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

551–560 of 993 posts

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#551

Post by aikinai »

armadsen wrote: post #327
ryukoposting wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A HUD reduces the difference in focus distance between "looking at road" and "looking at speedometer." It matters more as you get older, because your eyes focus slower.

Yep. My new car has a digital rear view mirror. You flip a switch and the rear view mirror becomes a screen showing a feed from a camera on the back of the car. It’s nice for night time as well as when the rear window is blocked by rear seat passengers’ heads, or cargo or whatever. But it’s uncomfortable for me because it requires my eyes to refocus from distant to close and back when I glance at it, which isn’t need…

Once I had a rental car (a Nissan) that only had a screen instead of a mirror. It was absolutely useless since the resolution and dynamic range were too low, and as you mentioned, you have to change your focal distance which drastically increases time/friction to check the mirror.

I found myself actually using the incidental reflection on the surface of the screen instead of the actual pixels. I can't believe this arrangement is legal.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#552

Post by koolala »

dweekly wrote: post #302
vasco wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All babies look the same, out of anything private you could film by mistake, a baby seems pretty harmless.

Face recognition is uninuitively good. Google Photos was able to pick out faces from my baby photos pretty easily.

Custom ads based on your baby facial expressions 15 years later?

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#553

Post by drakonka »

The evolution of smart glasses has totally passed me by since the Google Glass thing. Whenever I heard about them I just thought they were still in the "gimmick" stage. But last week I heard about Meta glasses for the first time and realized that people actually seem to use them, in a practical way?

If these things are now to the point of realistic adoption, I'd be interested in getting a pair, specifically to record and get on demand info/maps/AI integration maybe on runs, hikes, and other adventure/exploration-type settings... and recording my cats... But now a whole can of questions is opened:

- What products are developed enough this area that are worth choosing between?

- Don't trust meta due to privacy and data exploitation concerns. Are any other products on the same level in terms of hardware + software quality, or is it just going to have to be a compromise (or waiting until something else is good enough?)

- Responsiveness/UX/photo/video quality etc...

Part of me kind of wishes I was still ignorant to the advancements of these so I could keep ignoring them as a gimmick and not be tempted to dive into researching the product category...

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#554

Post by numpad0 »

m463 wrote: post #379
armadsen wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. My new car has a digital rear view mirror. You flip a switch and the rear view mirror becomes a screen showing a feed from a camera on the back of the car. It’s nice for night time as well as when the rear window is blocked by rear seat passengers’ heads, or cargo or whatever. But it’s uncomfortable for me because it requires my eyes to refocus from distant to close and back when I glance at it, which isn’t need…

Wonder why they don't optically refocus the display at a distance? There are ways to do stuff like this.

Like a light field display? ...

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#555

Post by tomhow »

motorest wrote: post #324

[flagged]

Please don't do this. It's unfair on people who are commenting authentically, which almost everyone turns out to be when we dig into the data. The guidelines ask:

Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45284046 and marked it off topic.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#557

Post by immibis »

whatsupdog wrote: post #321
solid_fuel wrote: post #309

Meta locked two games I already paid for - Blade & Sorcery VR and Beat Saber - behind account verification on the Quest 2. I already bought both of these, played them for a while, but now it won't let me use the headset without "verifying" my facebook account by sending them a photograph of my drivers license. Neither of these games are online, neither allow me to interact with other users in any way. I will never bu…

Agree. And the constant spying doesn't help either. Who wants an always online meta controlled camera/microphone in their bedroom all the time?

Objectively speaking, most people do. That's why Meta has so much money.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#558

Post by incone123 »

mnmalst wrote: post #525
leokennis wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think 99% of WhatsApp users would gladly stop using WhatsApp and switch to something like Signal, if they had verbal agreements of "everyone else" that they would also switch. Everyone is only on WhatsApp because everyone is on WhatsApp. That is why they tolerate the Meta ickiness of it.

This sounds like a product idea to me. Make a website that shows the status of your friends that are willing to switch to signal. You send an invite to all your friends first so the list keeps up to date as soon as one of your friend made a decision. If everybody agreed you can switch as a whole. Even better if signal would implement it themself!

As far as I can tell, Signal automatically tells me which of my contacts are already on the app. If someone is willing to switch, the obvious thing to do is install it.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#559

Post by wickedsight »

mrweasel wrote: post #526
JKCalhoun wrote: post #115

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

Which makes you wonder about Ray-Ban. Are they aware that their involvement with Meta risks hurting their brand? Those of us who are critical of Meta might be niche enough that it doesn't matter, but they must have factored that in.

Ray-Ban is part of EssilorLuxottica. They own pretty much every single (sun)glasses brand on earth. I'm sure someone in their organization has made the decision that Ray-Ban was the best fit for a brand in their portfolio to do something together with Meta.

Also, you're right about the niche. A lot of 'normal' people probably don't even have a clue that Meta and Facebook are the same thing.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#560

Post by martin_a »

perihelions wrote: post #519
heavyset_go wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some sites outsource their ID verification to platforms that want live videos of different angles of your face, along with pictures of your ID. Literally all the data they could possibly need to build 3D models of your face for even better facial recognition, along with plenty of data to train models on. When that data eventually leaks, it will be interesting. It's insane that anyone puts up with it.

> "that want live videos of different angles of your face" Hetzner (outsourcing to Idenfy) dared to demand this of me, three years ago. I'm still mad about it. > "When that data eventually leaks," Indeed, my understanding is these sensitive biometrics are generically (i) uploaded in full to a remote server, where they're (ii) retained for a nontrivial amount of time, because they need to be (iii) manually QA'd by hum…

Hetzner (in Germany) never did things like these to me. What were you trying to do with them?
Post reply on HN