Meta Ray-Ban Display

https://www.meta.com/blog/meta-ray-ban-display-ai-glasses-connect-2025/

by martpie • 10 months ago

639 961 10 months ago

jhatemyjob6• 10 months ago

I'm getting Macworld 2007 vibes

enos_feedler3• 10 months ago

I am getting Phillips CDI vibes. It takes me back to a mid 90s infomercial where products will built by marketing departments and companies with cash to splash. There is just no bottom up cool factor. At all.

reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhZdWvnF3do

bigyabai6• 10 months ago

There is just no bottom up cool factor. At all.

That's just like, your opinion, man.

stavros8• 10 months ago

What's this 30 minute ad?! Who was the intended audience!

bix65• 10 months ago

you can accomplish everyday tasks—like checking messages, previewing photos, and collaborating with visual Meta AI prompts — all without needing to pull out your phone.

Why do I need to pay $800 for this? I already paid a grand to have a phone disrupt my every waking moment!

ww520• 10 months ago

A Ray Ban sunglasses can run up to $500 already.

bix65• 10 months ago

Love me some luxottica monopoly pricing!

elicash• 10 months ago

They go up to $4,500 (solid gold), but they start at $81 on their website.

gumby271• 10 months ago

Sorry, is "collaborating with visual Meta AI prompts" just a casual everyday task we're all doing? I must be missing out!

imachine1980_• 10 months ago

this include the band which is also pushing the envelope of HCI mark writing clip https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxfmPX0hba7ulSVL2MyVaS60I0IPm-CQU...

jayd169• 10 months ago

Now you can wear clothes without pockets.

swaptr• 10 months ago

"We appreciate your honesty! While our data shows a few unoptimized pauses, those afternoon naps, we’re happy to confirm your six-hour rest cycle remains respected. This isn’t just a device; it’s your partner in reclaiming every waking moment with seamless efficiency."

spot6• 10 months ago

AI Glasses With an EMG Wristband available Sept 30 for $799

rvz• 10 months ago

This is very impressive for a first version of the AI glasses from Meta.

Zuck really has cracked this one.

To Downvoters:

Give credit where credit is due.

I think you are going to realize in a few years why tens of billions was poured into Reality Labs and Oculus.

Version 2 or 3 of these glasses is going to set Meta ahead of the rest (except at least Apple).

nubela• 10 months ago

I think the tech is really cool. But I was actually hoping for a device that does the whole "phone strapped to my face" thing without actually looking like one. I mean if I'm already staring at my screen, why not make it easier?

paxys19• 10 months ago

I saw the keynote, and while everything about the glasses was more or less as expected, seeing Zuck easily navigate the interface and type 30 words per minute while barely moving his fingers was a true WTF moment. If they can actually make the neural interface work that well then Meta has won this round.

yakz2• 10 months ago

Doesn’t that make the wrist accessory the important part? The chunky glasses look like they’re still too early, not enough tech.

paxys19• 10 months ago

That's why they are sold as a pair. The glasses are simply a screen strapped to your face. How to control it was always the real problem to be solved (and no, voice was never the answer).

zmmmmm11• 10 months ago

i was disappointed they didn't say you could connect it to other devices too. I would buy it just as a bluetooth keyboard!

jayd169• 10 months ago

It's still certainly early adopter tech. We have the technology for stereo vision and augmented reality. It's just a matter of getting the display and battery and compute bill of materials in order now that they have the screen and a feasible input path.

NitpickLawyer2• 10 months ago

still too early, not enough tech.

At one point I was tracking a company researching beaming images straight on your eye. I think they were MS related, but not sure. After a while they stopped updating, so I guess that went nowhere? It seemed really promising.

oever• 10 months ago

Meta sells your eyes and ears, not your fingers.

encoderer• 10 months ago

I can’t find this demo. Am I blind??

paxys19• 10 months ago

https://www.facebook.com/Meta/videos/1927325824791552/

Skip to around 53:00

bemmu• 10 months ago

Exactly, felt like the wristband was the big thing. I don't want the glasses, but I'm somewhat curious if it'd be useful as an extra input device when using a computer.

sigmar• 10 months ago

they've been bragging about how good that neural wristband is for years. It's strange they haven't ventured to make a smartwatch with it. Maybe because Zuck has been so focused on AR/VR

spot6• 10 months ago

yes and even more useful with a phone. or a TV so I don't have to find the remote. lots of possibilities beyond glasses.

cflewis2• 10 months ago

How does the finger thing work? What's he doing? I saw him tippy-tappy but it didn't seem like he's moving through some invisible keyboard.

jwrallie• 10 months ago

It was hard to see, but it looked like handwriting to me.

dagmx2• 10 months ago

It’s tracking the EMG signals that trigger your finger tendons. Doing that it knows how your fingers are moving.

It can therefore translate it to a handwritten stroke and then do classical handwriting to text conversion.

swordsmith5• 10 months ago

He's scribbling with his finger.

Typing can also work, but handwriting is simply faster and easier to decode.

sEMG signals correlate with *muscle* activation. When your fingers move, the actuators are the muscles in your forearm, and the tendons relay the force on the joint. Placing the band higher up on the forearm would actually give you better signals, but a wrist placement is much more socially acceptable.

zmmmmm11• 10 months ago

yep. whatever else you say, Meta's willingness to throw some tech out there is thrilling from a geek / tech perspective.

stavros8• 10 months ago

While I agree this is extremely impressive, when I'm out walking, I'm not going to be looking for a convenient flat surface I can rest my hand on so I can type a message. It seems useless in practice.

etrautmann2• 10 months ago

That's not a limitation - it works in the air, on your leg, other hand, etc.

_zoltan_5• 10 months ago

there are only a few companies where very strong vision, long time horizon and pouring money into said projects come together.

NVIDIA, obviously and Meta are definitely on this list.

xandrius7• 10 months ago

Yep "vision" because they are trying to sell you glasses. /s

But Meta's business is clearly getting more and more sweet data from its users. How anyone can not see past this being a surveillance tool for a vast amount of data is unbelievable to me.

NamlchakKhandro2• 10 months ago

If it was going to blow up then why hasn't those laser beam projected keyboards blown up, or why have mechanical keyboards become so damn popular and not "keyboards on screens?"

This isn't going anywhere.

jackbrookes2• 10 months ago

why have mechanical keyboards become so damn popular and not "keyboards on screens?"

I mean... have you ever used a phone?

0x4572• 10 months ago

why have mechanical keyboards become so damn popular

It's a very similar hobby to collecting post-marks.

those laser beam projected keyboards blown up

Because no serious company never made one and what was nowhere near usable beyond "Checks what another useless thing I got!"

5423542342353• 10 months ago

why have mechanical keyboards become so damn popular and not "keyboards on screens?"

Both are popular. Literally 100s of millions of people use keyboards on screens, so I'm not even really sure what you think you are trying to say. The desktop computer market isn't likely to move away from mechanical keyboards, but the phone/tablet market did a long time ago. Something with more accuracy, or that can be used for touch typing, without taking up device real estate, could definitely blow up in that market.

robotnikman2• 10 months ago

Having a keyboard with tactile feedback is much easier to use than a touch screen keyboard, an you're way less likely to make mistakes. The main reason you don't see them on phone anymore is because having a keyboard on a phone takes up space, makes the phone cost more, and in the case of sliding keyboards adds more points of failure as well. For phone, a touch keyboard is good enough.

someuser2345• 10 months ago

I disagree; this wristband might be a game changer because your hand does not need to be free to use it (at least in theory, we'll see how it actually plays out). Also, I'm willing to bet that for some people, this wristband might be more accessible than a regular keyboard (i.e. people with limited mobility or missing hands). Compare it to the laser beam keyboard, which is just a flat version of a regular keyboard.

why have mechanical keyboards become so damn popular and not "keyboards on screens?"

Keyboards in general have become more popular, as more and more people get computing devices. I'm willing to bet the increase of keyboards on screens is much greater than the increase of mechanical keyboards; there are far more smartphones than mechanical keyboards.

archon810• 10 months ago

Turn that neural band into a WHOOP band and then we'll talk. Such an opportunity for those who already use fitness trackers.

saberience2• 10 months ago

One, Zuck probably practiced for days for this moment and just managed 30 words per minute (which is slow, 1 word per two seconds is really bad).

Two, just try doing this now, moving your hand around like its writing with a pen and see how it feels (without holding a pen). It's super uncomfortable and feels really weird and also looks really weird.

People are really sensitive to looking weird and feeling weird and especially being singled out for being weird or looking weird. Also, there is a huge subset of society now who will not buy anything made by Meta. I think this product is doomed to failure honestly. Happy to eat my words when I see the subway filled with people wearing this dystopian specs.

fennecbutt2• 10 months ago

Nah, it'll only be cool once Apple does it, I mean once they invent it.

bpiche• 10 months ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCDWKdmwhUI

regina dugan's f8 keynote 8 years ago

where they announced they were working on a 'haptic vocabulary' for a skin interface as well as noninvasive brain scanning technologyu\

addaon• 10 months ago

Pretty cool hardware. Count me in if and when it supports interesting software.

tootie• 10 months ago

There's the rub isn't it? We've been doing AR for over ten years at this point and I can't name a single blockbuster app besides Pokemon Go.

ugh1232• 10 months ago

English link: https://www.meta.com/blog/meta-ray-ban-display-ai-glasses-co...

tomhow3• 10 months ago

Updated, thanks!

homeonthemtn• 10 months ago

It's fine. I still don't have a need for this in my life, and it's impractical as a replacement (good luck keeping them on once you start sweating) - you're still going to need your phone.

So that means this is just adding 2 more gadgets, both of which I now need to wear?

Nah. Not happening.

Neat gestures though.

paxys19• 10 months ago

You'll still need to have a phone, yes, but if the glasses reduce the number of times you pull it out of your pocket then I'd consider them worthwhile. Same as a smartwatch.

JKCalhoun5• 10 months ago

So that means this is just adding 2 more gadgets

Yeah, I see where this is going. (And here I am wanting less gadgets.)

moron4hire• 10 months ago

CapitalOne Meta Ray-Ban Display, brought to you by Costco.

barbazoo• 10 months ago

My neighbour is gonna buy this one as well and I bet it’s going to end up in the same junk drawer as the last one.

jsheard3• 10 months ago

It seems like a pattern that Meta hardware usually sells relatively well, but then struggles with user retention. It happened with the Quest and so far it's happening with the glasses too. People like the idea of the products much more than the reality of actually using them.

https://www.theverge.com/2023/8/3/23818462/meta-ray-ban-stor...

aerostable_slug• 10 months ago

Good point.

OTOH, for me the Quest killer app is Ace. I can practice pistol shooting any time I want, which keeps me using the headset every day. For the glasses, the killer app might be translation. Now, I couldn't say if that will 'translate' into widespread user retention, or — like Ace — only really keep a smaller community engaged (I don't think most users need translation services on a regular basis).

dylan6045• 10 months ago

It's not so much the hardware, it's the lack of software to use with the hardware. Nobody wants to wait until real hardware exists and risk losing consumer interest, yet they risk losing consumer interest with these half baked products. Sibling comment claims a killer app, but there hasn't truly been a killer app that makes people willing to use the product all the time. The new wears off, and then the use just craters.

wronglebowski• 10 months ago

The live demo of this is brutal. https://x.com/ns123abc/status/1968469616545452055

klik992• 10 months ago

This is why Jobs spent months prepping for each presentation.

But hey, at least it's not all faked

postalcoder• 10 months ago

i love jobs but i do remember the “everybody please turn off your laptops” presentation.

live demonstrations are tough - i wish apple would go back to them.

gretch2• 10 months ago

When I was at Meta (then facebook), people lived and died by the live demo creedo.

Pitches can be spun, data is cherry picked. But the proof is always in the pudding.

This is embarrassing for sure, but from the ashes of this failure we find the resolve to make the next version better.

neilv4• 10 months ago

"At least it's not faked" was my main reaction, too. Some other big-tech AI-related demos the last couple years have been caught being faked.

Zuckerberg handling it reasonably well was nice.

(Though the tone at the end of "we'll go check out what he made later" sounded dismissive. The blame-free post-mortem will include each of the personnel involved in the failure, in a series of one-on-one MMA sparring rounds. "I'm up there, launching a milestone in a trillion-dollar strategic push, and you left me @#$*&^ my @#*$&^@#( like a #@&#^@! I'll show you post-mortem!")

garbawarb2• 10 months ago

I appreciate the live demo but I'm suprised they didn't at least have a prerecorded backup. I wanted to see how video calls work!

SoftTalker3• 10 months ago

I saw Jobs give a demo of some NeXT technology and the system crashed and rebooted right in the middle of it. He just said “oops” and talked around it until the system came back up.

TIPSIO• 10 months ago

If you’ve ever used the current Meta Ray Ban and AI, this almost exactly happens when the connection is bad. Pure confusion but the AI still tries to give you an answer.

