this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2025
292 points (95.6% liked)

Technology

75442 readers
1315 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Fizz@lemmy.nz 89 points 1 day ago (3 children)

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".

[–] QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world 41 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] thehatfox@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day 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 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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 12 points 1 day 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.

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.

[–] batmaniam@lemmy.world 56 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I cannot emphasize enough how unwilling I'd be to interact with someone that has these.

[–] BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 43 points 1 day ago (2 children)

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.

[–] eldebryn@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (7 children)

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...

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 41 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] Evotech@lemmy.world 21 points 1 day ago

And serve ads directly in your eyeballs

[–] FishFace@lemmy.world 41 points 1 day ago (4 children)

most people do not generally wear glasses

I don't know about other countries but about two thirds of Americans wear glasses. A good number of them will be older adults with age-related long-sightedness for which they may only wear reading glasses, but this is a basic mistake.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 14 points 1 day ago (2 children)

...but this is a basic mistake.

They just fell prey to one of the classic blunders!

[–] felbane@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less well known is this: Never go in against a septuagenarian when blindness is on the line!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (8 children)

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.

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 day ago (16 children)

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.

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] Droggelbecher@lemmy.world 10 points 22 hours ago (8 children)

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

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 day ago (9 children)

I understand the gripes about Meta, but I don't understand how everyone clowns on this like the core concept is stupid or unwanted.

Easy $1000 sell: cycling / escooter accessory. People already regularly buy expensive sport glasses just for sun and wind protection. With a smart version of them like this, you add open ear headphone, and you add the potential for navigation directions, or even a Bluetooth rear view camera on the back of your helmet to get a virtual mirror.

[–] thehatfox@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The core technology is impressive, and has legitimate use cases.

But that doesn’t outweigh the enormous privacy concerns these devices raise. They aren’t being angled as an accessory for specific activities, but as everyday wearables. If smart glasses like these became common they would be unavoidable, creating leave of intrusion that’s concerning even without Meta being involved.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] OrgunDonor@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (5 children)

As a cyclist, this is a terrible sell. I already have tech which does all this, and probably does it better, for less.

I don't need a HUD constantly in my face obscuring the beautiful views. I have sun glasses which fit well with a helmet and wrap around my face to keep the wind out.

I have a cycling computer, which offers GPS turn by turn, and pairs to power meters, heart rate and radar light. It is mounted on the handlebars in an easy to view place.

I have bone conducting headphones for music.

All of this is significantly less than $1000, and if something breaks, I can replace it all individually. I also don't have to wear ridiculous looking sunglasses to listen to my bone conducting headphones.

[–] MurrayL@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (4 children)

I don’t necessarily disagree, but this reads a bit like some of the comments on those old Slashdot threads clowning on the first smartphones.

‘these things will fail, I already have a camera, a cellphone, and an mp3 player, why would anyone want them all in one device?’

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 day ago

I agree that head mounted displays can be useful, I'm contemplating getting something like it, but just no cameras, please. not in the frame, not backwards, not anywhere.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] zingo@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I read "the new assholes" instead of glassholes.

How improper!

[–] JackDark@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

That's intentional.

Smart glasses also raise many privacy concerns, as their cameras and microphones may be recording at any given time, which can be unnerving to people. When Google launched their Google Glass smart glasses, this led to the coining of the term ‘glasshole‘ for people who refuse to follow perceived proper smart glasses etiquette.

[–] popjam@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I wonder what the result of mass adoption of these will be on society - surely there will have to be "no smart glasses" rules set up in places where you would expect confidentiality like hospitals and classrooms. Also what the ability to instantly watch video content or listen to anything with the click of your fingers (without anyone knowing) will do to people's attention spans. Things in public will have a much higher chance of being recorded by someone, for better or for worse. If someone like Elon Musk makes his own with his own "woke free" xAI (which he has so far been unsuccessful in moulding to his viewpoints), people could have an immediate propagandized perspective and answer for anything they see in real life.

[–] magguzu@midwest.social 8 points 1 day ago

surely there will have to be "no smart glasses" rules

They have this rule for ebikes at the lake I love to walk and the kids are zooming by anyway. I think we'll struggle to enforce it and that really sucks. I hope this fails. It's hard not to be pessimistic about it, as much as I can see some legitimate use cases. I just don't trust big tech with it, least of all Meta.

[–] Deflated0ne@lemmy.world 9 points 22 hours ago

There's new glassholes?

All I need is a nu-metal revival and we're back in 2008 baby.

[–] renrenPDX@lemmy.world 9 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] melfie@lemy.lol 8 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

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.🖕

[–] Landless2029@lemmy.world 12 points 20 hours ago (3 children)

I got a voucher for a free pair of meta glasses. I don't want to order them. I'd need a meta account.

Wife is bugging me to order and resell and I want zero part of it.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Cybersteel@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

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

[–] artifex@piefed.social 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I love this image. I think it should be required on any smartglasses packaging like the surgeon general's warning is on a pack of cigarettes (for now).

load more comments
view more: next ›