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

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

seattletimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 280 posts

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

#131

Post by noman-land »

throwaway_7274 wrote: post #87
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.

It’s so interesting to me that there are still so many people who see the monkey’s-paw thing as somehow secondary or incidental, even those who acknowledge that it’s often there! I don’t really understand why this is, or why I feel differently. To me at least, the monkey’s-paw aspect is primary now, to the point that the gee-whiz aspect hardly bears on my thinking at all. I’m not telling you that I think you’re wrong…

The web is truly taken over by the biggest scumbags on the planet preying on the technological naivety of a populous they helped entrap.

In the beginning they stepped in with the cloud to bring the "always available" thing to the masses, while simultaneously socially and legally destroying the burgeoning p2p ecosystem. Convenience at the cost of freedom.

That had the effect of kneecapping the technological progress and knowhow of ordinary people and has left them trapped on platforms they moved their lives to but are owned by their abusers.

The abusers are now in complete control and the abused have no ability to even imagine an alternative.

The alternative is to leave these platforms. Form alternate social groups with open technologies that stay resilient to outages and attacks.

We don't need the cloud anymore for the vast majority of civic and social life.

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

#132

Post by jayd16 »

shimman wrote: post #76
joemi wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not the person that you're replying to, but: It can be less intrusive than using a phone, I believe. That makes it a step closer to being present. (I don't know specifics, but I'm assuming that the display can be turned off when not in use.) Also, if someone already wears glasses, why not have glasses that can do more?

You don't need a phone either and sorry but the idea of someone using a device to learn things about me that I did not share with them is frankly disgusting and dehumanizing. You can simply talk to people, we don't have to enable your perversions because you refuse to interact with humans.

You mean like if they google you?

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

#133

Post by flufluflufluffy »

yoyohello13 wrote: post #123
andy_ppp wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!

I personally prefer good old situational awareness

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

#134

Post by codazoda »

arjie wrote: post #126

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…

I agree, but unfortunately, they don't have great quality or support.

First, I've had these for about 2-years. I purchased them to capture candid pictures and video's on a cruise and they were fantastic for that purpose but I've bought two pairs in two years and won't buy them again.

When you email Ray Bans for support they send you a wall of text mentioning everything their warranty doesn't cover. It was enough to discourage me from continuing to get a case replacement 2-weeks after my purchase and I just bought a third-party adapter instead. I expected more from the brand. I won't buy Ray Bans (Meta or otherwise) again because of the hostility in that one email.

My first pair died after 1-year (I gave them away after 6-months and they only lasted the new owner another 6-months). My second pair died after just over a year.

I'd love to have a good pair of camera/audio glasses. The audio is one of the best parts. But these Meta glasses aren't it for me anymore.

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

#135

Post by rurp »

ipaddr wrote: post #107
abirch wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone signs in and gives up their privacy, I don't care. Where I do care is when someone with their pervert glasses captures an image of me at my kid's little league game and now I'm getting ads based on that.

A little league game has hundreds of people taking pictures and video. Unless your child plays naked there is nothing you can do to stop them. If you really want to stop anyone from seeing your child in public you would need a Burka or don't allow them to be in public. I think you are fighting a losing battle if you choose to allow your kids to enter society.

Scale matters. Parents taking their phones out to record discrete events in a visible way is one thing, and the data may or may not make its way to Facebook. Parents wearing glasses that record and upload 100% of what they are seeing to Facebook is qualitatively different.

Similar to how cops getting a warrant and tapping a single person's phone is different from the government spying on all citizens at all times.

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

#136

Post by vitorfblima »

gopalv wrote: post #51
andy_ppp wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> notice the real world without the idea of augmenting it. The core problem of solitude is curiosity and sonder. When I smell fennel on a hike, I want to know what it is - yeah, this is dog fennel. When I see a strange symbol on a taxi car, I want to know why it is 3 arrows on bow and what that is. Seeing a strange dog and wondering what kind of dog that is (a whippet?). A glimpse of a black bird with red shoulder pa…

I'd say, if anything, this would make me less curious. The less you know, the better.

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

#137

Post by flufluflufluffy »

johncearls wrote: post #52
AtlanticThird wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My assumption about the default use case is that people want to take normal pictures. For example, I wear them to sporting events, and it's a lot faster to take a picture of the action with my Meta glasses than with my iPhone.

I love mine. Being able to snap a pic without getting too far out of the moment, like when I am at a museum or in a beautiful place is great. Even better is being able to snap a picture of my grandchildren without distracting them. As soon as I pull out my phone, they are grabbing for it. Some of my favorite pics were taken by my meta glasses.

> snap a picture of my grandchildren without distracting them

That my friend is the reason everybody hates them

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

#138

Post by throwaway_7274 »

noman-land wrote: post #131
throwaway_7274 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s so interesting to me that there are still so many people who see the monkey’s-paw thing as somehow secondary or incidental, even those who acknowledge that it’s often there! I don’t really understand why this is, or why I feel differently. To me at least, the monkey’s-paw aspect is primary now, to the point that the gee-whiz aspect hardly bears on my thinking at all. I’m not telling you that I think you’re wrong…

The web is truly taken over by the biggest scumbags on the planet preying on the technological naivety of a populous they helped entrap. In the beginning they stepped in with the cloud to bring the "always available" thing to the masses, while simultaneously socially and legally destroying the burgeoning p2p ecosystem. Convenience at the cost of freedom. That had the effect of kneecapping the technological progress a…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure

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

#139

Post by alickz »

willtemperley wrote: post #80
abirch wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably different concerns. If you had a home video and I was in the background I wouldn't care. The odds of anyone recognizing me would be low. If you upload it to anyone using mass AI (YouTube, Meta, etc.) then I care a lot.

I suspect you're not a pretty girl that gets stared at. Neither am I, but if I were I'd rather the stares weren't recordable.

If I was a pretty girl that gets stared at I think I'd want to record the ones doing the staring

People generally commit less crime if they think they're on camera

If they do commit a crime, at least there would be video evidence

Or if they just want to be creepy, I'd send those stares to their wife

Considering motivated perverts would use hidden cameras, as opposed to cameras literally on their face, I think the asymmetry here is in favor of recording the perverts rather than vice versa

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

#140

Post by arjie »

codazoda wrote: post #134
arjie wrote: post #126

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…

I agree, but unfortunately, they don't have great quality or support. First, I've had these for about 2-years. I purchased them to capture candid pictures and video's on a cruise and they were fantastic for that purpose but I've bought two pairs in two years and won't buy them again. When you email Ray Bans for support they send you a wall of text mentioning everything their warranty doesn't cover. It was enough to d…

The audio is actually remarkable. My wife could hear the whole description while I was standing next to her and heard nothing. There are these bone-conduction headsets that also do this stuff and it seems nothing short of magic. Sad to hear these ones didn't last. Who knows if they'll work if we ever take them out of the case.
Post reply on HN