I bet the device hardware is small/cheap and susceptible to interference

krustyburger• 10 months ago

Even if it’s small/cheap, if the item is scanned multiple times this will prevent any electrical infetterence.

m3kw93• 10 months ago

next time they need 1 public and 1 private router and shut the public off right before the demo.

stavros8• 10 months ago

I have the Meta glasses and I've never noticed this, and don't even understand why it could be the connection's fault. The AI gets your audio and your image, if it gives the wrong answer, it's because the AI went wrong. How would the bad connection ever affect it?

303uru2• 10 months ago

It’s the WiFi, ya sure.

klabb32• 10 months ago

Yeah I was also cringing at that cop out. It doesn’t appear connectivity related. Plus even if it was, it beautifully highlights the connectivity requirement which sucks for so many reasons.

herval2• 10 months ago

Typical Meta product. I used to believe and wasted money on multiple generations of Quest & Ray-bans. I expect this device to be unsupported at launch, just like Quest Pro was

hattmall3• 10 months ago

The portal was like their best product and they just abandoned it.

zmmmmm11• 10 months ago

If you watch it carefully, he preempts the AI with "What do I do first" before it even answered the first time. This strongly suggests it did this in rehearsal to me and hence was far more than just "bad luck" or bad connectivity. Perhaps the bad connectivity stopped the override from working and it just kept repeating the previous response. Either way it suggests some troubling early implications about how well Meta's AI work is going to me, that they got this stuck on the main live demo for their flagship product on such a simple thing.

daemonologist• 10 months ago

I think preempting the AI the first time was meant to be a feature (it's not trivial to implement and is something people often ask for). Failing from there definitely wasn't great, although it's kind of what I'd expect from an(y) LLM.

mrandish2• 10 months ago

Either way it suggests some troubling early implications about how well Meta's AI work is going

I fully expect the AI to suck initially and then over many months of updates evolve to mostly annoying and only occasionally mildly useful.

However, the live stage demo failing isn't necessarily supporting evidence. Live stage demos involving Wifi are just hard because in addition to the normal device functionality they're demoing, they need to simultaneously compress and transmit a screen share of the final output back over wifi so the audience can see it. And they have to do all that in a highly challenging RF environment that's basically impossible to simulate in advance. Frankly, I'd be okay with them using a special headset that has a hard-wired data link for the stage demo.

exitb• 10 months ago

The way he clung to „what do I do first” makes me think that the whole conversation was scripted in the prompt and AI was asked to reply in specific way to specific sentences. Possibility not even actually connected to the camera?

joshdavham• 10 months ago

For those who didn't pick up on it, they were being sarcastic about the issue being wifi related haha

stavros8• 10 months ago

It didn't sound like sarcasm at all to me?

bigtones• 10 months ago

That was not sarcasm. They were being serious.

dxxmxnd• 10 months ago

I’m surprised everyone is saying they weren’t sarcastic. They were even being MORE sarcastic about it being the Wi-Fi after the failed WhatsApp call.

m3kw93• 10 months ago

so when I talk but not to it, it may response like i accidentally say siri? Except is every time?

explorigin2• 10 months ago

I've done live demos of AI. Even with the same queries, I got a different answers than my 4 previous practice attempts. My demos keep me on my toes and I try to limit the scope much more now.

(I didn't have control over temperature settings.)

hdjrudni2• 10 months ago

(I didn't have control over temperature settings.)

That's...interesting. You'd think they'd dial the temperature to 0 for you before the demo at least. Regardless, if the tech is good, I'd hope all the answers are at least decent and you could roll with it. If not....then maybe it needs to stay in R&D.

danjc• 10 months ago

It looks like true 0-temperature (i.e. determinism) will happen. Here's some good context: https://thinkingmachines.ai/blog/defeating-nondeterminism-in...

llmthrow0827• 10 months ago

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 problem as well as the format that I want the LLM to structure the response

* Correct it when it misreads one of my ingredients

* Hope that the rng gods give me a decent recipe

Or basically any of the things shown off for Apple's headset. Strap on a giant headset just so I can... browse photos? or take a video call where the other person can't even see my face?

SchemaLoad9• 10 months ago

These companies are reaching really hard for use cases while ignoring the only ones VR actually works well for. If they just went all in on gaming it would be a much better product than trying to push AI slop cooking help.

hdjrudni2• 10 months ago

I dunno, if these worked perfectly I don't think it'd be awful to be able to open my fridge and say "what can I make with this" and it could rattle of some suggestions based on my known preferences and even show me images in their new display.

Hands-free while cooking (not having to touch my phone with messy hands) is not a bad thing either.

dyauspitr• 10 months ago

I wear my glasses all the time. If I could just talk to the void and get help with things I’m directly seeing reliably that would be a game changer. I’ve used Gemini’s video mode and we’re not all that far away.

twalichiewicz• 10 months ago

Watching the announcement, every feature felt like something my phone already does—better.

With glasses, you have to aim your head at whatever you want the AI to see. With a phone, you just point the camera while your hands stay free. Even in Meta’s demo, the presenter had to look back down at the counter because the AI couldn’t see the ingredients.

It feels like the same dead end we saw with Rabbit and the Humane pin—clever hardware that solves nothing the phone doesn’t already do. Maybe there’s a niche if you already wear glasses every day, but beyond that it’s hard to see the case.

jackbrookes2• 10 months ago

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

rhetocj239• 10 months ago

People dont realise how amazingly efficient touch interfaces already are.

THere is no need for these stupid glasses. Some refuse to accept it - especially Zuckerberg who relies on folks like Apple to make his money. Thats really whats driving this project if you tear away all the BS.

jayd169• 10 months ago

Voice input is just too annoying but with the display and wristband I think the dream is there. Your hands are deep in messy food prep, you have a recipe up, you can still pause your music or take a call with the wristband and without stopping to wash up or getting oil or batter on everything.

hombre_fatal2• 10 months ago

On the other hand, having to constantly consult a recipe on my phone while I cook is the main quality of life aspect of home cooking that could be improved.

You're missing the part where I'm reminded that my phone autolocks so I have to go into the settings in the middle of cooking to make it never autolock (or be lazy and unlock it every time I need it). And then I have to find a clean knuckle to scroll the ingredient list and the recipe steps every time I'm trying to remember what step I'm at.

You could do some killer recipe UX with a HUD on some glasses.

anal_reactor5• 10 months ago

Hearing this AI-generated voice awakens some primal aggression in me.

HaZeust• 10 months ago

I have mad respect to them for actually attempting this on the fly - especially a public company. Nothing really to gain versus a scripted demo, and absolutely everything to lose. Admirable.

xandrius7• 10 months ago

Obviously scripted, just the LLM didn't follow its part of the script.

santiagobasulto• 10 months ago

This one was also pretty bad: https://x.com/jason/status/1968496622884495847?s=46&t=9d1Ha4...

I think there’s some respect to give cause they’re doing it live and non-scripted.

jansan• 10 months ago

Non-scripted? You must be kidding.

whywhywhywhy4• 10 months ago

Respect for trying it live now Apple just does pre-recorded with a ton of VFX.

anonu• 10 months ago

It was the WiFi though

losvedir3• 10 months ago

Ouch. Kudos for trying, though. I miss the days of live demos at Apple events, instead of all these polished videos of people standing in silly poses around the Apple campus.

baby5• 10 months ago

The demo gods were not present that day

jjfoooo42• 10 months ago

It was painful even before it started malfunctioning

bryant• 10 months ago

The biggest thing stopping me from getting these is knowing that a derivative of Meta's Orion AR prototype will release to manufacturing in the next few years, and this just feels like a stop-gap.

But the wrist/hand control is the thing that impressed me the most in today's release. I'd hope for this to go far beyond just the glasses.

SequoiaHope• 10 months ago

The nice thing about AR/VR is that a better version will always come out in a couple of years so you can always wait. I love VR as a concept and some years late I bought a Valve Index and am considering a Bigscreen 2 but really the best thing to do is always wait.

paxys19• 10 months ago

Every piece of tech has a better version a year or two away. If you keep waiting then you are never going to buy anything.

xandrius7• 10 months ago

I can end up buying from a non-evil company?

zmmmmm11• 10 months ago

knowing that a derivative of Meta's Orion AR prototype will release to manufacturing in the next few years

You actually know that? how? Just the leaked road map or something more concrete?

tomhow3• 10 months ago

Pre-release discussion yesterday:

Meta RayBan AR glasses shows Lumus waveguide structures in leaked video - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45266215 - Sept 2025 (124 comments)

moralestapia2• 10 months ago

The only wave guide device out there with > 42 pixels per degree (ppd) is a giant headset that isn’t sold commercially anymore.

Magic Leap.

dylan6045• 10 months ago

Are you countering that's the name of a device that does this, or the name of the device that isn't sold any more? I didn't think ML ever made it to anything viable. They just gave great demo

Philpax5• 10 months ago

The Magic Leap 1 and 2 were commercially available to some degree, but they were not successful. I can't speak to their PPD, but I can't imagine it was that amazing.

The HoloLens devices might be another set of candidates.

blululu• 10 months ago

The Magic Leap was around 30 pixels per degree when it was still sold. https://kguttag.com/2022/01/31/magic-leap-2-at-spie-ar-vr-mr...

ivape• 10 months ago

I feel like this and this (https://www.visor.com/) are going to converge into the same thing. If you really think about it, the average person will only ever use AR glasses for hands free camera, mic/headphone, and to see notifications. If they get really good, then a map overlay of the world. But real productivity will require it to start converging into a bigger visor type headset that is definitely not the same bulky VR form factor. The bulky VR form factor is DOA ergonomically for productivity imho.

Lastly, I don't put it past humanity to actually be interested in seeing ad overlays throughout the world because it's just ... cool, at least at first.

Killer feature for me:

I'd like to see that 3D marker in the world that I need to walk towards like a video game.

herval2• 10 months ago

Visor is largely vaporware (to put it mildly). It’s the form factor Apple is aiming with version 2 or 3 of Vision Pro

It’s a very different experience to passthrough, no matter how small you make the glasses, so I’m not sure there’s a clear path to convergence

kstrauser3• 10 months ago

Very interesting.

And also, I hereby ban them in our office. Thou shalt not wear spyware while looking at the screens that contain our company IP.

moralestapia2• 10 months ago

So, no smartphones in your office?

Edit: Lmao, fake downvotes while another comment which is essentially the same gets upvoted. The veil has been lifted :D.

paxys19• 10 months ago

Do you also ban cellphones in your office? And email? Text messaging?

If an employee wants to steal your IP, they will.

kstrauser3• 10 months ago

I'm not unreasonably worried about my coworkers, compared to a software-controlled camera they'd be wearing on their heads and pointing at our code, internal docs, customer information, etc.

And yes, if someone made a habit of pointing their cellphone camera at the screen all day, I would ask them to please knock it off.

I don't trust Facebook installing cameras in our workspace, or trust that they couldn't be compromised by another party who might want to watch what we're doing.

dylan6045• 10 months ago

at a company I used to work at, yes, very much so. our personal devices were checked into a locker with security before entering the secured part of the building. you were free to come back out to use it when you needed during the day. the USB ports to our workstations were covered with epoxy. the desktops didn't actually connect to the internet, so email/etc used a remote citrix connection to isolate networks. any network transfer over a set size would send notices. to be honest, it was glorious to be without the device. the shit part was everyday when leaving the office you had to have your bags searched.

AvAn128• 10 months ago

Yes. I work on a trading floor. Personal tech is a big issue in the world of private equity, investment banking, capital markets, law, medicine, proprietary research, coding, national defense, homeland security, most government roles, law enforcement, and may other professions. An employee may try to steal IP, but in the case of regulated industries, they can wind up in jail very quickly for doing so. This is no joke, and there is no room for sloppy move-fast-and-break-things jackassery.

oldfuture3• 10 months ago

You have more control, in theory, on a cellphone, and so do people around you. With the glasses you really have no way to say if they are listening or watching what you see. The phone has most of the time the sensors partially blocked by a bag or a pocket so it really can't be compared with eyewear.

smitty1e• 10 months ago

As a theoretical matter, this is some nifty stuff. Hats off to everyone involved, as a simple matter of engineering.

As a practical matter, this feels too Orwellian. I don't want necessarily want to emit that much information (he said, looking at his Galaxy smart phone and watch) all the time.

Possibly I'm trending Luddite in my dotage.

jrowen• 10 months ago

I think continuing to go for the classic Ray-Ban look is a mistake. I don't think this product is enticing to the Ray-Ban crowd at this point. Ray-Bans are for looking effortlessly cool, not maybe secretly filming people, it's a wolf in sheep's (bulging) clothing. I would go for more steampunk goggles. Get nerds and hobbyists really excited about it. Create a new lane.

yakz2• 10 months ago

A version that is just plainly nerdy (and more comfortable) might not be a bad idea; maybe call it the developer version or something to avoid any association with fashion or luxury.

kstrauser3• 10 months ago

I don't think these look like classic Ray-Bans. It looks like someone selected Wayfarers and then ran stroke path 30px. They're basically the clip art version of Ray-Bans.

JKCalhoun5• 10 months ago

Ray-Buns.

jaccola• 10 months ago

Why are Ray-Ban doing this, is Meta paying them a boatload?

I'm not negative on the Meta glasses, I think a device like this is the future, even still this hurts Ray-Bans reputation in my eyes.

