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

721–730 of 993 posts

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#721

Post by moolcool »

SchemaLoad wrote: post #116

>Meta Ray-Ban Display glasses are designed to help you look up and stay present. With a quick glance at the in-lens display, you can accomplish everyday tasks—like checking messages, previewing photos, and collaborating with visual Meta AI prompts Can you imagine trying to talk to someone face to face, but they are giving you a blank stare as random notifications and tiktok videos are being beamed inbetween their eye…

All while sending the entire interaction to one of the most harmful companies in the world, no less. What a uniquely awful product.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#722

Post by neya »

SchemaLoad wrote: post #116

>Meta Ray-Ban Display glasses are designed to help you look up and stay present. With a quick glance at the in-lens display, you can accomplish everyday tasks—like checking messages, previewing photos, and collaborating with visual Meta AI prompts Can you imagine trying to talk to someone face to face, but they are giving you a blank stare as random notifications and tiktok videos are being beamed inbetween their eye…

Everyday, we get closer to that Wall-E scene where everyone's just so pre-occupied with virtual displays all around that they forget to live their life!

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#723

Post by FuriouslyAdrift »

zmmmmm wrote: post #168
SchemaLoad wrote: post #116

>Meta Ray-Ban Display glasses are designed to help you look up and stay present. With a quick glance at the in-lens display, you can accomplish everyday tasks—like checking messages, previewing photos, and collaborating with visual Meta AI prompts Can you imagine trying to talk to someone face to face, but they are giving you a blank stare as random notifications and tiktok videos are being beamed inbetween their eye…

I do think we're in for a bit of a reality check on how human attention works. I have a HUD in my car that shows me directions, speed etc and when I'm looking at that the rest of the view out the windscreen is hardly even there to my visual perception even though I'm looking right at it. This seems to be getting largely overlooked but I feel like over time statistics are going to emerge that HUD type displays are inc…

Eye tracking and depth of field adjustments are the missing pieces. A HUD has to be able to stay in the same focal range as what is viewed beyond it so you don't lose concentration on the task at hand.

In fighter jets, they project onto the visor. Obviously not the most convenient method for an automobile. There have been attemtps to figure out depth of field but it's tough. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00304...

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#724

Post by endemic »

milkshakes wrote: post #710
Arainach wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And among their non-technical contributions, you have genocide in Myanmar, election interference worldwide, the explosive growth of hate speech, countless teenager suicides, and more. Any large company can write a web UI framework, but only a truly special one can directly contribute to genocide, know about it, have employees bring it up and suggest intervening, and decide that nah, they'd rather let people die and m…

> Meta seems like one of the few large tech companies where if the whole company vanished, the world would be purely a better place. This is what I disagree with. Specifically, I don't disagree that Meta has caused serious harm. I just don't think we live in such a black and white world "where if the whole company vanished, the world would be purely a better place".

The tech contributions are fungible, to be honest. Sure, they're popular because ~Facebook~ Meta is a giant company, but if they disappeared overnight, other equally good solutions would soon take their place.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#725

Post by rs186 »

jackbrookes wrote: post #630
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…

This reads a bit like like a pre-PC take: "Why use a computer when a cookbook works fine?" Imagine it’s 1992: Cookbook: Open book, follow steps. PC: Turn on tower, wait for DOS, fiddle with floppies, pray the printer works, hope the shareware recipe isn’t weird. Not saying you're wrong but its easy to miss the big picture

Not the same.

Internet and recipe websites solve a real problem: accessing recipes was expensive and not easy

AR headsets don't solve any problems. If anything, they make up a nonexistent problem, attempts but fails to solve the problem, during which the experience becomes even worse.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#726

Post by user1999919 »

The 'demo' for ar is always over promising. I know The fidelity does not actually look like that. Apart of me believes the artistic license gets carried away with itself, because to begin with, you cannot really show what it 'looks like' The iphone for instance was easy. Steve held up a hand held screen. Ar is different, you can't really show what the lens 'sees' until its right up in your face. so you just make it up. In doing so you REALLY really really make it up.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#728

Post by Aurornis »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #115

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

This is why HN comments about personal preferences for Meta products aren’t informative. Meta really does have billions of users who don’t care in the slightest about boycotting the company. They just want to use their products because that’s where other people are.

Re: Meta Ray-Ban Display

#729

Post by taco_emoji »

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.

Those 4 billion people are using a free product with strong network effects. That has basically zero bearing on who's going to buy useless spyware glasses.
Post reply on HN