is greater than the discomfort of my vision not being ultra sharp (for me). So a future of putting on glasses for the tech really isn’t for me.

Same could be said about headphones, yet here we are.

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#294

Post by bparsons »

I don't know anyone who would want this.

Nobody wants to be around someone in social situations who might be surreptitiously filming them. Wearing glasses with a camera on them is a great way to be labelled a creep by everyone around you.

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#295

Post by toast0 »

nickthegreek wrote: post #135
ChicagoBoy11 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 found google glass to be great. It had real world AR in directions. I used it several times in other cities to move about. I never really had any heat issues. I do wish we could have gotten a couple iterations, but that's Google for you.

Google Wear is the second iteration of Google Glass, pretty much the same UI, but on your wrist instead of awkwardly up and to the right.

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#296

Post by itissid »

I am wondering how they will build out Wifi-Index for positioning(GPS sucks in cities) assuming they want to do location based targetting for any number of purposes(ads, recommendations, location based geo-fencing etc). The critical piece for attribution is linking Wifi based position to a PoI(for location based anything). This takes a few years to build. Google has a great map blue dot has good fidelity with location because they have a phone collecting all that Wifi data for many years..

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#297

Post by JumpCrisscross »

expertentipp wrote: post #192
smcleod wrote: post #164

As someone else here said - I don’t care about a camera, I want a display, and I certainly wouldn’t want a camera from Facebook.

It's not about what you want, it's about what ad industry wants.

> it's about what ad industry wants

On what planet would an ad exec choose this over a pair of sunglasses with a screen?

We don’t currently have the technology and/or industry to sell a decent $300 screen on your face. That is why we don’t have it.

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#299

Post by pj_mukh »

jperras wrote: post #277
ianbicking wrote: post #259

These could be pretty incredible if the platform was more open. You get highly available image and voice input, and good voice output. Imagine if you could take a picture of anything, add a little note, have it filed away. Not necessarily an awesome Instagram picture, but just a picture of some mail you got, a tool you are putting away, any thing you want to record and save. Heck, why not a picture of your computer s…

> Imagine if you could take a picture of anything, add a little note, have it filed away. Not necessarily an awesome Instagram picture, but just a picture of some mail you got, a tool you are putting away, any thing you want to record and save. Heck, why not a picture of your computer screen? Pair that with quickly available audio transcriptions and you can also dictate anything, thoughts, small notes, information as…

I have the near opposite experience especially having attempted to build the mobile based product you mentioned [https://placenote.com/]

The seamlessness of glasses is really what makes this even possible, especially now that voice is becoming a seamless interface.

I largely like my phone to remain in my pocket (especially when I’m with my impressionable kids) and bringing it out and unlocking, getting my brain to ignore all the notifications, going through whatever button routine is required, then doing the camera localization dance, just doesn’t compare to one click + voice narration once it’s built right.

Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses

#300

Post by majikandy »

freedomben wrote: post #114
jeremyjh wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Meta glasses don’t have a display, it’s just camera and audio.

Wow dang, they really should make this more obvious. If I bought one and discovered that (despite being able to record and stream video) it had no display, I would be pissed.

I agree this marketing is definitely misleading, this image is a clear representation of a screen. Very black mirror. https://ibb.co/HYpNzxD
Post reply on HN