• BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      7 days ago

      Good thing that the kind of person who would were these in public doesn’t interact with others much anyway

    • renrenPDX@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      I was watching a random short with a guy what I’m assuming is one of these. I didn’t hear much of what he said, because I was distracted by the lenses the whole time. It was impossible to ignore as the light catches the lenses as he moves his head around.

  • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    Cool… now everyone can be a part of their respective surveillance states. While Meta makes a buck on selling your feed to governments and law enforcement.

  • renrenPDX@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    6 days ago

    Now we need a device that detects Meta Glasses and makes us invisible to them. I know this is a losing battle and it’s just inevitable over time but I don’t like having information provided to someone about me without my consent. With enough adoption, at some point we would all just need to have our own glasses to even the field.

  • melfie@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Worst part with Meta Quest is it seems you have to sign up as a dev and give them a credit card in order to sideload (a.k.a., install stuff on the device you purchased). So, you can shell out hundreds for one of their devices and the device and all your data are belong to Meta. I assume it’s the same deal with these glasses. Zuck off, Zuck.🖕

  • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    For me at least, the killer feature is going to be tagging faces with names. Face blindness sucks.

    Edit: For the downvoters, in case you’re unaware, I’m talking about a real life disability.

    Face blindness, or prosopagnosia, is a condition where individuals cannot recognize familiar faces, including their own, despite having normal vision and intellectual function. It can be congenital (present from birth), developmental, or acquired due to brain damage from injury, stroke, or disease. People with prosopagnosia rely on other cues like voice, hair, or clothing to identify people.

    • Droggelbecher@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      I have this, and I cannot stress enough how much this use case is not worth being recorded and tracked in public against my consent

      • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        6 days ago

        There’s no reason it has to be one or the other, you’ve created a false dilemma. It’s perfectly possible to have the feature operate locally without recording / tracking.

        • pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          6 days ago

          There’s no reason it has to be one or the other, you’ve created a false dilemma

          Well, there is a reason, specific to these glasses. The reason is Meta.

          If someone tells me they trust Meta not to break the law or violate their privacy, I assume they haven’t been paying attention to Meta in the news.

          • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 days ago

            It’s not beyond the realm of possibility that we could use the hardware with 3rd party software. With the Quest line of VR headsets, Meta was pretty open to letting devs mess with the hardware. At least during the time I was using one.

        • Droggelbecher@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          Not a false dilemma at all. I’m not comfortable with being recorded onto some rando’s hard drive either. It’s still recording and tracking me against my consent.

          • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            6 days ago

            Still a false dilemma. Recording you against your wishes is already against the law in some countries, and not required for the feature to actually function.

              • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                6 days ago

                Only acquaintances with your permission would have entered your face into their local database. Beyond that, checking faces against what’s stored in the database does not require recording, hence you should not be in any randos database.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      7 days ago

      And that’s also the main reason I don’t want these to exist. I don’t want to be identified by random people, and I especially don’t want police to have access to something like this. People I spend time with know who I am, and I’m fine missing out on random same place/same time coincidences with people I knew from high school or something.

      • Joelk111@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        I’d want them to use a local database that you’ve created. After you’ve met someone, the glasses could be like “remember this person?” and you could choose to save them or not, or something like that.

        • Lfrith@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          Its meta so they’ll get their hands on that data the way peoples numbers end up in metas hands despite not having a Facebook account because people gave the app permission to contacts.

          • Joelk111@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 days ago

            I’m not talking about a Meta made pair of glasses. I would never buy those due to the privacy issues. I’m talking about a potential pair of glasses that are open source, or at least privacy focused, and don’t phone home.

            • Lfrith@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              6 days ago

              Average people will have it phone home for convenience. Just how things play out. I think the tech is cool, but not looking forward to how it’ll be utilized in the end.

              • Joelk111@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 days ago

                Yeah, not looking forwards to being in Meta (or any other massive company)'s database or whatever when a friend or family member wears one of these.

                • Lfrith@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 days ago

                  Like VR, meta’s will probably be the best priced and have the best tech on top of it for the price, so end up getting the most market share too.

        • pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 days ago

          Yes. I’m all for an open specification, local only version of this.

          But I don’t think Meta releasing a set of smart glasses leaves anyone (other than possibly Zuckerberg) better off.

          • Joelk111@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 days ago

            One could argue that without Meta’s investments into the technology, we might never get an open specification at all. With something like Valetudo, it wouldn’t exist without the privacy nightmare that is off-the-shelf robot vacuums.

      • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        Prosopagnosia, also known as face blindness, is a cognitive disorder of face perception in which the ability to recognize familiar faces, including one’s own face, is impaired, while other aspects of visual processing and intellectual functioning remain intact.

        I’m talking about recognising people I’ve met and know.

        • markko@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          7 days ago

          I don’t see how that could realistically happen without whichever company is behind the glasses taking all that juicy biometric data for themselves though.

          • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 days ago

            It’s up to the govts to protect the rights of the people. If you’re in the US, you’re already on the verge of losing all rights anyway. For the rest of the world, there’s no reason to think we couldn’t regulate it in a reasonably privacy-friendly way. Local face tagging and recognition could work without cloud access, so that you’d only have access to information you keyed in yourself about somebody.

            • pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              6 days ago

              For the rest of the world, there’s no reason to think we couldn’t regulate it in a reasonably privacy-friendly way.

              You’re totally right in principle.

              But the conversation for this pair of glasses is different, because of Meta.

              If anyone believes that Meta obeys their local laws, please refer them my way for a pyramid business opportunity…(I believe I could easily rip them off, because I believe they are suckers.)

            • 4am@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              6 days ago

              You act like America is the only place in the world where tech is being used for mass surveillance.

              Your own governments are doing it to you too, whether or not it’s legal.

              Wake up, they don’t give a single fuck about you.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          7 days ago

          Sure. My point is that same technology can and will be used to violate peoples’ privacy, and in some cases could create dangerous situations (e.g. domestic violence victim being recognized by their attacker).

          • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            7 days ago

            (e.g. domestic violence victim being recognized by their attacker)

            Not sure how or why the attacker wouldn’t be able to recognise them normally.

            My point is that same technology can and will be used to violate peoples’ privacy

            Every technology can be used to do shitty stuff, and in most cases has been. It’s up to the govts to protect the rights of the people. If you’re in the US, you’re already on the verge of losing all rights anyway. For the rest of the world, there’s no reason to think we couldn’t regulate it in a reasonably privacy-friendly way. Local face tagging and recognition could work without cloud access, so that you’d only have access to information you keyed in yourself about somebody.

    • yeehaw@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Yup, can’t wait to be tracked without my consent everywhere I go because of other people that want to pay money to become employed for free by private and government companies.

      • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        7 days ago

        Way to belittle people with disabilities. In case you’re unaware, I’m talking about a real condition.

        Prosopagnosia, also known as face blindness, is a cognitive disorder of face perception in which the ability to recognize familiar faces, including one’s own face, is impaired, while other aspects of visual processing and intellectual functioning remain intact.

        • yeehaw@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Don’t take it so personally. I’ll also still stand by what I said.

  • Cybersteel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    Oh man I’m wearing ray bans. I should get a new pair else I’d get lynched for it… again…

  • ALilOff@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    Imma just wait till a better brand makes em.

    I’d use it solely for cooking recipes so I don’t go “ah have to flip page….washes hands… oh shoot I forgot the amount of that ingredient… washes hands…”

    The cycle never ends

    • Joeffect@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 days ago

      Or you can go old school and just have it on a piece of paper sitting right there… you could even reuse it… maybe put it away some place safe so it doesn’t get lost with all the other ones you have decided to keep…

    • pmarksen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      Apps like Crouton have a hands free mode which allows you step through the instructions by winking (right = forward, left = back).

  • Fizz@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    100
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    7 days ago

    These glasses are actually insanely cool. I’d pay so much for an open source pair and the band.

    It sucks that no matter what cool new hardware meta comes out with will always be ruined by them stuffing in “meta integration”.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      7 days ago

      They certainly are, but they’re also a bit dystopic. I don’t want random people looking up stats about my online presence, and I certainly don’t want the police doing that either.

      I can see tons of cool applications, but also tons of ethical issues.

    • QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      Seriously, an open source version would be awesome. You could connect it to your own server running whatever local models you want without needing to worry about that audio/video being processed by some large corporation willing to sell you out along with your data.

      • moubliezpas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 days ago

        I don’t think the men on this thread realise the impact this world have on their lives via the women in their lives.

        Idk how much is geographic, but in Europe pretty much every girl has, by the age of 15, had to use some ingenuity or running skills to get away from a random stranger who wouldn’t stop hassling them for their number / just to talk! / a photo.

        I don’t mean like, he didn’t get the hint and she had to be quite rude. I mean she had to approach a shopkeeper or stranger for help, or spin a story about their husband, or make up a number and ring their own phone at the exact right time, whatever.

        I had a guy follow me home from school, then looked up my land line from my address, and he had the nerve to call and ask for me by description. I’m not stunningly attracting, but there are a lot of fucking twats out there and 1 twat can harass, what, 300 women in a year without even booking up his weekends.

        And in my case, this was back in the 20th century. People have got A LOT less polite since then.

        When this is not possible, because any guy can look at you and get your details, girls will absolutely stop going out on their own, and older women will make an effort to look as gross, or as masculine, as possible.

        Again, statistically, they will not have much choice. Rape can destroy a life. So can threats. So can staking, or putting people in fear for their life. And it can take a perpetrator an hour, which means he’s free to really, really skew the odds of being sexually traumatised in that town. If you think I’m exaggerating the risk, ask your sister / partner/ friend / coworker when they last felt intimidated by a man in public. Ask when they first had to actively shake off a random guy. You’ll be shocked.

        Guys, you want to live in that world? Do you look at the Taliban and think it sounds kinda fun? Well neither did most of the residents of Iran, but thats what they got.

