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

Meta Ray-Ban Display

meta.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 993 posts

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#271

Post by splatter9859 »

bitmasher9 wrote: post #244
paxys wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meta has close to 4 billion people worldwide using one or more of their products. Their brand problem doesn't extend much further than the HN comment section.

Instagram or WhatsApp are absolutely critical for daily functioning in certain circles of humanity.

WhatsApp I can buy due to the communication factor, but Instagram you're really going to have to sell me on fitting into the category of 'critical for daily functioning'.

Instagram. Critical to life. Naah.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#272

Post by jryle70 »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #115

They have a brand problem. Absolutely no way I buy anything from Meta.

Are you using Chinese brands? Tiktok, AliExpress, ByteDance, Binance, Tencent? If you have no problems with them but with Meta, that's hypocrisy on your part.

I myself don't really have problems with them, and neither with Meta. I don't think they have a brand problem other than in bubbles like HN.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#273

Post by intrasight »

SchemaLoad wrote: post #121
llmthrow0827 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the VR/AR/XR demos are so insanely trivial and yet still manage to be much more difficult than current methods of doing things. Like, really, cooking? Normal method: * Search for a recipe * Leave my phone on a stand and glance at it if I forget a step Meta glasses: * Put glasses on (there's a reason I got lasek, it's because wearing glasses sucks) * Talk into the void, trying to figure out how to describe my prob…

These companies are reaching really hard for use cases while ignoring the only ones VR actually works well for. If they just went all in on gaming it would be a much better product than trying to push AI slop cooking help.

> the only ones VR actually works well for

I had really expected a different "only one"

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#274

Post by mgh2 »

paxys wrote: post #236
JKCalhoun wrote: post #115

They have a brand problem. Absolutely no way I buy anything from Meta.

Meta has close to 4 billion people worldwide using one or more of their products. Their brand problem doesn't extend much further than the HN comment section.

Mark was right: https://www.theregister.com/2010/05/14/facebook_trust_dumb/

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#275

Post by SonOfKyuss »

ghaff wrote: post #253
SilverElfin wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These things have cameras and mics in them. Am I the only one concerned about people walking into every space with surveillance systems that are capturing us and sending that data to some random set of companies who have no obligation to keep our information confidential? How can I have a conversation with a friend wearing one of these? And surely workplaces will ban these?

> And surely workplaces will ban these? For all but the most security-conscious companies, that ship has probably sailed. Bringing a camera into many companies used to be an exercise involving forms, approvals, and so forth. Now everyone has camera, video, and audio recording in their pocket.

To those around you, there is a big difference between having a video recording device in your pocket compared to on your head. I would personally feel pretty uncomfortable if someone pulled up to the next stall in the workplace bathroom with these on

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#276

Post by sharkjacobs »

I like the look of the Oakleys better than the Raybans. I get why they want to make their glasses look like Rayban Wayfarers, because they're the most neutral inconspicuous glasses frame style of the last 25 years, but, IMO, they missed the mark pretty bad, and they look pretty conspicuous and pretty bad.

You won't blend in wearing the Oakleys, but they look like what they are, which is an insane mirrorshades cyberpunk HUD, and if the wearer can own that they could actually look kind of sick.

Of course, I'm technically underwhelmed and unimpressed by what I've seen of the actual technology, but that's hardly the most important thing.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#277

Post by bitwize »

jryle70 wrote: post #272
JKCalhoun wrote: post #115

They have a brand problem. Absolutely no way I buy anything from Meta.

Are you using Chinese brands? Tiktok, AliExpress, ByteDance, Binance, Tencent? If you have no problems with them but with Meta, that's hypocrisy on your part. I myself don't really have problems with them, and neither with Meta. I don't think they have a brand problem other than in bubbles like HN.

One of these options (Meta vs. Chinese brands) is in bed with a dangerous totalitarian regime.

The other is the Chinese brands.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#278

Post by danpalmer »

hdjrudni wrote: post #267
explorigin wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've done live demos of AI. Even with the same queries, I got a different answers than my 4 previous practice attempts. My demos keep me on my toes and I try to limit the scope much more now. (I didn't have control over temperature settings.)

> (I didn't have control over temperature settings.) That's...interesting. You'd think they'd dial the temperature to 0 for you before the demo at least. Regardless, if the tech is good, I'd hope all the answers are at least decent and you could roll with it. If not....then maybe it needs to stay in R&D.

Reducing temperature to 0 doesn't make LLMs deterministic. There's still a bunch of other issues such as float math results depending on which order you perform mathematically commutative operations in.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#280

Post by dmbche »

stavros wrote: post #265
dmbche wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's the last queried answer. There is no ai in the glasses without a connection, so all it (edit1:it here being the program being run on the glasses, client to the ai between other things)can do (seemingly) is loop around and re-read the last queried answer, which was the mistaken "you've already...". In the glasses is just a client to the ai. Like there is no ai in your phone when you talk to chatgpt, you are…

If you believe that they made the glasses repeat the last answer when they don't have connectivity, instead of saying "I don't have connectivity", I don't know what to tell you. I own a pair of Meta glasses, and the response when they don't have connectivity is "this function is not available at this time".

Isn't this a very odd discussion to keep going? I'm not sure why you're being so confrontational as well. I see you have a lot of points, is that a way to drive engagement?
Post reply on HN