It's like if Rolex made a smart watch, the tech just doesn't mesh well with a "luxury" brand.

chatmasta2• 10 months ago

This is getting closer to the ideal product, but I’m gonna wait for the one from Apple that I know it will be well-tested and integrate with my device. I’m sure it’s coming in the next few years. I can only imagine the pain that will come with trying to get the half-baked Meta ecosystem to cooperate with my iPhone.

klik992• 10 months ago

I believe the wristband came from this acquisition: https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/23/20881032/facebook-ctrl-la...

Insanely cool, and awesome to see a viable wave guide device.

It's so cool that it might outweigh my reluctance to strap facebook to my face.

jayrhynas• 10 months ago

CTRL-Labs themselves acquired the wristband tech from North/Thalmic, who pivoted into smart glasses for a few years before being acquired by Google.

In an interesting twist, CTRL-Labs purchased a series of patents earlier this year around the Myo armband, a gesture and motion control device developed by North, formerly known as Thalmic Labs. The Myo armband measured electromyography, or EEG, to translate muscle activity into gesture-related software inputs, but North moved on from the product and now makes a stylish pair of AR glasses known as Focals. It now appears the technology North developed may in some way make its way into a Focals competitor by way of CTRL-Labs.

spot6• 10 months ago

nope. the technology was invented by CTRL-labs, and at Meta after the acquisition.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09255-w

yes the Myo was a similar, earlier, and less capable technology also based on EMG sensing.

teleforce2• 10 months ago

measured electromyography, or EEG

Should be EMG, but is it normal EMG or sEMG?

etrautmann2• 10 months ago

That's not true. Thalmic did develop an sEMG band, but the tech developed here was created by Ctrl-labs and continued development within Meta.

jorvi• 10 months ago

Disney is about to have a serious talk with Facebook. Disney Research has had a prototype on gesture detection via wristband electric sensing tech since 2012: https://youtu.be/E4tYpXVTjxA?t=2m8s

spot6• 10 months ago

not the same tech at all.

sva_2• 10 months ago

Besides it being different technology, the original Myo wristband was also introduced around 2012. The parents were later acquired by CTRL-labs which was then acquired by Meta. So you can be pretty confident that they have the patents.

Although surface electromyography is quite a bit older than that.

post_break• 10 months ago

Still no way to replace battery, so in 3 years tops this thing is e-waste.

Philpax5• 10 months ago

That is also true of most smartphones. Smartphone batteries can be replaced, but specialty equipment and training is required. It's the same problem here, but much worse: they have to pack a significant amount of hardware into the space available. Even if they wanted to, it's unlikely that they could offer user-serviceable batteries.

blackoil2• 10 months ago

TWS are better comparison. Smartphone battery need to be changed in 3-5 years and should cost < $50. People throw them away because new one is better and they have money.

tinyhouse• 10 months ago

So this is like Alexa in glasses with a band that lets you do things without speaking? Sounds like a cool technology. I can see how it is useful for sport (bike riding, running, etc; hopefully people don't use it while driving), but to be honest, not something I'm too excited about buying. It feels more of the same.

LorenDB• 10 months ago

Well, Apple might be Cooked (pun very much intended). Tim is apparently very focused on AI glasses, but here is Meta with display-enabled glasses a year before Apple is planning to release anything.

Source: https://www.macrumors.com/2025/05/21/apple-smart-glasses-eve... or some other Mark Gurman leak

blackqueeriroh• 10 months ago

We all love to say this, but everyone forgets: Apple has never beaten competitors by being the first – they’ve beaten them by being the best.

Personal computers? Apple wasn’t first. Smartphones with screens? Apple wasn’t first. Tablets? Not first by a mile. True Wireless Earbuds? Nope, not at all first. Smartwatches? Hell no, not first.

And yet, Apple’s a category leader in every single one of these areas.

I don’t think it matters if Meta releases something first; Apple wins by doing it way better. Arguably, Vision Pro was way too early, even though it’s an incredible experience.

t0lo2• 10 months ago

No- they beat them by squatting on the most generic logical human friendly style so that other companies can't copy the most natural conception. They're copyright colonialists.

paxys19• 10 months ago

People keep saying this, but it is absolutely not true.

Apple was first to the personal computer. First to the smartphone. First to the tablet. First to wireless earbuds. The vast majority of the company's revenue comes from segments where they had a multi-year head start over their competitors.

In fact products where they play catch up are more prone to failing (Vision Pro, Airpods Max, Homepod, Maps, MobileMe, Ping, Music Connect, AirPower, Airport).

cflewis2• 10 months ago

I think it's a "yes but" here. AI is the first transition point since the smartphone. Apple knows how to make hardware, and knows how to make software. I am extremely unconvinced Apple has a clue about what to do with AI.

You can't just jump in, the lead up to getting this stuff going is a 5 year+ horizon, and Google, Meta, OpenAI and Anthropic are still moving exceptionally fast. Apple has shown they are nowhere near. They missed the boat on buying Anthropic, OpenAI was never going to sell with Musk behind it. There's no path forward for them, let alone catching up.

wklauss• 10 months ago

To be fair, Meta is also not the first company to launch smart glasses with a display.

But the reality of it is that it's probably still to early to say if these devices will have mainstream appeal. I see a lot of people saying "well, i no longer need to take the phone out my pocket", but that has been the case for a couple of years with smartwatches, for example, and it has not meaningfully changed our dependency from the smartphone or the smartphone market dynamics that much.

jayd169• 10 months ago

What does wins even mean, then? Apple doesn't dominate a market. They make competitive hardware that integrates well with its ecosystem. If there's a market for smart glasses they'll probably use the same strategy.

jhatemyjob6• 10 months ago

Wat. Vision Pro was a complete flop, Airpods aren't the best on the market, Apple Watch isn't the best on the market

solid_fuel3• 10 months ago

If Apple launches a similar product it already comes with a huge brand advantage, although Tim Cook has been working to squander that reputation recently. Regardless, an Apple version would like be local-first and come with stronger privacy controls than anything Meta releases, and that alone is a huge advantage for glasses that will be worn into the bathroom.

josephpmay• 10 months ago

It's weird that they give a figure for PPV but not FOV. That tells me that the FOV must be pretty terrible

jsheard3• 10 months ago

The Verge's article says it's 600x600 over a 20 degree FOV.

303uru2• 10 months ago

I could not be less interested. As the world determine their relationship with their phone needs distance, Zuck has decided everyone wants a phone on their face. Doubt it.

babelfish2• 10 months ago

Pretty disappointed that prescription is limited to -4/+4!

nomilk• 10 months ago

Looks like there were some bloopers during the demo: https://x.com/nearcyan/status/1968473003592990847

Huge respect to Zuck and co; I much rather authentic demos where stuff goes pear than some glossy marketing spiel by a non-technical exec.

Also, I didn't know this demo was taking place until afterwards, meta really should do more to publicise their demos, especially given they're actually making cool new stuff, unlike a lot of other big tech companies who are more about rent-seeking, advertising and enshitifying than inventing.

hanief• 10 months ago

I refuse to buy hardware from Meta again. I bought two Portal TV from them and it discontinued and not supported within two years. Now I have two junks in my drawer. :(

amatecha2• 10 months ago

cries in Oculus Go :(

released on May 1, 2018 to generally positive reviews. By July 2019, the Go was estimated to have sold over two million units. On June 23, 2020, Facebook Technologies announced it would be ending the sales of the Oculus Go later that year

laweijfmvo2• 10 months ago

ending sales is not the same as ending support; use the correct dates!

TiredOfLife• 10 months ago

https://developers.meta.com/horizon/blog/unlocking-oculus-go...

lostmsu• 10 months ago

The camera access is limited to Meta, no 3rd party developers. For privacy reasons. Meta ♥ privacy

geuis2• 10 months ago

Interesting tech, but the item is completely without any attractive style. Look up "army birth control glasses"

(Sorry about the google search link. Apple and Google go out of their way to hide the url when doing searches on Google from mobile Safari.)

https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=046dc2c9c0fa6748&udm=2...

This is what no one else can seem to understand. The iPad was created in Apple's labs before the iPhone. But Jobs and other staff made the decision to wait several years to launch the phone until the tech caught up to the ambition. They had a certain ascetic they wanted in addition to the hardware and it required time.

In this case, it looks like opposite. The tech is finally getting there, but the design team has no sense of making a daily wear product that people should reasonably want to wear. If I imagine a large population of people wearing these daily, it's going to look like middle and high school students from the 70s and 80s in yearbook photos.

What's awful is that I'm one of the most fashion ignorant people I know. I wear the same type of shirts and shoes because they're comfortable not stylish. And my glasses are as minimal frame as possible because I don't want a large mass of matter sitting on my face. Even that being said, this product just reminds me of my buddy's army photo of him wearing the Army issued glasses. Not good.

dylan6045• 10 months ago

Apple and Google go out of their way to hide the url when doing searches on Google from mobile Safari.

What? It's only 2 clicks away. You can click the copy button after hitting the share button. /s

geuis2• 10 months ago

Yup. I can go to any other of billions of domains in the world and just see the url, but because Google and Apple have a special compensatory friendship we can't do that.

thot_experiment• 10 months ago

Just in case someone is working on this type of thing. I will easily pay $1000 for an open source glasses thingy that has a monochrome laser display projecting directly onto my retina. IIRC Bosch and Intel have tried this before and the prototypes never went anywhere so there's probably a really good hardware reason why it's not happening but I want that more than any other hardware, it doesn't even have to be both eyes.

(admittedly with the recent Android news perhaps non-exploitative mobile computing is about to be dead and buried but shit, I'd lug around a backpack module everywhere running linux if it came to that)

Philpax5• 10 months ago

Apple is rumoured to have tried this and caused eye damage as a result: https://macdailynews.com/2017/04/20/leaked-document-details-...

It's quite difficult to do that safely, as it turns out! I would love a virtual retinal display, but I assume there's a good reason that nobody has managed to ship one in the last two decades.

mietek2• 10 months ago

Microvision Nomad was indeed two decades ago, but Microsoft Hololens 2 also used laser retinal projection.

zmmmmm11• 10 months ago

No display but perhaps you can support these guys and hope they get there:

https://mentra.glass/

kanwisher• 10 months ago

they do have a display on the glasses

mietek2• 10 months ago

Old Microvision Nomad units from around 2004 pop up on eBay from time to time. I have one; it's a monocular red laser retinal projection display, with a permanently attached computing unit running an ancient version of Windows CE. It's bulky, finicky, and nowhere near open source; there's hardly any documentation for it, but it does work somewhat. I haven't done anything interesting with it yet, because it doesn't have a IMU, and integrating one with it has been difficult.

Microsoft Hololens 2 also used Microvision-derived laser retinal projection technology. I don't have one, so I can't say how well it really works, but Microsoft seems to have given up on it as well.

If you relax your requirements and allow for a green holographic waveguide display, there are a few other options, but still nothing open source that I'm aware of.

numpad09• 10 months ago

Meta's probably losing tons of cash on this one at $799. Realistic retail price for what they're shipping is likely couple times over that. No way they're even fully covering the hardware cost with this price.

Nevermark• 10 months ago

You think its more expensive that Apple Vision Pro? [0]

Estimates for that are around $1500.

[0] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/02/apple-vision-pros-co...

t0lo2• 10 months ago

considering meta is short for metadata, this opens up whole new avenues of data harvesting

65• 10 months ago

It's cool in theory, but frankly my mental health is significantly improved if I don't stare at a screen all day.

aacook8• 10 months ago

It seems like there are a lot of negative comments about Meta's glasses which is surprising to me as a regular user. I bought these both in clear and sunglasses and I love them. I've recorded some of the most amazing videos of my baby with them. Listening to music is fantastic as it's different from regular headphones since you can still hear the world around you — I've even done a few longer bike rides with them and it's been great. I haven't enabled any of the AI or smart features on the glasses, although I've been meaning to give it a try. Some things I don't love about them is the proprietary charging cases, the battery life seems to degrade over time (not totally certain though), and they're sensitive to sweat. Overall I think they show a ton of promise.

alex11383• 10 months ago

One thing with technology is "iron sharpens iron" - I'm sure as advances in batteries (although I imagine there comes a point where that stops) occur it will have downstream effects of making all these things better

...unless part of the package for the improvements are things like "more likely to catch fire"

lurking_swe2• 10 months ago

Listening to music is fantastic as it's different from regular headphones since you can still hear the world around you

Many earbuds, like Airpods, have transparency mode. The end result is the same…music while hearing background noise. In fact airpods are better because of the ANC mode that tunes out noise except conversation and other “important” sounds. I can also wear airpods indoors without looking like a dork, so that’s also plus. I’m not seeing why this is novel or interesting?

I've recorded some of the most amazing videos of my baby with them.

This seems like a compelling use case. How is the video quality?

garbawarb2• 10 months ago

I wouldn't want to wear earbuds while doing anything active, the chance of them falling out is too high.

asdev• 10 months ago

they also don't have an app store and are a closed platform which is a big downside.

aacook8• 10 months ago

Agreed, hopefully that changes as things are more ironed out

SilverElfin• 10 months ago

These things have cameras and mics in them. Am I the only one concerned about people walking into every space with surveillance systems that are capturing us and sending that data to some random set of companies who have no obligation to keep our information confidential? How can I have a conversation with a friend wearing one of these? And surely workplaces will ban these?

ghaff• 10 months ago

And surely workplaces will ban these?

