'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows • Hacker News Board

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#121

Post by apothegm » Mon, Aug 10, 2026, 4:52 PM UTC

customguy wrote: post #70

yoyohello13 wrote: post #6

Tech is so frustrating in real life. I feel like we have all the cool sci fi stuff I always wanted, but everything comes with a monkey's paw style gotcha. The idea of meta glasses is so awesome, I want a heads up display to show me whatever I want. But there is no way in hell I would use them because the company that makes it can’t be trusted.

Startup idea: customers give you their Meta glasses, you smash the camera and microphone (with a tiny sledge hammer), and wrap most of the glasses and particularly where mic/camera would have been in a special casing with a very unique and patented design you also make a huge fuss on social media about, so everybody knows it. The wrapper is hard/impossible to remove, only the company can trigger the self-release mech…

And two months later, knock-offs that leave the camera and mic operable are available for $5 on Temu.

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#122

Post by hgoel » Mon, Aug 10, 2026, 4:52 PM UTC

aqme28 wrote: post #90

hgoel wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the only way will be the tech getting too useful for the complaints to matter. Currently it's only marginally useful. Otherwise this irrational reaction will continue. Would help for the tech to come from companies with less awful reputations. Alternatively, maybe the solution will be some sort of device signature embedded into the video data at the hardware level so that videos are traceable to the person th…

To be clear, I don’t think this reaction is irrational at all. I’m curious though why you do.

This kind of discrete recording capability already is so widespread and accessible. Amazon is full of these kinds of devices, tiny "AI" audio recorders, pens with hidden cameras etc. They don't even require much technical competency.

People also walk around with their phones out so often. There's no way for you to know that they aren't recording. E.g. someone could easily be pretending to use their phone when climbing stairs while actually taking upskirt shots with the front camera.

Social media is also already full of people shamelessly recording others in situations where they would not want to be recorded.

Actual perverts have little reason to use these glasses specifically, and as mentioned in my previous post, the cameras have utility other than recording others.

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#123

Post by yoyohello13 » Mon, Aug 10, 2026, 4:52 PM UTC

andy_ppp wrote: post #22

yoyohello13 wrote: post #6

Tech is so frustrating in real life. I feel like we have all the cool sci fi stuff I always wanted, but everything comes with a monkey's paw style gotcha. The idea of meta glasses is so awesome, I want a heads up display to show me whatever I want. But there is no way in hell I would use them because the company that makes it can’t be trusted.

Why do you want this? I honestly think we’ve completely forgotten how to be present and notice the real world without the idea of augmenting it.

I wouldn't wear them when I'm walking in the woods or hanging out at home. Having 'incoming car warning', or waypoint nav when I'm biking/running? That would be great!

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#124

Post by ipaddr » Mon, Aug 10, 2026, 4:52 PM UTC

Octoth0rpe wrote: post #3

miladyincontrol wrote: post #2

I do think its a bit odd to automatically and "obviously" default to the idea that people will be using these to be perverts. Its a bit strange of a default assumption to me. Although its even more disheartening that most people's reactions to just about anything these days is dread about how it'll make their lives worse without fail.

> Its a bit strange of a default assumption to me. What is _your_ default assumption re: use case? I honestly can't think of any use cases (outside of very niche a11y uses) that are not in some way offensive, though perhaps not 'perverted'. This product is absolutely toxic, and I can't imagine myself or anyone I know being willing to associate or socialize with someone wearing them (again, excluding some very specifi…

The default is people live streaming their day. Live streaming is very popular with young people not so with older people.

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#125

Post by jayd16 » Mon, Aug 10, 2026, 4:53 PM UTC

eldaisfish wrote: post #104

jayd16 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because its cool. I mean, the real answer is that we have the technology to be tech wizards. You could conjure spatially anchored widgets and screens and gauges. You could put a cooking show screen above the stove, where a physical screen wouldn't work. You could put a synced calendar on the wall. Notes app on the fridge, weather reminders by the door. ...a million mundane conveniences in the house alone. But still,…

but then you are not present, you are distracted by a computer. Just because that computer does not have a clunky monitor, doesn't mean that you aren't any less distracted. Some of the attitudes on this website, especially ones like yours, are the literal reason we are in this mess today. Please, please, if you have the power, push back on this nonsense from the inside. We need more people talking to other people lik…

Nothing I described replaces or impacts talking to a human. If someone is going to distract themselves in XR, they can already do it more efficiently on a handset. The only change would be your posture and eye strain could possibly improve.

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#126

Post by arjie » Mon, Aug 10, 2026, 4:53 PM UTC

These glasses are really great to use. The camera is pretty fundamental functionality because you can use it to tell you things about the world around you. At the Vancouver Aquarium we asked about some fish we saw and stuff. I was quite surprised at the speed of the multi-modal model. It recognized the fish type, and then gave us some facts about it. Fantastic stuff, honestly.

It's also marvelous for taking videos of your children playing at the park. Here's my daughter at Port Moody https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcLAByw6ZYc

Very ergonomic and you get your hands free to catch them if something is about to happen. In the end, we didn't end up using them that much because the whole charging thing makes it kind of annoying, but that's about the only reason. I can't imagine I'd use it in a context where I wouldn't wear a GoPro, but it's a cool form factor.

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#127

Post by storus » Mon, Aug 10, 2026, 4:54 PM UTC

10 years ago one could buy "spyglasses" on eBay with camera in the middle hidden behind a polarizing filter, looking like regular glasses. This Meta stuff feels like a bad copy of the same.

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#128

Post by gavinray » Mon, Aug 10, 2026, 4:55 PM UTC

wombat-man wrote: post #4

I hope one of these companies pulls off a compelling set of glasses with a display and no camera.

Even Realities G2, and MemoMind One + NIMO glasses coming soon.

Vuzix Z100 if you can find them anywhere as well...

All of these are green LED displays though, not a full color HUD.

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#129

Post by bonoboTP » Mon, Aug 10, 2026, 4:56 PM UTC

rtkwe wrote: post #34

Octoth0rpe wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would use them because the company that makes it can’t be trusted. I think this gets at only half of the problem. Not only can meta not be trusted, even if I trust _you_ if you were friend, I wouldn't trust any _other_ random user of such a product. As such, better to not have such a product around.

Correct the issue isn't Meta people just don't like the idea they could be being recorded at any time to get blasted out to the whole world. Yes, in theory you're always open to being recorded in public but the glasses make it far more subtle /and/ up close so more normal interactions become subject to the intrusion in a way that would normally be quite obvious. It's basically the same backlash that hit Google Glass…

Phones already make people much more reserved and less "wild" eg at parties compared to pre-phone-cameras (that are always online and can upload to social media effortlessly).

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#130

Post by wombat-man » Mon, Aug 10, 2026, 4:56 PM UTC

dylan604 wrote: post #66

wombat-man wrote: post #4

I hope one of these companies pulls off a compelling set of glasses with a display and no camera.

The product you describe would have very limited use. The full HUD of realtime information absolutely has benefits for the real world, but of course it will be used for things people would subvert for a more malevolent purpose. There's no avoiding that. Does the malevolent use out weight the beneficial use to the point the product should never be allowed?

People misuse all types of technology, yes. For now I'm not wearing any camera on my glasses partially because I don't want people being wary of me, but also I don't think it'd be that helpful. I am fine taking my phone out when a camera is needed.

If anyone comes up with a nice set without a camera, I'll consider it.