#googleglass — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #googleglass, aggregated by home.social.
-
There are no "smart glasses".
Meta/Facebook and Ray-Ban would like you to call them that, but you shouldn't. You should call them by their proper, accurate name.
That is "creep glasses". People who wear them are "glassholes".
If you see anyone wearing them in public, you should stop what you're doing, point dramatically at them, and loudly say "Hey, this creep is recording you without your permission! He's a glasshole!" [1]. Ignore any protests of "I'm not recording!", because the tell-tale indicator is trivially bypassed, so you *have* to assume every user is recording, all the time.
Mock them. Insult them. Shun them. Make sure everyone knows they're a creep. If you know someone who has creep glasses, make sure they never, ever wear them in your presence. Warn everyone you know about them.
What killed creep glasses the last time around - remember Google Glass? - was social opprobrium. Do it again. Make it *extremely* uncomfortable to be caught wearing them in public, so they *stop* fucking wearing them in public. You want them gathering dust, in shame, in the back of a drawer somewhere. You want the creep owner to feel a deep pang of regret every time they think about them.
[1] It will be a "he". I guarantee it.
#creep #CreepGlasses #SmartGlasses #GoogleGlass #Facebook #Meta #Google #SpyGlasses #record #video #opprobrium #creepy
-
Absolutely!
The thing that will kill creep glasses this time is the same thing that killed them last time (Google Glass, remember those?) - public opprobrium.
If you see anyone wearing them, assume they are recording (because they can hide that fact if they want) -- and then, more importantly, ensure everyone around *knows* the creep is recording them without permission.
Do this loudly and visibly. Stop, point directly at them, and yell "HEY, GLASSHOLE - STOP RECORDING PEOPLE WITHOUT PERMISSION" and continue by telling everyone "Hey, that guy <points> is recording people"...
Humiliate them, publicly. Shame them. Ostracize them. If someone you know is using them, go hard, and make sure everyone else you know knows they are doing it.
That is what will make them stop. Make the personal cost to their dignity, social acceptance, embarassment, everything total out more than the creepy voyeurism is worth, and they will drop it like a hot potato.
-
I’m not sure that the mass market shares the tech industry’s vision for smart glasses
One recent change among early-adopter circles was plain on the faces of many fellow attendees of Qualcomm’s Snapdragon Summit in Maui this week: “smart” glasses with cameras, microphones, speakers and sometimes screens. But then my flights home Friday reminded me that for the overwhelming majority of people, “eyewear” means electronics-free glasses.
Qualcomm’s invitation-only conference–that company paid my airfare and lodging, as it did on my prior trips to cover it in 2021, 2022 and 2024–allowed me to get some brief face time with Snap’s Spectacles ’24, running newer software than the version I tried at last year’s summit. The event also treated me to a parade of tech execs testifying that smart glasses were the next big computing platform.
But despite all those optimistic assurances and my own earlier, brief tryouts of such smart glasses as Meta’s camera-enabled Ray-Bans and a prototype set of Android XR glasses, I remain unsold on the entire concept. So, it seems, do most customers: A Forrester Research survey released in September found that 79 percent of respondents had no interest in buying smart glasses.
On one hand, smart glasses with cameras, speakers and microphones are not particularly cheap–the Ray-Ban-branded models from the conglomerate EssilorLuxottica cost $379 and up–but perform worse than phones at taking pictures and playing audio.
Plus, they have the potential to annoy friends and strangers who aren’t keen on the possibility of surreptitious photography.
On the other hand, more advanced smart glasses with built-in displays could finally make hands-free augmented-reality overviews of the world a reality, but first somebody has to bring them to market at a not-crazy price. Snap’s Spectacles, which require a $99/month developer subscription, are not there; Meta’s Ray-Ban Display glasses, available starting Tuesday for $799, aren’t that much closer.
And somebody also has to solve battery-life concerns: What’s my motivation to strap a computer to my face, however stylish it might get, if that electronic eyewear will only run six hours on a charge and therefore need recharging much more often than my phone?
Meta championing this cause gives me further cause. That company has shown a history of careless indifference to the consequences of its actions, including repeated episodes of bad-faith behavior towards my own industry, that does not make me want to give it my money.
But Meta has also been so spectacularly wrong about consumer-electronics trends–topped by Mark Zuckerberg renaming Facebook to “Meta” and losing tens of billions of dollars on the delusional notion that people want to spend prolonged time in virtual-reality environments–that Zuck pushing smart glasses itself seems reason to eye the concept skeptically. Through dumb, software-free glasses.
#AndroidXR #ARGlasses #faceComputer #GoogleGlass #GoogleGlasses #Hawaii #MarkZuckerberg #meta #metaverse #privacy #Qualcomm #RayBan #smartGlasses #SnapSpectacles #SnapdragonSummit
-
A.I. Could Make the Smartphone Passé. What Comes Next? - As Apple prepares to release new iPhones this week, industry veterans shared their predic... - https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/08/technology/personaltech/ai-iphones-android-smartphones.html #computersandtheinternet #artificialintelligence #wearablecomputing #watchesandclocks #metaplatformsinc #zuckerbergmarke #amazon.cominc #smartphones #googleglass #panaypanos #appleinc #human.co