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

Nearby Glasses

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 235 posts

Re: Nearby Glasses

#81

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

tamimio wrote: post #34
luxuryballs wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

an invisibility cloak! crazy times, maybe we can make anti-smart-glasses glasses that detect smart glasses and have an invisible beam that can target and blind the cameras

> anti-smart-glasses glasses that detect smart glasses and have an invisible beam that can target and blind the cameras I love it! I literally thought of something similar while writing the above comment, something like an EMP that disables all nearby camera sensors for 10min or so.

> an EMP that disables all nearby camera sensors for 10min or so

Some years ago, there was a guy that got arrested (may have been in Chicago), for riding on the train, and running a cellphone jammer, because he hated people on the phone, while on the train.

Might be considered somewhat similar. It could definitely earn you a beatdown, if someone catches you.

Re: Nearby Glasses

#82

Post by hsbauauvhabzb »

nomel wrote: post #76
bryanlarsen wrote: post #33

Currently detects via Meta, Essilor or Snap company ID. So it won't detect my XReal's. I purposefully bought my XReal now because it feels like they might be one of the last models released without cameras. But theoretically I could have the XReal Eye attachment on my glasses, and could be taking video through that. I don't, but the XReal user next to me might. Of course the USB wire hanging from my ear probably make…

Looking at this almost unanimously negative comment section, on a tech website, it appears you should be concerned about your safety while wearing anything that could be seen as being "smart". I imagine a non-tech crowd would be even more negative. > for identifying creeps nearby > I recently had to interact with an idiot wearing meta glasses. > Would renaming to ”Nearby Glassholes” be acceptable as a PR? > If you're…

Good.

Re: Nearby Glasses

#84

Post by kurthr »

Refreeze5224 wrote: post #49
fusslo wrote: post #25

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/meta-trial-mark-zuckerberg-ai-g... > Judge Carolyn Kuhl, who is presiding over the trial, ordered anyone in the courtroom wearing AI glasses to immediately remove them, noting that any use of facial recognition technology to identify the jurors was banned. I am not a believer in Zuckerberg's idea of humanity's future.

That's because you are intentionally not included in it. Only him and his rich owning class buddies are, the rest of us are only profit-generating NPCs.

Epstein class fits here, might as well use it.

Re: Nearby Glasses

#86

Post by stbtrax »

arjie wrote: post #50
paul7986 wrote: post #29

Bought my first pair of Meta glasses in Oct 2023 and overall I really enjoying using smart glasses! They are great for quickly/easily capturing life experiences. Also, while traveling or wherever asking and getting information on things your looking at - it's cool & useful. Tho Meta makes trash as my 1st pair died after 14 months of use after a software update and then my 2nd pair only lasted 4 months after some wate…

Do you have children? I frequently want to record things my daughter does but I find that my phone is not close at hand. I am curious if the latency to record is low-enough and I don't want to distract my daughter while she's doing whatever she's doing. I just want to capture the moment for later without interrupting the moment. They advertise it as this but I am curious what it's like in actuality.

I use it all the time for this use case. It's great because your hands are free and you can remain an active participant in play/safety/feeding. I find I capture more moments that I'm more actively involved in vs passively holding the phone and framing the shot.

Re: Nearby Glasses

#88

Post by randallsquared »

mrbluecoat wrote: post #17

Add satellite imagery, nearby self-driving vehicles / Google maps cars, line-of-sight ring doorbells, peripheral street surveillance cameras, police equipment, people in your proximity with a smartphone camera, and various-purpose drones and then you'll have the perfect paranoia alerter.

...people with neuralink or similar, in a year or three.

Re: Nearby Glasses

#89

Post by randallsquared »

IncreasePosts wrote: post #69
btbuildem wrote: post #41

Sooo technically this is on the edge of legal/not legal, depending on your intent and what the judge had for lunch that day. ID'ing devices without consent is a grey area at best.

What region has laws that you're not allowed to look at a packet that was broadcast from a device? This sounds prima facie absurd, but I know a lot of strange laws exist out there.

This is a case where any law is strange, but so is a lack of a law, for some.

    * What do you mean it's allowed for people to record me while I'm telling them off?
    * What do you mean I'm not allowed to remember (with high fidelity) what someone said to me?
Either way, someone thinks it's weird.

Re: Nearby Glasses

#90

Post by arjie »

stbtrax wrote: post #86
arjie wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have children? I frequently want to record things my daughter does but I find that my phone is not close at hand. I am curious if the latency to record is low-enough and I don't want to distract my daughter while she's doing whatever she's doing. I just want to capture the moment for later without interrupting the moment. They advertise it as this but I am curious what it's like in actuality.

I use it all the time for this use case. It's great because your hands are free and you can remain an active participant in play/safety/feeding. I find I capture more moments that I'm more actively involved in vs passively holding the phone and framing the shot.

Thank you and the other responder. I'm going to try to go get one.
Post reply on HN