For all but the most security-conscious companies, that ship has probably sailed. Bringing a camera into many companies used to be an exercise involving forms, approvals, and so forth. Now everyone has camera, video, and audio recording in their pocket.

polyomino• 10 months ago

Perhaps or maybe they will require them?

ghostpepper2• 10 months ago

Most of the people in this thread are agreeing with you. You are not even close to the only one.

BatteryMountain4• 10 months ago

Hookup culture or any space (bars, clubs, festivals) where some level of shenanigans are expected will be destroyed by this even further than what smartphones has already done.

Imagine you take your kids to the beach and people are wearing these things. So even the beach won't be safe anymore.

hn_acc16• 10 months ago

Forget friends - random strangers in public. The slightest hesitation to "praise DJT" and you'll end up on the dox/fire/harass list.

mcntsh• 10 months ago

Grateful to be living in Germany where this will not be allowed due to strict data privacy rules.

ugh1232• 10 months ago

What's the sweat issue about? Does the display fog up?

aacook8• 10 months ago

I have the first generation of these, and as far as I know there isn't a screen. The sweat issue is sensitivity to the side controls — the glasses think I'm changing the music, volume or whatever and I'm just wearing them and doing nothing. This was an issue early on but recently I went on a ride for 90 minutes and didn't have this issue.

JustExAWS3• 10 months ago

The camera is worse than any phone camera and you have been able to buy headphones with active pass through forever to “hear the world around you” including adaptive ones.

And being sensitive sweat is kind of a deal breaker when you are working out.

aacook8• 10 months ago

The advantage for me is being able to snap video without holding anything in my hands. Sure, I could do that with a Go Pro but with these I just throw them on. I find the video quality to be good enough... the few moments I've captured have been so outstanding that I don't really care that it's not 4K.

vunderba2• 10 months ago

It seems like there are a lot of negative comments about Meta's glasses which is surprising to me as a regular user.

Really? Does nobody remember the "Glasshole" debacle with another equally large FAANG corporation who tried to push a similar technology? There were incidents of people getting physically assaulted JUST for wearing the things.

Jyaif• 10 months ago

In 10 years the mentality evolves.

It used to be considered extremely rude to pull out your phone during a conversation, now all the under 20 do it.

dav43• 10 months ago

I use them too for similar uses. Brilliant. I also use zero AI. I don’t care. I totally understand ppl not buying them because they are meta. I get it.

ainiriand• 10 months ago

Zuckerberg: Our baby.

michelb• 10 months ago

I think most of the negative comments are about morality and Zuck’s, Meta’s, Meta’s workers and Meta supporters lack thereof.

maldonad0• 10 months ago

I wamt less screens, not more.

tempodox3• 10 months ago

*fewer* screens.

BatteryMountain4• 10 months ago

So META now has videos of your baby. Let that sink in. Hope they were clothed at least.

People never learn. One day your children will be your judge when they are grown up, when they realise what you did to them. I hope it was worth it.

AuryGlenz2• 10 months ago

Thats such a ridiculously extreme viewpoint. What exactly did the user “do to them?”

Wurdan3• 10 months ago

As someone with a very opinionated 11 year old nephew (so he grew up in the time of ubiquitous social media and he is getting to the age where he starts to understand its upsides and downsides) - I dare say that most children don't hold any grudges against their parents for making digital images and videos of them as babies and storing those on cloud platforms.

losvedir3• 10 months ago

Because kids sure hate putting pictures on instagram...

aacook8• 10 months ago

I don't have the cloud processing features enabled for photos/video on these. As far as I understand, the photos and videos aren't used for training data. I also don't publish these photos anywhere on social media.

qingcharles• 10 months ago

I got some of these for a friend who has severe vision problems. They don't seem to be able to read out texts or emails from your phone? If something is in your notifications, it can get to it, beyond that it just constantly complains it doesn't have access or can't do it, despite the app having damned near root on the phone, with every permission possible granted.

Videos are limited to 3 mins, up from 1 min originally.

He says you can't hear the audio or use them for anything useful if there is much noise around you, i.e. in a busy area they become completely useless.

I still think they hold great promise, the main letdown is the awful software. Amazing miniaturization.

baby5• 10 months ago

I put my hands over my ears if I need to use them in a noisy environment. Not perfect but it works

Vinnl3• 10 months ago

For me it's not so much about what those glasses could do for me if I were to wear them... It's what they do to me if someone else wears them.

d3rockk2• 10 months ago

Exactly. The real danger is how they turn every wearer into a walking surveillance camera, creating a permanent, searchable record of your life without your consent, simply by being near them.

This fundamentally rewrites the rules of social interaction, creating a panopticon where you have to assume you're always being recorded, forcing self-censorship and destroying the trust essential for any authentic relationship.

And because our antiquated consent laws and pathetic safeguards like a tiny indicator light are completely unprepared for this, you have no real way to opt out of their surveillance network.

jijijijij2• 10 months ago

Watch Zuckerberg proudly showing how his hand gestures are hardly noticeable. So, so creepy.

I wouldn’t be surprised if people wearing these would get confronted, denied entry or beaten up regularly. I can even totally see them ray-banned legally. At least in the EU. Much less with external video processing.

Although I love the idea of AR and the cyberpunk flair, I don’t think these will be a thing because of privacy implications. Nothing has fundamentally changed since Google Glass failure.

epolanski3• 10 months ago

And yet users here were super bullish at how Apple was reinventing AR/VR with their visor flop 2 years ago.

latexr3• 10 months ago

In every popular thread there are tons of people optimistic and pessimistic about the subject. Saying “users here” shared an opinion is always wrong. Just look at the commend thread, there are all kinds of opinions.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36201593

Apfel• 10 months ago

Honestly, as someone who is not particularly pro Apple but bought (and returned) the Vision Pro, I cannot stress enough how much you need to try it out.

The issue with the product is entirely the lack of an ecosystem - the interface is unbelievably polished. The eye tracking & finger touch to click feels absolutely perfect. It really did feel like living in the future.

I returned it because the security policy at my work didn't allow me to pair it with my macbook, otherwise I would be using it all day every day.

simianparrot• 10 months ago

After oculus rift I’m never buying another Meta product either. It doesn’t matter how good it is they have bo trust left for me.

Will happily try an alternative from someone like Valve or, heck, even Apple — although not for a few generations when the price is reasonable.

bamboozled2• 10 months ago

You record your intimate family encounters using Meta products? Sorry for your family.

latexr3• 10 months ago

It seems like there are a lot of negative comments about Meta's glasses

The negative comments are about Meta the company. Many here don’t trust them, and with good reason, let’s not forget Zuckerberg literally called “dumb fucks” to people who trust him.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/17/facebook-...

I've recorded some of the most amazing videos of my baby with them.

Those are now property of Facebook, inarguably one of the most privacy-invasive companies in history.

Listening to music is fantastic as it's different from regular headphones since you can still hear the world around you

https://shokz.com

I haven't enabled any of the AI or smart features on the glasses

Oh, don’t worry, they’ll do it for you. Whatever they want to get, they will.

thomassmith653• 10 months ago

They're about Meta the company.

They're also about the product category, which is poised to obliterate the last shred of privacy a citizen still has.

postexitus4• 10 months ago

How do your friends feel when you are having a conversation and you are constantly pointing a camera at them?

baby5• 10 months ago

Nobody cares, and everyone loves the candid videos I take with it

jerojero• 10 months ago

A friend of mine got a pair, they get this light when theyre in use but you can't quickly tell what's happening. Are they taking a picture, a video, or just conversing with the AI?

I find it annoying, ofc, he's my friend so I could tell him not to take "candid pictures" of me (I generally just don't like people taking pictures of me).

But you would have no control whatsoever on the street and it would be very difficult to know that someone you've passed on the street has or hasn't taken a picture of you.

aacook8• 10 months ago

I don't really use them that way. I don't wear them 24/7, just specific situations. Also, there's an LED light on them that clearly indicates when the camera is recording vs. when it isn't.

chaostheory• 10 months ago

Meta’s brand problem won’t be solved until Gen Alpha comes of age. They’re the first generation to accept VR and they won’t remember the Facebook debacle since they won’t be using Facebook, but they will use meta’s AR and VR

taco_emoji2• 10 months ago

Wow yeah, there's no other way to take pictures or listen to music with environmental pass-through

makeitdouble4• 10 months ago

Taking pictures of small kids is a different thing altogether.

Many of the shots you want are very fleeting moments that you won't get after you took your phone from the other room. Then holding a phone will often redirect attention on the phone or hide your face, and again you'll have lost the moment.

The best alternative is someone else taking the picture (that can include auto photographing devices, like the one Google made and discontinued), the second best is you taking the pictures/videos with the most intrusive and practical device you can get. Smart glasses sound pretty good for that.

On the music part, I see a niche where glasses are unbeatable: most buds need to either stick into the ear canal or hook on the external ear, or both. If you hate things in your ears and also wear glasses, having the glass act as headphones is the best of both world.

None of that is mainstream IMHO, but there will be a sizeable public clamouring for these.

0_____02• 10 months ago

These specific glasses haven't been released yet. Hitting brick and mortar at the end of the month per TFA

Quitschquat• 10 months ago

I am curious: does Meta deliver ads to you based on what you’re looking at?

For example ads for diapers while looking at your baby etc.

aacook8• 10 months ago

dallasrpi• 10 months ago

Yeah, I feel similar. As an avid hiker/runner they have been a ton of fun to use. I got the transition lenses. I use them for listening to music/pods while running or wherever really as well as taking videos and pics. Only downside so far is in winter use where the battery dies VERY quickly.

boringg• 10 months ago

So Canadians and Russians shouldn't buy them is what you are saying?

gdbsjjdn• 10 months ago

Bone conduction headphones will give you the same audio experience with better battery life and usb-c charging.

I think a lot of people don't want to "feed the beast" and reward Meta for their terrible impact on society.

freedomben3• 10 months ago

My wife loves bone conduction, but to me it sounds terrible. Makes me wonder if I'm doing something wrong or if my bones just suck

rezmason• 10 months ago

I think of bone conducting headphones as the most realistic foundation for augmented reality on the market. Hearing things without plugging your ears up, weighing you down or taking you out of your surroundings is underrated and underutilized. To match the weight of an Oculus Quest 3 on my head, I'd have to wear seventeen pairs of Shockz OpenMove. Compare the dread of a video ad over your eyes to the dread of an audio ad in your ears.

We really should have a broader conversation about the practical applications of this stuff.

canuckintime2• 10 months ago

What brands still make bone conduction headphones?

stevenhubertron• 10 months ago

I deeply disagree here. Bone conduction headphones sound significantly worse then the Ray-Bans. You can hate Meta but its untrue that its the same audio experience.

bigshot• 10 months ago

Wait… you’re praising the audio? Mine must have something wrong with them. I cannot listen to music or any audio really unless I’m in a silent environment. If I’m outside and there are cars driving by, or wind, or any other ambient noise, the glasses speakers aren’t loud and full enough for me to actually hear anything at a level that I would deem appropriate. And when you max out the volume, the audio breaks down —- any bass gets squished and the whole soundstage sounds like crap.

Do yours actually sound decent? Maybe I need a new pair. Or maybe I’m just too picky.

coolspot• 10 months ago

Same.

Kaytaro• 10 months ago

I've never had a problem with loudness, in fact I only use them around 50% volume even walking outside next to a busy road. But I agree the audio quality is about the same as a phone speaker.

aacook8• 10 months ago

Mine sound decent for what they are and I'm fairly into audio stuff.

singleshot_• 10 months ago

That sounds like a fun product! I’m glad you like it.

Please don’t ever come near me.

spoiler• 10 months ago

I think the recording aspect is cool, since I assume it has that "first person perspective" thing going on that's usually difficult to replicate without a complicated setup. Especially useful for showing or demonstrating stuff with your hands, etc.

On the other hand, I can't fathom why having a permanent screen on your face is appealing... I don't know if I'm biased because I have a few mild neurological issues, and I'm simply not the target audience

m3kw93• 10 months ago

nobody is gonna use this, it's the Humane device except on a glasses.

zhyder• 10 months ago

Neural band is huge, glad they're shipping it already rather than waiting (years?) for a production version of Orion (the full AR glasses they demo'd a year ago together with this neural band). TheVerge found the controls great, even tried an alpha of handwriting for text input: https://youtu.be/5cVGKvl7Oek

These glasses are just "annotated reality" rather than full AR, with just 1 small display; think Google Glass but 100x more discreet. So discreet input and output on a device with a camera.

askvictor• 10 months ago

I think the backlash against Google Glass was counterproductive - the product was intentionally made to be obvious that someone was wearing it. But because of the backlash, companies that want to do this kind of tech now have to hide it, such as this.

xandrius7• 10 months ago

Let's forget that Google, just like Facebook, is an evil corporation with its main line of product being the sale of personal information, with absolutely no regards, except for when some country manages to slap their wrist.