        There are some deeply, deeper deeply tragic bastards in the world who can’t attract any women except their mother, and well therefore want to live in a world of where they don’t have to see women in the street or the workplace, and have to feel bad.

        They want a world where women are afraid to leave the house. And like most dystopias, it’s a very short few steps away. It starts with giving tech bros the ability to get a woman’s details, workplace, relationship status and address (and, presumably, to generate whatever AI nightmare live) just by looking at her.

        If you don’t want to live in that weird, testosterone sweaty world created by losers who couldn’t hack reality, then do not even joke about using this crap for bloody recipes or games. There are already technologies that can do that without ushering in a new dark age.

      • thehatfox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        7 days ago

        An open source smart glasses platform would be a much better direction.

        But that only provides security assurances for the wearer of the glasses. Anyone else interacting with them doesn’t know how they are configured, and what is being recorded and/or shared.

    • melfie@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Agreed, I’d totally buy a Meta Quest as well if they didn’t zuck up all their devices with spyware that can’t be removed.

      • masterspace@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        7 days ago

        It would be really nice if every country would enact digital privacy laws so that Meta’s business model was just forced to be better. They genuinely have some of the best and most accessible VR/AR hardware available.

        It would of course be nicer if a more ethical competitor stepped up in a serious way but no one seems that interested. It’s interesting that the vast majority of Meta’s business model is being extremely good at copying or buying out competitors but with VR they’re basically the only ones actually sinking serious money into making it a thing.

  • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    7 days ago

    I can think of one useful function. I have a lot of friends who are totally blind, and there’s an app called Be My Eyes, where a sighted person can take a look at something through your phone’s camera. But, being blind, a lot of blind people are absolutely terrible at aiming cameras, because they can’t see what they’re aiming at.

    In this case, the object ends up out of the camera’s field of view, or at an angle, or upside down, etc. etc. etc. Whereas, I think having a pair of smart glasses on your face would make the camera platform be much steadier.

    • luminaree@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      Yes, I have two family members who are blind and they regularly use this app and the meta glasses. It’s a huge help to them!

    • eldebryn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      7 days ago

      I can imagine that haptic/soft vibrations could also be used to steer a blind person towards an object that needs more focus by the camera.

      As you say, it has a lot of potential for accessibility and people with handicaps like that, but it’s not direction that tech, the economy, or the world itself is interested in right now…

        • eldebryn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          7 days ago

          Yeah great. Capitalist market without socialist values means the elite can overcome their handicaps and live long lives with a physical form sculpted to their wants.

          Call me when it’s done without a metric tonne of exploitation.

          • FishFace@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 days ago

            This comment seems to lack perspective. In countries where medicine is socialised, this technology wasn’t invented. Could it have been? Yes, absolutely. But in the reality we are faced with, it was invented with capitalist values. Now it can be assessed and potentially taken up by public health systems.

            • eldebryn@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 days ago

              I’m not saying that technology and progress is bad nor that we should stop pursuing it.

              I’m saying that progress that only benefits 1% or less of the people doesn’t interest me.

              If your innovation cannot reasonably exist without economic bubbles and worker exploitation, then it doesn’t deserve to.

              Even if we found the cure to cancer tomorrow but it was so expensive and restricted that maybe 1000 billionaires alone could afford it I literally wouldn’t care for it.

              The cost for achieving all that is exploitation. It literally worsens the lives of many, so that few can taste the fruits of advancement. I’d rather we discovered that cure 20 years later if it meant that 99% of us had better quality of life.

              The rich want the opposite and try convince you and me and everyone else that this is to the benefit of humankind because advancement happen faster with capitalism.

              I have no sources on that. But even if they do, I simply don’t care about it. It doesn’t benefit me nor anyone I know.

              • FishFace@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 days ago

                Yeah I am also not particularly interested by healthcare which only benefits a tiny fraction of society.

                However, when glasses were first invented they were only accessible to very few people. Technology tends to get more accessible over time as it is developed from a niche product to something for the mass market. So we can be cautious about the impact of these smart glasses, but still recognise that, for something that costs significantly less than a hearing aid and has hearing-aid like features, making life easier for people with hearing and vision impairments is in fact a key area where tech can help, is helping, and is recognised as such even in the world of big tech.

          • Aneb@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 days ago

            I’ll give you an upvote. I feel thats fair. Like you guys if you can’t make buck you lose a buck. (Any of you read Uglies?) We really need a reset on the capitalist regime imo and instate a socialist platform that is by the people and for the people. Fuck with this AI nonsense too

            • eldebryn@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 days ago

              It’s really bad yes. I’m no communist but I really think we should have had mixed economies and better tax policies to keep the rich in check. AI and other automation could have led to us working 20hrs a week on average while everything runs smooth, if used for the benefit of all.

              Right now they have snowballed so much money and power and tech that I just can’t see how we can out of outside of revolts. Democracy has been corrupted almost everywhere and people are being manipulated into thinking other religions or immigrant are the problem.

              There was a time we banned cloning to prevent the rich from making armies to exploit. But religion/ethics made that easy. We never considered doing the same with tech and important means of production.