The relentless surveillance state marches ever onward...
[deleted]
Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses
731–740 of 967 posts
Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses
#732Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Damn it Siri where did I leave my hammer?” “At 8:32, you were in the basement and left it on your work bench, it was very close to the edge of the table and possibly fell” Ah the easy life…
I was waiting for them to say “hey Meta, who is this person again?” But that might have been too creepy for some people :)
I'm terrible at remembering names. This would be so useful on when attending workrelated functions.
Privatly I only hang out with the same 5 people or so, so there I manage
Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses
#733These 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…
A good start to make the tech more approachable for real hackers and nerds would be removing the Meta account requirement.
But it's obvious they don't want that community.
Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses
#734Adversarial clothing startups could very easily become more important.
[deleted]
Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses
#735They look amazing but it feels like a huge mistake to even include a camera (unless it's only inward-facing).. they should focus on Audio + AR + AI. The camera quality will be terrible compared to what you can get from the phone that's already in your pocket, and it just going make a huge portion of the population feel creeped out by it.. whereas there would be no real pushback against a HUD that provided real-time t…
[deleted]
Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses
#736Earlier quoted context omitted.
First of all, nobody (certainly not me) is "yelling." I find the way you wrote this response a bit telling, and that sort of thing actually detracts from your ability to persuade. I'd freely grant your point about the zyl. But the rest of your response is somewhat motte-and-bailey fallacy to me. For instance, I never maintained that there are "low quality plastic lens blanks." What I was getting at is that for a lot…
I find both comments pretty insightful and have a hard time disagreeing with either. It's nice that the poster you're replying to has deep knowledge about these glasses, but it doesn't actually change the way you feel about a sturdier-feeling product. And, sure, maybe you treat them really carefully, but the fact that they're 40 years old at least proves SOMETHING about them. Sometimes things that "feel" high-quality…
Oh man those Volvos from the 80s and 90s... I swear until a few years ago I heard people saying how they were the safest cars.
Or even my mum, I remember how she didn't like how the doors in the Sierra (an European Ford model) that my dad bought to replace an old Taunus (also an old European Ford model) were lighter, she felt less safe.
Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses
#737Earlier quoted context omitted.
> smart glasses will be as ubiquitous as smart phones This reminds me of the difference between Apple and Google: a sense of style. I have no doubt smart glasses will find their niche in industry and among techies. But what people put on their faces is deeply tied to identity. Until the technology can exist virtually unseen, it’s not going to compete.
Once smart glasses run solidly and can run mind blowing innovation / apps solidly too they are the next smart phone. Such innovations will sell smart glasses like apps drove smart phone sales. I think my argument is helped by the billions both Facebook and Apple are putting into smart glasses.
What about Google? They realised years ago that the market doesn't really want their product and found other niches to build their glasses for. If it's so obvious why would Google not care and only meta (which has a bad track record in finding trends) and apple follow that 'trend'
Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses
#738Pricing is interesting. $299 for the Wayfarer model when the base Wayfarer goes for $171 on the Rayban website. If (and this is a big if) you assume Luxottica takes the same cut on both models, then Meta is selling a camera, headphones, etc, conveniently packaged into a very small form-factor for $128. If I were in the market for a new pair of sunglasses, it isn't hard to seem me splurging another $128 for something…
Luxottica is probably doing very nicely on this partnership, and may well be offering Apple a substantial price cut to compensate. I had never heard of 'Rayban' before this Apple announcement! (Not that I am the target market for sunglasses anyway, in dark and wet Great Britain)
> I had never heard of 'Rayban' before this Apple announcement!
Apple? Or do you mean Meta? It would be understandable if you had never heard of them, given the recent rebrand!
Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses
#739Camera sunglasses are available from others, and the others are better looking. How did Luxottica produce something so ugly?
Re: Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses
#740Earlier quoted context omitted.
The base, regular Wayfarers were cannibalized and cheapened out by Luxottica a long time ago. I'm fortunate enough to have a vintage pair from the mid-1980's that still look brand new. They have higher quality zyl frames, polarized glass Bausch & Lomb lenses, and, crucially, five barrel bolted hinges. They're built like a tank. The new ones are so cheap I won't even wear them. Cheap plastic, plastic lenses, spring hi…
I work in the optical industry. I do R&D/quality control for a lens manufacturer and agree Luxottica is an awful company, but your comment is way off base. It's actually quite wrong. Your "zyl" acetate frames aren't higher quality. Modern acetate is stronger, lighter, less brittle, less subject to warping from temperature change, and more resistant to UV damage which impacts brittleness and color. 40 years of materia…
thank you for this very down to the facts excursion on 40y of progress in non-prescription glasses :-) this is what I come for on HN