So, it's quite a stretch to say "counterproductive", I'm for one very glad that happened. Sure, I love the tech and what really mind-blowing we could do with it (I was part of devs working with Gglasses) but I don't want these ruthless corps being the ones owning the output.

I'll wait until it is open, with self-hosted infra, and until then, I'll politely ask to remove the glasses if someone is talking to me.

jonbiggums222• 10 months ago

The other day I was doing a task I wished to record my view from in case I needed to review later and searched for webcam glasses or something. There are tons of $50 fairly unobtrusive spy glasses on Amazon already.

Actually, this reminds me I might buy a pair after all. In my case I was reviewing an important document package and wanted a way to quickly confirm later what I put in. But I've also recorded unboxings (when worried about a potential return) and disassembly of appliances for repairs that I only make every year or two.

fennecbutt2• 10 months ago

Yeah, the backlash against Google glass was dumb and nonsensical purely because that same tech will eventually become fully accepted by society.

But we are often a disappointing species.

JKCalhoun5• 10 months ago

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

mgh22• 10 months ago

Why do you think they rebranded? They are chasing after Gen Z, brainwashing that clean slate.

AvAn128• 10 months ago

"rebranding" takes more than saying "oh, now we are 'meta'" FB launched with great positive repetitional aura, but, at least to me, they have worn that away bit by bit over the years to the point where it becomes hard to earn back,.

metabagel3• 10 months ago

They rebranded because Facebook is a limiting name for branching out into new markets. Clean slate is a bonus.

dhjilop• 10 months ago

I would buy something from them, but until I know I could wear them safely at work while developing, using the bathroom, driving, and watching TV at home, and that I’d want to do that without being distracted all day by texts, etc., I wouldn’t wear them. I have to wear glasses, so they’d have to be clear, prescription glasses with reasonable small and stylish frames. This product isn’t for me, and I don’t see how it makes sense to continue spending money on this boondoggle, which is effectively a massively expensive human-testing project to help them develop reasonable-looking glasses. I love Ray-Ban glasses, but not this style or size, and not with these features.

al_borland• 10 months ago

This is my #1 issue. I simply don’t trust them and I don’t know that there is a realistic path to build that trust at this point. They’ve been violating my trust for decades.

I’m happy to let them prove out the tech, and if/when a company enters the market with a compelling product that I can trust, I will consider that competing product.

throwoutway• 10 months ago

OP is taking videos of his baby with these when Meta's page here doesn't event mention data privacy or security of the user's information or how it protects them

JKCalhoun5• 10 months ago

I don’t know that there is a realistic path to build that trust at this point…

I suspect it's impossible as long as Zuckerberg is involved in the company.

bigyabai6• 10 months ago

Well, your loss. My Oculus Quest remains the best $400 I ever spent on consumer tech.

mupuff1234• 10 months ago

Almost everyone I know who got a quest stopped using it after a week.

It's a fun toy, but gets boring pretty quickly.

cosmic_cheese• 10 months ago

I use my Quest 2 constantly but the moment that rumored Valve Index with inside-out tracking becomes available I'm switching. Not only is the association with Facebook not great, their Windows desktop software is awful and constantly breaking. PCVR took a big back seat to the weak on-board stuff with the Quests.

jodrellblank• 10 months ago

8 days ago you would never buy a gimmicky device. Now a screen facehugger (which does even less than an iPad and is useful in even fewer situations) is the best thing you ever bought?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45188372

JSR_FDED2• 10 months ago

Meta has a Musk/Tesla problem

Handy-Man• 10 months ago

Not even close to that level lol

notpushkin• 10 months ago

I would probably buy a pair once there’s some progress on an alternative firmware for those. The price is (hopefully) subsidized, so putting Meta in the red while getting some cool tech would be nice. (Same reason I own a Quest 3.)

mavamaarten• 10 months ago

Hah, same reason I bought my Quest 2. Figured I could buy a device that is subsidized by them, and then buy zero games on their platform and stream from my PC instead.

I was very angry though when they suddenly took away my USB debugging and had to go through another round of "verification".

jlarocco• 10 months ago

100% They couldn't pay me to use it. I fully expect it's violating the user's privacy in every way they think they can get away with.

paxys19• 10 months ago

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.

bitmasher9• 10 months ago

Instagram or WhatsApp are absolutely critical for daily functioning in certain circles of humanity.

mgh22• 10 months ago

Mark was right: https://www.theregister.com/2010/05/14/facebook_trust_dumb/

pier253• 10 months ago

You can use their products and still hate the brand.

I use Whatsapp daily (as does everyone I know) and there's no way I'm buying anything from Meta.

motorest3• 10 months ago

Meta has close to 4 billion people worldwide using one or more of their products.

If you ask any of those 4 billion people if they know WhatsApp is related in anyway to Meta, your answers will be split between "no" and "what's a Meta?"

leokennis2• 10 months ago

Actually Facebook and WhatsApp are the only products I know of where even completely non-tech people like my mom or the other parents at my soccer game have ever mentioned something along the lines of "yeah I did X on Facebook so now whatshisname Zekkerburg knows about it too..."

These people probably have zero awareness about cookies, tracking, online disinformation campaigns and online security in general...yet the one "tech" thing they know is that Facebook spies on you.

Everyone is aware of how Meta kills privacy in their products. The products are still useful, especially at price point "free". And they are still riding on an installed base and network effect from a time before we cared that much about the privacy infringement.

But, actually paying for the privilege of being the product...that seems like an extremely hard sell from Facebook for me.

rmonvfer• 10 months ago

In my (totally limited) experience, most non-tech people don’t even know what Meta is. WhatsApp is almost the only messaging platform used where I live (and pretty much everywhere outside the US).

I remember doing Bug Bounty for Meta a while ago and telling some friends and family about it, and I had to repeatedly explain they _are_ Facebook and WhatsApp and Instagram and many other things because they would look at me like I was talking about aliens.

taco_emoji2• 10 months ago

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.

splatter98592• 10 months ago

100% this. I'd love to have some of these features in eyewear, but there is no way in hell I purchase anything like this from Meta.

Less those bastards get of anything I control (data, finances, time) the better.

mdhb2• 10 months ago

You’re about to be in a world where your consent is totally out of the picture with Meta releasing this product and people will be recording you all the time now and sending that data directly to Meta where they can then build models about where you are, who you’re with, what you’re doing and what you are talking about and all without providing you and way to opt out other than breaking the glasses when you encounter them in public.

jryle70• 10 months ago

Are you using Chinese brands? Tiktok, AliExpress, ByteDance, Binance, Tencent? If you have no problems with them but with Meta, that's hypocrisy on your part.

I myself don't really have problems with them, and neither with Meta. I don't think they have a brand problem other than in bubbles like HN.

bitwize2• 10 months ago

One of these options (Meta vs. Chinese brands) is in bed with a dangerous totalitarian regime.

The other is the Chinese brands.

JustExAWS3• 10 months ago

The Chinese government can’t do anything to affect my daily life. I would much rather the Chinese government know everything about me.

paul7986• 10 months ago

I own two pair and love them yet hate them also because they are not durable and my 1st pair bought Oct 2023 stopped being smart in April so I bought a 2nd pair. After some big-ish water splashes the second paired died in June.

Smart glasses are great for ppl who wear some type of glasses and use their phone to take pics. Also, when I was in Europe asking about my surroundings enhanced my trip per my learning of about many sights I explored in Berlin and Amsterdam.

I do love and miss them but I’m not buying another pair til they are rock solid durable! Also the Ray Ban stores need to act just like Apple stores in terms of tech support but they do not ..and thus both Meta and Ray Ban are just selling a toy that easily breaks / doesn’t last. Even a Ray ban customer service rep said these things break I get so many calls.

zmmmmm11• 10 months ago

The brand on display here is Ray Ban. That's why they spent billions to lock in the partnership.

ghostpepper2• 10 months ago

Facebook changed its name to Meta. Meta is the company with the brand problem, not Ray Ban.

MengerSponge• 10 months ago

It's deeper than a brand problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Careless_People

Meta delenda est.

mrweasel3• 10 months ago

Which makes you wonder about Ray-Ban. Are they aware that their involvement with Meta risks hurting their brand? Those of us who are critical of Meta might be niche enough that it doesn't matter, but they must have factored that in.

wickedsight• 10 months ago

Ray-Ban is part of EssilorLuxottica. They own pretty much every single (sun)glasses brand on earth. I'm sure someone in their organization has made the decision that Ray-Ban was the best fit for a brand in their portfolio to do something together with Meta.

Also, you're right about the niche. A lot of 'normal' people probably don't even have a clue that Meta and Facebook are the same thing.

gausswho• 10 months ago

Huh. I genuinely thought they were already acquired.

incone1234• 10 months ago

You would avoid ray ban conventional glasses in protest at their association with meta? Don't forget to avoid the rest of Luxottica Group's products. I would bet (on Polymarket) against such a boycott gaining traction.

mft_2• 10 months ago

I doubt it is to any measurable extent.

The (literally) billions of people around the world using Facebook and Instagram don't care.

ml-anon• 10 months ago

Luxxotica is already terrible, predatory brand that makes shitty products.

mft_2• 10 months ago

This. The tech would have to absolutely world-alteringly amazingly unmissable for me to even consider using anything tied to the Meta ecosystem.

unsupp0rted3• 10 months ago

Only on HN do they have a brand problem.

The vast majority of the world doesn’t care. Half don’t know that Meta and Facebook and Instagram and WhatsApp are the same thing.

And even if they know it’s no more concerning than that conspiracy video they just watched and 100% believed about Bill Gates, as they log into Windows or power on their Xbox.

Aurornis3• 10 months ago

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.

SchemaLoad9• 10 months ago

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 eyeballs and you.

Meta seems like one of the few large tech companies where if the whole company vanished, the world would be purely a better place.

drdaeman4• 10 months ago

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 eyeballs and you.

They wouldn't do this if the conversation is important to them. Not as much as one would glance on a smartwatch when they get a chirp, which, I believe is perfectly socially acceptable in most business/casual situations.

And if they do it's nothing new - it's a literal equivalent of talking to a person deep into their phone. Exact same audiovisual media consumption - just a different form factor and display technology. Or, in a pre-phone era, a newspaper.

I don't think this technology introduces anything new to this issue.

brandon272• 10 months ago

It's quite different. Both are rude. But in one case the person is looking at their phone, and in another case the person is basically looking directly at you but engaged with some other thing happening on their device, as if they are in some drug induced stupor or having a neurological episode.

heavyset_go3• 10 months ago

The glasses close the attention loop faster, and the brain really, really likes quick stimuli -> dopamine release loops.

The faster it happens, the more addictive it is. It's the difference between oral administration of drugs and IVing them directly into one's veins.

Vinnl3• 10 months ago

Possibly I'm a horrible conversation partner, but even today already it happens with some regularity that someone is checking their phone while I'm in a conversation with them. It's even more common in group conversations.

And tacking on some personal experience, I've also noticed when I'm meeting over Zoom (i.e. with the rest of the internet within arm's reach), I get distracted way more easily than when meeting in real life. Sure, maybe not all those meetings are super important to me, but I'm not sure if the world would be a worse place if that wasn't possible.

j4coh• 10 months ago

You can tell that some people who grew up addicted to video content already sort of just stare at the real world like they are watching a video and don't quite realise they are present. If they were wearing glasses where they were actually watching videos while they stare into space not much would change.

jajko• 10 months ago

No its not perfectly socially acceptable, in contrary. Rude is the best description, be it personal or professional life.

When I see such person who simply can't resist looking at their displays during conversations, I know I am seeing a hard addict with host of other attention disorders. And the fool is feeding those, actively making them worse for some ultra short dopamine kicks that keep getting shorter till they make new baseline.

Not a stellar person in any meaningful way, rather an addict or an asshole. So much for perfectly acceptable.

everdrive3• 10 months ago

I don't think this technology introduces anything new to this issue.

This belief shows up time and time and again and is nearly always false. We had the written word before the internet, and before the printing press, so blogs are just like a hand-written letter. Gossip has always existed, so twitter does nothing new. There have always been things which eat at our impulse control, such as sports gambling and casinos, so smart phones are nothing new. etc.

What this view really fails to understand is that the constant here is human nature. Human nature is built more or less the same way as it has been for thousands of years. What changes is how technology allows human nature to play out, whether or not any given technology interacts poorly with human nature. New problems can exist purely based on scope, scale, reach, ease-of-use, lack of friction, etc.

inerte• 10 months ago

I disagree because the apps are designed to be addictive, so the conversation might actually be more important, the person might agree and say the conversation is more important, but they can't control themselves. It's hard to muster the willpower to fight "social" media.

SoftTalker3• 10 months ago

Exactly. It is bad enough trying to talk to someone with earbuds in and this just seems 10x worse. Zero chance I would buy something like this or try to talk to someone wearing them.

SchemaLoad9• 10 months ago

I've been making an effort to keep my phone in my pocket or even bag when talking to someone, and not having it sit on the table so I can't get distracted. I just can't imagine having notifications literally shoved in your vision automatically all the time.

The whole product category seems to be everything wrong with tech turned up to 11.

zmmmmm11• 10 months ago

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 increasing accidents rather than preventing them.

drdaeman4• 10 months ago

Isn't it a general rule of driving (or operating any sufficiently dangerous machinery) to keep the eyes on the road, constantly reminding oneself to do so, so the attention is kept where it is needed? I mean, in theory. In practice, I see people deep in their damn phones all the time - and it's scary - but I think that's more of an attitude (social) issue than a display (technology) problem.

And, yes, surely, one needs to periodically switch attention to mirrors and instruments, and I must imagine that shorter gaze movement distance shouldn't hurt. It's the same as checking the speedometer - you don't see the road, only have a rough idea from the peripheral vision.

Although I can imagine that a HUD can be actively distracting, constantly intercepting attention, e.g., flickering.

ryukoposting2• 10 months ago

A HUD reduces the difference in focus distance between "looking at road" and "looking at speedometer." It matters more as you get older, because your eyes focus slower.

cbsmith• 10 months ago

What's amusing is the original use case for HUD displays was to reduce attention problems. ;-)

croes4• 10 months ago

There is a difference between status information like speed and directions and messages from other people.

Your attention reacts differently

ludicrousdispla• 10 months ago

"Change blindness" is how this is characterized in the research field. Basically any abrupt change in your visual field will prevent you from seeing another change on the road.

http://nivea.psycho.univ-paris5.fr/#CBdemos

Youden• 10 months ago

You mean a HUD projected on the windshield itself? That's not my experience with it at all; I don't have to "look at" it, when my eyes are focused on the road in front of me, the HUD is sharp enough and positioned so that I always know my speed etc. without having to actively look for it.

Your car might have settings to adjust it somehow, have you tried those?

thefz• 10 months ago

Even less is needed to generate danger: I found myself checking my phone twice during a car trip because when listening to music through the USB-C to Jack dongle, it believes I am blasting music at full volume through my ears and decides to cut off the volume to 10% after 20 minutes.

Don't, and I mean DON'T decide things for the user.

immibis3• 10 months ago

Is this a physical or mental focus thing?

As in, are you just concentrating on the speedometer instead of the road, or do your eyeballs have to adjust because the optics aren't set correctly? I believe a HUD is supposed to focus at infinity, same as a road that's many times farther away than the size of your eyeballs.

fraboniface• 10 months ago

"The World Beyond Your Head" from Matthew Crawford is exactly about this. Definitely recommend reading!

Someone• 10 months ago

I think there’s plenty of evidence that they’re better in jet fighters (where users are well-trained), possible also in automotive (where they have been sold for decades; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automotive_head-up_display), but of course, it will depend on the design of the HUD and on what it displays.

Extreme example: showing random ads every ten minutes, even if the glasses c/should suspect you’re driving a car. I have my doubts as to whether Meta will make the right choices here.

FuriouslyAdrift• 10 months ago

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...

creaghpatr• 10 months ago

Meanwhile, I saw someone using their windshield mounted phone to watch videos while sitting in traffic yesterday (and driving erratically as a result which led me to notice). The self-driving cars can't come soon enough.

nirav723• 10 months ago

Not sure HUDs in cars will cause same issues. There aren't a lot of things to read on car HUDs that require direct concentrated focus. Every HUD I've seen have displayed the most minimal information. Usually the speed, map directions and media currently playing. Even the map directions usually only indicate the next step in route. So a quick glance is all that is required. Regular dashboard gauges require far more concertation. Especially if you're new to that specific vehicle.

kevin_thibedeau2• 10 months ago

Is this an aftermarket device that doesn't project to infinity or a purpose designed feature from the manufacturer? The former is not a real HUD for the reasons you cite.

anal_reactor5• 10 months ago

I think this is going to be very funny to observe as a third person.

ATechGuy• 10 months ago

Meta seems like one of the few large tech companies where if the whole company vanished, the world would be purely a better place.

100%

jayd169• 10 months ago

Probably about what you get now except their neck isn't craned down to a phone.

milkshakes4• 10 months ago

I disagree.

Among Meta's many technical contributions: React PyTorch osquery GraphQL Presto/Trino RocksDB Jest OCP Llama

Arainach• 10 months ago

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 make more money.

dakiol• 10 months ago

We don’t need any of those. So many brilliant people working at facebook and wasting their talent.

xdfgh11126• 10 months ago

They made quest 2 and 3. Despite their recent pushing of shitty horizon worlds, the hardware is extremely solid and affordable for VR.

rhetocj239• 10 months ago

And yet there isnt any large magnitude of buyers in the market, despite the fact that over a billion people use Meta products every month.

gorgoiler• 10 months ago

In my culture it’s considered extremely casual — and therefore quite rude in social situations other than the most private and familiar — to talk with someone while wearing sunglasses. I can imagine the same thing would apply to AR devices too.

What you describe sounds like it could be a real problem, but one I’d blame on rudeness rather than Meta. We already live in a world where people order coffee while reading E! news on their phones.

pjmlp2• 10 months ago

That is indeed pretty much culture dependent, in Southern Europe sunglasses only go out during Winter, when indoors or when bumping into a friend.

throwaway20372• 10 months ago

    > In my culture it’s considered extremely casual — and therefore quite rude

What culture?

_ink_• 10 months ago

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 eyeballs and you.

You spelled ads wrong.

BatteryMountain4• 10 months ago

Now imagine people driving at 130km/h with a 4 ton SUV with these things...

makeitdouble4• 10 months ago

Imagine talking with someone face to face and there's a giant tv right behind you pumping inflammatory news headlines.

That's a present day situation but I never seen anyone shaking their fist at tvs screens in cafes.

pnut• 10 months ago

Obviously, they don't have the gesture bracelet for the TVs yet.

Vinnl3• 10 months ago

Oof, I hate that. Luckily most cafes over here don't have TVs, or even clocks, for exactly that reason. I've been in countries where TVs in cafes are more common, and I don't know how you put up with it.

incone1234• 10 months ago

The square in the middle of Woolwich, London has a giant screen showing BBC News all day. No idea who decided to put that there but it gives the place a strong 1984 feel.

izacus• 10 months ago

Probably because many of us avoid such cafes? The "wall plastered with TVs bar" seems to be much less popular here and those places are aggressively unpleasant for me.

Findecanor• 10 months ago

That's already happening with cell phones and wireless earbuds, just without video.

... and I personally find that horrible.

elAhmo• 10 months ago

This might be good for public transport zombies, at least they wont be using their speakers to watch TikTok

numpad09• 10 months ago

Every sufficiently tech obsessed kids dream about being able to look at the screen while walking. It takes experiencting for them to accept it doesn't work.

rhetocj239• 10 months ago

In this world even a self driving car doesnt help if an individual sporadically walks infront of a car at close range due to being distracted.

AaronAPU3• 10 months ago

I have never once in my life felt a moment of wanting that.

maxwellito• 10 months ago

Meta seems like one of the few large tech companies where if the whole company vanished, the world would be purely a better place.

+1 ...and I think about it everyday

seydor2• 10 months ago

It's more like, Meta gets people continuously wrong, like they did with metaverse. I dont think people like walking around with a teleprompter. At least when using a phone it's obvious what they are doing, and that's respectful.

Plus, i dunno, i hate glasses that's why i did LASIK and it was the best decision ever.

bondarchuk• 10 months ago

There's plenty of people who don't mind using their phone in a socially disrespectful way. Maybe they got it right.

kypro2• 10 months ago

If you have kids this happens today, except they don't look up from their smart phone.

This isn't a new problem.

AaronAPU3• 10 months ago

That is true, it’s an old problem being amplified.

artursapek• 10 months ago

And you know that Faceberg’s plan with these is to sell advertising spots directly on your eyeballs haahaha

rhetocj239• 10 months ago

Meta has no real internal product innovation since FB desktop.

Every internal innovation after that has been a disaster. Hence the continuous acquisitions they have done.

xg15• 10 months ago

Yeah, I was amazed at the brazenness of doublespeak present in that press release.

It’s technology that keeps you tuned in to the world around you, not distracted from it.

Using this to sell a technology that will keep the wearer even longer in virtual spaces...

Marc evidently hasn't let go of his Metaverse dream and small details, like most of the population finding those ideas completely horrible, aren't gonna stop him...

rayiner• 10 months ago

Also it makes you look like a dork.

baby5• 10 months ago

Can you imagine trying to talk to someone face to face, eventhough you're not speaking the same language

sva_2• 10 months ago

Yeah I've been getting into such situations quite frequently recently here in Germany.

bookofjoe• 10 months ago

Try AirPods Pro 3 translation mode

pj_mukh2• 10 months ago

Honestly, I’m an avid user of Ray-Ban metas and I agree that if Zuck doesn’t want to re-hash his old original sin (distracting algorithmic feeds) into this new form factor, he would block out any feeds and notifications from the glasses when it detected someone was talking to you, which the glasses can do really well. I’m hoping whatever answer Apple comes up with here has this behavior as default because they don’t have an active user axe to grind.

The glasses shine bright when you’re alone, on a walk.

Also while you’re at it, kill the Facebook and Instagram feeds to save humanity. Too much to ask?

1shooner2• 10 months ago

if Zuck doesn’t want to re-hash his old original sin (distracting algorithmic feeds) into this new form factor

Out of curiosity, is there a specific reason to expect different? To me this is designed for attention primacy, for exactly that purpose.

evilfred3• 10 months ago

If Zuck wasn't Zuck he wouldn't be Zuck

stetrain2• 10 months ago

The Verge's video on these was mostly footage that looked like the person was staring down at the tip of their nose. It definitely didn't feel natural or like the person was looking through the glasses at the world around them.

moolcool• 10 months ago

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

neya• 10 months ago

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!

dennis_jeeves2• 10 months ago

Meta seems like one of the few large tech companies where if the whole company vanished, the world would be purely a better place.

In the 'developed' world I'd extend that concept to many other other organizations. Around 90% of the work they do is useless or harmful: banks, govt, fast food chains etc.

ToucanLoucan2• 10 months ago

Mmm you're making me want to read Bullshit Jobs again.

cal85• 10 months ago

Billions of people willingly use banks, fast food chains etc. all the time.

BrawnyBadger53• 10 months ago

Banks and government as your first two examples of useless institutions is definitely interesting

evilfred3• 10 months ago

banks protect your money so you don't have to keep it under your mattress and get easily stolen. governments build roads and give you clean water. what are you on about? you know Walden was a total lie right?

bluecheese4522• 10 months ago

That is the pretty close to the world we already live in. They call it then genz stare.

devin• 10 months ago

the millennials I know are worse than their children

dlandis• 10 months ago

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 eyeballs and you.

It would be just like in the Dungeon Crawler Carl books (and probably other scifi/fantasy books)

stronglikedan2• 10 months ago

Removing Meta from the equation will not remove general rudeness. Those same people aren't paying attention to you now either, it's just not so obvious.

There are other, valid use cases for this. I'm looking forward to it. More specifically, I'm looking forward to the secondhand market that will surely spring up moments after release as people realize that it's not a product for them in particular.

bko2• 10 months ago

Billions of people voluntarily Meta products every month. They invented React, React Native, PyTorch, GraphQL, Cassandra, Presto, and RocksDB just to name a few.

HN reader: the world would be a better place if they didn't exist

Peak Hacker News hubris.

evilfred3• 10 months ago

All of those would keep on existing if Meta died today, so who cares? Are you saying we have to keep permitting Meta to help governments oppress people and enable teen suicides just in case we get another React? that is silly

metabagel3• 10 months ago

Ideally, the glasses would stop displaying content when you are physically present with someone and conversing with them. Or you turn the glasses off for a bit to avoid being distracted. Not really a deal breaker, in my opinion.

boxerab• 10 months ago

I continue to be amazed by people rushing to give away even more of their personal data to a large corporation, especially one with Meta's privacy-challenged history.

neilv4• 10 months ago

What do people think about the (almost hidden) cameras in glasses?

With traditional cameras, feature phones, and smartphones, if someone wanted to be creepy with the camera, they'd have to point the device at someone, which tended to look exactly like they are using the camera.

(IIUC, some countries even required a shutter sound, for anti-creepy reasons, when the pointing of the phone wasn't enough warning.)

Now, the wearer of the glasses spy camera just has to look in the general direction that creepiness should be sprayed.

The creepiness isn't even that of the wearer; it could also be that of the tech company.

Is this going to end up another Google "Glassholes" situation, with the wearers shunned?

jayd169• 10 months ago

They've had the camera glasses part for a few years now.

neilv4• 10 months ago

But currently not very popular.

paxys19• 10 months ago

There's a pretty bright light that turns on when the camera is recording, and if you try and cover the light the camera won't work. Their existing glasses are pretty popular and there haven't been big compaints about it. If you really wanted to do secret recordings there are plenty of better and cheaper glasses in the market for it.

hollow-moe• 10 months ago

What a relief, they really thought about it, exactly like the AirTags with the warning buzzer.

walls• 10 months ago

There are several videos showing you can easily cover or disable the LED with no loss in functionality.

pesus2• 10 months ago

I'm really not a fan of them. There's already too much recording going on on a daily basis. I would personally avoid anyone wearing these. They say the mandatory LED activation prevents the issue, but I still don't trust it, and find it very off putting either way.

anal_reactor5• 10 months ago

Many years ago there was some summer camp and the staff organized a game "take a picture of your team leader without having them realize you're taking a picture". I completely obliterated the game by downloading an app that allowed me to record "in the background". I got a few good shots by showing a funny picture to people while having the front-facing camera on. Then I got other shots by turning on the back camera, locking the phone, and then just casually holding it in my hand like any other locked phone and waving it around.

The point is, if you want to secretly record, it's already trivial to do it.

lfaw• 10 months ago

So, your point is: "things are already bad now, no harm in making it worse"?

Yeul3• 10 months ago

This is HN. People would call it free speech- until it happens to their daughter.

jonbiggums222• 10 months ago

Amazon has a ton of spy glasses for like $50 that are no more obtrusive than this new Meta product so I think we've been living in this world for awhile. I suppose if the Meta product becomes popular it might raise awareness of them.

Philpax5• 10 months ago

I'd be the first one to buy these if they weren't made by Meta. I've wanted a pair of smartglasses for a very long time, and these seem like the first viable pair in terms of capabilities - aside from the thickness, which I can live with.

Unfortunately, Meta, and Zuckerberg, have been involved in far too much malfeasance. I just can't ethically justify buying a product from them again. I'm hoping that viable competitors become available, but it's going to be hard to compete with Meta's investment, especially on the HCI front.

pm905• 10 months ago

Fwiw i don’t have a facebook/instagram account (have whatsapp) and am still able to use all functionality in my Meta Rayban glasses.

I struggled with this question too. Unfortunately our current system doesn’t make it easy for startups to build this stuff at scale without being gobbled up (the FTC under Lina Khan seemed to want to change that but oh well) so Im resigned to using Big Tech products if they’re the only option.

ryukoposting2• 10 months ago

It's a tough needle to thread. I mentor a high school robotics team that's using a Quest 3S as odometry. You'd be astonished at how well a Quest keeps up while both spinning around and moving laterally at 12mph. Imagine an IMU that never, ever drifts no matter how much you whip it around. And you can just buy this thing from the local Best Buy! And it's cheap!

And yet, Meta is squeezing every cent they can out of our attention spans, and knowingly tearing apart the fabric of our society in the process. Do I discourage the kids from doing amazing stuff with Meta's gadgets? I don't think so. They're not my kids. It's not really my place to be having those conversations with them.

solid_fuel3• 10 months ago

Fwiw i don’t have a facebook/instagram account (have whatsapp) and am still able to use all functionality in my Meta Rayban glasses.

That was the promise when I originally bought the Quest 2, but a year later they forcibly tied those accounts to Meta accounts and through that, facebook accounts. Now I can't use my Quest 2 because it is locked into an account verification screen, demanding that I upload a photograph of my drivers license to access the games I already purchased from the quest store.

Meta cannot be trusted.

iammrpayments• 10 months ago

I’m 99% sure that EMG band is collecting several biomarkers and sending them all to facebook headquarters, get ready to get mattress ads when your HRV goes down.

jayd169• 10 months ago

I was a bit disappointed to see it was a single display and no mention of AR. Even if it wasn't stereoscopic you could still have world locked visuals.

But I realized this is a pretty clever move. Only allowing a fixed, inset screen really hides any issues with display field of view.

jnaina2• 10 months ago

This is beginning to mirror the evolution of the Smart Phone.

The Apple Vision Pro is AR glasses at the Apple Newton evolutionary stage, an early smart PDA (Yes I'm the sucker that bought both at their respective launch, 3 decades apart).

The Meta Ray-Ban Display is AR glasses at the Windows Mobile/Blackberry stage.

Apple will likely swoop in and launch the final refined version of the AR glasses (thin, 8 hour battery, eye gaze control, retina based authentication, tethered to the iPhone, Apple AI, etc), when the tech is available at a decent price point for mainstream launch.

And yes, being the unrepentant Apple FanBoi, will be buying the Apple iGlass at the launch.

pm905• 10 months ago

I really hope that Apple is working on this. It seems like they have at least some of the framework through the Vision; if they fire that team/abandom this software its gonna be a huge mistake.

jnaina2• 10 months ago

Apple really plays the long game. More than 10 years ago, on a now defunct website for AAPL investors, there was an Apple employee who inadvertently blurted out about how his work at Apple was related to researching saccades & micro-saccades, the small rapid eye movements of the eye, as it never stays completely still, even during “fixation".

Apparently eye tracking must distinguish meaningful gaze from the natural jitters. I was thinking at that time, as an AAPL investor, that Apple seems to be wasting money on worthless R&D endeavors.

It only became apparent to me, much later with the launch of the Apple Vision Pro, how his seminal research on saccades contributed to the design and realization of the AVP.

cco2• 10 months ago

Apple is very well positioned since they also sell you a super computer in your pocket.

One of my biggest annoyances is the OS on the Ray Ban Metas. If they just served as dumb I/O they'd be an incredible product and everything else about them, e.g. battery life, weight etc, would be so much better.

sho_hn• 10 months ago

I'm not sure I'll ever get over my concerns about making people around me uncomfortable to ever don one myself, but I hear the non-display ones are breakthrough assistive devices for impaired folks and this one might be too with the captioning.

I wonder how the etiquette will evolve for people with legitimate needs to use them in polite company.

pm905• 10 months ago

I do see them being recognized more and sometimes banned (eg i saw a video of a strip club stopping someone with those glasses from entering). But otherwise… meh? We already know everyone around us is carrying incredibly high powered cameras in their pockets.

AvAn128• 10 months ago

Use cases: 1: FPV "how-to" videos are marginally easier to make, though GoPro remains a thing...

2: Users get to look like the nerd emoji

3: The rest seems like creepy-spying-on-friends-or-strangers kinds of things. Any constructive suggestions? I'm willing to be enlightened...

culopatin2• 10 months ago

I tried to record every day things with my action cam and I always feel like a weirdo with a box hanging off, I think these would help me not care about that as much,

AvAn128• 10 months ago

Out of curiosity, for what purpose? Do you go back and watch your videos of everyday things? Share them with friends? With photography (and most visual media) the secret seems to be to take many many photos, or draw many many pictures, or shoot tons of video, and then curate and edit meticulously to find just the very best parts. Do you really get much value out of recording lots of day to day video? Is this part of some kind of art project?

gmueckl• 10 months ago

4. On-foot navigation without having to glance down at the phone or watch

5. Being able to converse with friends in loud places (e.g. restaurants have become louder and louder over the years due to bad acoustic design)

AvAn128• 10 months ago

My phone and noise cancelling earbuds allow for both of these already. My issue is with an always-on hidden camera and mic — just creepy surveillance junk

lolive• 10 months ago

Fight the future !

https://youtu.be/YJg02ivYzSs?si=nTLQO4G2OIPcMkwX

pm905• 10 months ago

This is very cool; It seems likely to be the next step in human computer interaction. I could see Meta (or someone else) adding cellular features and a small screen to the wristband and getting rid of a phone entirely.

dagmx2• 10 months ago

Tested has a hands on plus interview with Boz (their CTO) https://youtu.be/1jDorDsi9JM?si=O1_g9Z-rgGjyVER3

pm905• 10 months ago

Seems like Apple should get the wristband tech so people can type on their watches.

dskhatri• 10 months ago

Someone help me understand why the Ray-Ban branding? Meta should be able to make the frames themselves. Ray-Ban doesn't seem to be a strong enough brand that Meta couldn't go it solo and build a glasses brand themselves.

avlbk• 10 months ago

At first I was shocked by the price, but now I just sort of want it. If they opened the OS it would be AMAZING.

albert_e• 10 months ago

Is anyone else seeing concerns about where this technology is heading --

(A) Are we going to consume food prepared by a human so incompetent that he needs Live AI to tell him what ingredient to put and how much ... and that too an AI so unreliable that it can't tell whether the bowl is empty, let alone what ingredients are in it.[1]

In what world is this a sane marketing proposition?

(B) Distracted driving due to smartphones is at least detectable -- how do we escape distracted driving because of smart glasses?

When people eventually crash cars or walk into traffic or fall into pits -- no tech company will so much as acknowledge that the tech they are pushing so hard might have something to do with it.

Who should take the lead on saying: wait a minute we need some common sense boundaries around this ... some ground rules around responsible use of technology.

[1] Failed demo of Live AI - https://x.com/ns123abc/status/1968469616545452055

enos_feedler3• 10 months ago

Dont worry. The market decides what we want and we just wont go for it

manco• 10 months ago

Are we going to consume food prepared by a human so incompetent that he needs Live AI to tell him what ingredient to put and how much

Yes, I have cookbooks full of recipes I follow.

When people eventually crash cars or walk into traffic or fall into pits -- no tech company will so much as acknowledge that the tech they are pushing so hard might have something to do with it.

Adults have agency and I expect them to be held accountable for their actions; not use technology as a scapegoat. If someone drives drunk it's not the alcohol at fault.

ashu1461• 10 months ago

Is it weird I went through the complete landing page and still did not get what actually the features are

oldfuture3• 10 months ago

https://www.wired.com/story/tiktok-promotes-stickers-for-sec...

Why they shouldn't be allowed ---

1.The glasses have cameras and microphones capable of recording people nearby often without their knowledge (e.g. the recording indicator can be subtle or blocked, “GhostDot” stickers are being sold to block the LED indicator light so others won’t see when recording is happening)

2. As I remember Meta has changed its privacy policy so that voice recordings are stored in the cloud (up to one year) and “Hey Meta” voice-activation with camera may be enabled by default, meaning more frequent analysis of what the camera sees to train AI models.

3.The possibility that anytime someone might be recording you wearing glasses that look like ordinary sunglasses can create a chilling effect: people may feel uneasy, censor themselves, avoid public spaces, etc.

TheDong2• 10 months ago

As opposed to now? Everywhere you go in public, people are holding their phone up watching tiktok or such. There's no recording indicator on phones, they could be recording you.

Heck, go to a tourist location, like a famous area of london or tokyo or new york, and there'll be dozens of wannabe influencers holding up gopros on selfie sticks.

It's too late. It's already happening. If it has a chilling effect, we're already chilled.

Octoth0rpe3• 10 months ago

wannabe influencers holding up gopros on selfie sticks

I think there's a huge difference in how one perceives these as a privacy/self-censoring risk. Yes, a bunch of tourists with their gopros might catch me in the background, but I think it's reasonable to assume that their intended target is themselves, and catching me in the background is incidental. If someone is recording with their glasses, basically by definition their target is not themselves (though perhaps a companion?), and it's more likely that I am their target.

oldfuture3• 10 months ago

the fact that surveillance capitalism, or we should rather say surveillance oligarchy, is here does not mean we have to support it going forward, it can only be worse if nobody reacts

zmmmmm11• 10 months ago

e.g. the recording indicator can be subtle or blocked

if they are like the previous ones they have hardware level detection and decativation of the camera if the indicator light is blocked

ghm21992• 10 months ago

Zuckerberg's online actually quite slick @30 WPM. Brand concerns aside, its a good tech leap forward for this fidelity of communication using gestures(and costs will fall as apple, google, 3rd party get into this). You have to realize that there are only smart glasses in the market which are 1/2 way between smart and AR/VR and at the moment none have any AR/VR that are commercially at this price point or massively available like Orion. I still think the puck will make its usecase be more specialized and will be a hindrance to massive adoption, but things will get smaller and they have separated the power hungry screen made it way less power hungry as an interface goes and they will go after puck's size next.

I have been reading the book called Apple in China and hardware is so hard. 30 hours of battery with wireless communication (I wonder if this is BLE 6.0 alone) between the EMG + Wave guide tech is not easy.

This is the second long term bet by meta that is panning out, the first being investing in long horizon AI projects(pytorch and a bunch of AI models), though that org has had rough times it did yield something good.

ghm21992• 10 months ago

I would also say several other less known software and data breakthroughs are probably going to also help this tech

1. A world wide localization map that can let the glasses SLAM system do useful things.

2. I believe the Puck runs on a custom OS. The glasses are probably on somekind of a real time Microcontroller driven thing(would be surprised if its much more than firmware, code wise) that needs to efficiently package sensor data and send it over BLE to the puck/wristband. I am not sure they have open sourced those two components.

I hope they open source both of those for public good.

robin_reala• 10 months ago

It’s six hours battery, not thirty:

with up to six hours of mixed-use battery life and up to 30 hours of battery life total thanks to the portable (and collapsible!) charging case

cco2• 10 months ago

I understand the existential problem that Meta faces here, but those forces have created a worse product.

As a Meta Ray Ban owner my biggest takeaway is that these glasses shouldn't have a CPU. They should be a dumb camera, mic, and speakers for my phone.

Interacting with Gemini on my phone would be the ideal product here, but of course that means Meta doesn't reap any of the data rewards.

So of course, since they don't make the phone in your pocket, they're strapping a device to your head and everyone pays the price of a big battery, CPU, and RAM in a sunglass form factor.

They're a remarkable product, but again, "dumb" glasses that just serve the I/O directly to your phone would be an incredible product. I wish Google or someone else would make them.

chrischen2• 10 months ago

There’s a Chinese AI glasses brands (Solos) that integrates with ChatGPT and I’m wondering if simply being paired with a better AI model will make it significantly more useful. One thing Meta seems to be completely ignoring up until now is Asians and Asian markets (lack of low bridge fit models, lack of translation features for any Asian languages despite ChatGPT being state of the art at it).

wrboyce2• 10 months ago

I’m almost certain there are low bridge fit Meta Ray-Ban glasses.

sidcool• 10 months ago

Amazingly, I agree with you. But the average HN user does not understand the market and regular users' demands. It's been repeatedly demonstrated in the past too.

sundar_p2• 10 months ago

I'm with ya. Meta is making these to get your data, not really to make a compelling i/o-enriched pair of glasses.

The changes to their privacy policies plainly show the bait-and-switch.

Octoth0rpe3• 10 months ago

It's hard to imagine using these for more than 30 minutes in my day. If I'm at work, whatever these can display I'd rather have on my monitor. When I'm socializing, I wouldn't want random popups or notifications, and I certainly wouldn't want whoever I was with to be looking at them either. So that leaves some pretty narrow use cases such as the cooking example in meta's demo, which might be interesting if it actually works well (the demo did not inspire confidence). So I'd end up using this maybe 30 minutes, every 3 or 4 days? Most of the time I know what I'm doing with my ingredients and don't particularly need AI assistance to combine noodles w/ sauce or whatever I'm doing. That's a very, very hard sell.

thrownawayohman• 10 months ago

The best part of this tech is the being recorded by random strangers without you noticing. I can’t wait to learn about who and what gets access to this data. Let’s go surveillance state!

wkat42425• 10 months ago

I wonder if these are also available in prescription form? I imagine this would be harder due to the light guide in the lens

paxys19• 10 months ago

They are (only within +/- 4 though)

wkat42425• 10 months ago

Oh that wouldn't be a problem but I would need astigmatism correction. They might not have that.

Slow_Hand• 10 months ago

What is it with the Meta site disabling the back button on the browser?

I can understand why apps like Instagram - when used in the browser - wouldn't be compatible. But this product release page? What's going on here? Why?

chupchap2• 10 months ago

I've been using the RayBan Meta glasses for a while now, and the main reason I like them is because they do not have a display (https://balanarayan.com/2024/12/31/ray-ban-meta-long-term-re...). Another screen to glare at is the last thing I need, but I can imagine there are people who want one of this.

I use them for taking videos when I'm out and for listening to music without putting on headphones or earphones. While it is not the best at anything, it is definitely capable of doing a lot of things well enough and that is what matters a lot of times.

divan• 10 months ago

Same, but I would love to have map navigation displayed occasionally. I use bicycle in the city a lot and so many times I had to pull the phone (+unlock with face ID) while cycling, just to see the directions, and it's both frustrating and dangerous.

wpm4• 10 months ago

A smart watch or bike computer fixes this problem already.

chupchap2• 10 months ago

I use the voice guidance of Google Maps for it and in that context, Rayban is just a bluetooth piece.

sharkjacobs• 10 months ago

I like the look of the Oakleys better than the Raybans. I get why they want to make their glasses look like Rayban Wayfarers, because they're the most neutral inconspicuous glasses frame style of the last 25 years, but, IMO, they missed the mark pretty bad, and they look pretty conspicuous and pretty bad.

You won't blend in wearing the Oakleys, but they look like what they are, which is an insane mirrorshades cyberpunk HUD, and if the wearer can own that they could actually look kind of sick.

Of course, I'm technically underwhelmed and unimpressed by what I've seen of the actual technology, but that's hardly the most important thing.

bitwize2• 10 months ago

Can I hack it? Can I load whatever OS and software I wish to run on it?

No? Then no thank you.

solid_fuel3• 10 months ago

Meta locked two games I already paid for - Blade & Sorcery VR and Beat Saber - behind account verification on the Quest 2. I already bought both of these, played them for a while, but now it won't let me use the headset without "verifying" my facebook account by sending them a photograph of my drivers license. Neither of these games are online, neither allow me to interact with other users in any way.

I will never buy a Meta product again, the brand reputation is lower than dirt to me. Even ignoring all the other awful things Meta does, they have no reason to require a verified account to play two local-only games that I already paid for. No matter how cool glasses like these may look, I have no trust that the brand will not suddenly demand more money or information from me to continue using a product I have already purchased.

whatsupdog• 10 months ago

Agree. And the constant spying doesn't help either. Who wants an always online meta controlled camera/microphone in their bedroom all the time?

ryandrake• 10 months ago

I'm never going to update a photo government ID to some company just to use an app. What kind of a bonkers world are we living in? Totally ridiculous. No app is worth this.

anal_reactor5• 10 months ago

Lots of people, actually. This website is an echo chamber of those privacy-conscious.

epolanski3• 10 months ago

You already have one, regardless of some companies repeating the privacy claim 24/7 to make you believe so.

immibis3• 10 months ago

Objectively speaking, most people do. That's why Meta has so much money.

xdfgh11126• 10 months ago

How does that work? The Quest doesn't even require a Facebook account. They were decoupled in 2022.

makeitdouble4• 10 months ago

I'd assume the purchases were made with the Facebook account, when it was still required, so the purchase can't be used on another account ?

I haven't checked, but the Facebook decoupling was made kicking and screaming so I assume there will be rought edges

kotaKat• 10 months ago

You can’t tell me a Meta account isn’t just a Facebook account with extra steps.

It’s still Facebook and will always be Facebook.

zeroq• 10 months ago

This, plus the fact that if you dig deep enough into your google account you'll probably find an audio file with you saying "really? I can't play this game? Fuck you facebook, never buying your gear again" recorded from your android phone without your consent or knowing.

sneak• 10 months ago

The above post didn’t even load for me because I have all of their domain names DNS blocked at my router and in NextDNS on mobile.

liendolucas2• 10 months ago

This. Also (if possible) move away from Facebook. I have zero respect for this company, no matter what they do or come up with.

Always remember that you are under their will, be your data, be the devices you purchase from them or any other thing that is related to them.

strogonoff3• 10 months ago

Microsoft pulled the account verification trick with Minecraft after forced account migration a few years back, locking accounts and forcing customers to verify mobile phone number to even launch the game.

afandian• 10 months ago

That's crazy.

If you want to play something minecraft-like, Luanti (VoxeLibre) is really excellent. I play it with my child, and it's indistinguishable from 'real Minecraft'.

https://www.luanti.org/

ramon156• 10 months ago

iirc there's a YouTuber that wants to sue Microsoft for this weird rugpull, although I doubt it will happen

FergusArgyll3• 10 months ago

At least on nintendo switch that's not true

ToucanLoucan2• 10 months ago

In the most minor defense of the devil: with Minecraft, you have a substantial audience who is underage, the game features multiplayer heavily, and I don't think it's the worst idea ever to have verified accounts there.

lupusreal• 10 months ago

That was a real scumbag move. Thankfully its easy AF to "pirate" Minecraft by simply commenting out account verification in a 3rd party launcher. But I will never forgive Microsoft for stealing my account with that dirty trick.

__turbobrew__• 10 months ago

Yea, that was a major pain. I had a Mojang account since basically day one when the Minecraft beta came out and then over 10 years later I want to boot up the game to play with some friends for nostalgia and my account no longer works.

whywhywhywhy4• 10 months ago

Switching from just basic Oculus accounts to Facebook accounts was the dumbest move, I say that from someone who was really enjoying the Rift and Quest 1 hardware. Whole thing was pretty effortless until that moment, then logging into it became this massive chore where you're bounding between the phone and headset twice, really tedious if you're not a big facebooker so haven't used their login flow in years and it was all just extremely janky.

Then there were a bunch of walls in the transition period where Oculus accounts can do X,Y but Meta accounts are needed for Z.

Can really tell Zuck told the teams "All in on VR/AR" and the accounts/FB team began "well if its core it's account should be the core account we use".

Would have been much smarter to keep it like Instagram where it's an entirely separate feeling account but under the hood deeply connected in a way that allows the data syphoning they want but the end user it rarely feels like a Facebook account.

newman8r• 10 months ago

That was the day I stopped developing for VR completely. Kind of dodged a bullet because the space didn't explode the way I thought it was going to.

illusive40802• 10 months ago

Why did you have to switch to a Facebook account?

I was gifted a Meta Quest 3S, and I was forced to make a Meta account, but I didn’t have to make a Facebook account.

bilsbie3• 10 months ago

A lot of big companies make this mistake and dont see how it hurts them.

I’m almost at a tipping point of leaving windows because of the weird account integrations.

Even my Mac nags me to log in. Why do I have to log in online to use a computer? This bothers gen x at least.

And I use google products way less than I would because of all the login requirements.

benterix2• 10 months ago

now it won't let me use the headset without "verifying" my facebook account by sending them a photograph of my drivers license.

I believe this would be the first time in my life that I would try to generate a fake driver's license.[0] It's completely ridiculous.

[0] Not to mention that I'd only use a fake FB account first anyway, there's no way I'd give them my real data. I know Zuck apologized by "dumb fucks", but while the wording was offensive he was actually right.

damnesian• 10 months ago

they don't look cool anymore. they are the eyes of skynet. I have prescriptions coming up and I have always bought ray bans. I won't anymore, I don't want anyone to think I am spying on them, because that's what they are, spy tools.

metabagel3• 10 months ago

Yeah, looks like a cool product, but I would never buy anything from Facebook, because it's primarily an advertising company.

bitcurious• 10 months ago

Neither of these games are online, neither allow me to interact with other users in any way.

Beatsaber has a multiplayer mode, so if your opinion is contingent on online play you should reconsider.

pciexpgpu• 10 months ago

Meta really desperately wants to own a platform so they can avoid paying the Apple tax and the Google tax and directly plumb a vision to ads pipeline.

Just imagine the dollars in front of those glasses… if it only darned worked.

I really hope they don’t though because it’s beyond dystopian to own such a billboard company with a sick twist.

motorest3• 10 months ago

[flagged]

Almondsetat• 10 months ago

[flagged]

motorest3• 10 months ago

Why do you lie? Clearly this is not the case if you look at the user's submission and comment history

Do you think someone's comment history link is an obscure secret no one can access?

Clearly this is not the case (..)

Oh really? Please explain in your own words why you believe this is not the case.

tomhow3• 10 months ago

Please don't do this. It's unfair on people who are commenting authentically, which almost everyone turns out to be when we dig into the data. The guidelines ask:

Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45284046 and marked it off topic.

blondie9x• 10 months ago

Google Glass again ...

mrcwinn• 10 months ago

Really excited about these types of products. Would never trust anything with Meta, but I appreciate them trying to contribute a product. Unfortunately, it’s a dead end. Mark’s always regretted missing mobile - and thus being the app rather than the platform - and here it’s no different.

nothrowaways• 10 months ago

What are the privacy guarantees for passerbys (non-wearers).

mdhb2• 10 months ago

Zero… you can and will be filmed without your knowledge or consent and your private conversations will be used to train ever more invasive AI systems and profiles of you will be sold to advertisers and governments all over the world.

I strongly recommend making owners of these things feel incredibly unsafe and uncomfortable in social situations. I wouldn’t hesitate to break a pair when I get the opportunity personally.

numpad09• 10 months ago

You can sue the wearers for reparations and to work with Meta to delete your data, perhaps

psyclobe• 10 months ago

I would give up some privacy in order to get some cool future tech; honestly I’m so in love with sci fi that I’m pretty excited to be fully connected to my own ai 24/7 like how iron man did it.

_ZeD_• 10 months ago

The very first thing I though was: "yeah, they're gonna shovel advertising directly into my retina"

qwerty_clicks• 10 months ago

I can’t believe they believe this is what people want. Why isn’t Zuckerberg doing the demo in the metaverse? Ha

cryptozeus• 10 months ago

$799 for this ?

rashidae2• 10 months ago

I got so excited watching these videos and going through the product page. I completely ignored the price tag without putting any resistance and I thought to myself: I'VE GOT TO HAVE THIS!

Not only that... I started to think about ways I could use this!! I pictured myself using them... I visualized it all, and then remembered when I felt this way when the Ipod was released, and then again, when the first Pebble watch was launched or maybe even, the first kindle.

Although there's going to be some strong competition in the next 1-2 years with Apple, as we all know, the "thin phone" is nothing about the phone, and all about their pathway towards wearables...

I must have this. This is a game changer. WOW!

rashidae2• 10 months ago

who ever's downvoting my comment... You're literally trying to shut up the positive review due to your lack of empathy? WTF? This is my preference, I'm an expert in tech and I don't hold your negative views... Stop trying to control the narrative.

Tepix3• 10 months ago

You seem to be based in Europe. Do you not realize that using these glasses in public will violate the GDPR, making this gadget useless?

losvedir3• 10 months ago

How so, specifically?

withinrafael• 10 months ago

I have the previous generation Meta Ray-Ban glasses and they're great, but I wish I could use the underlying tech for... something more useful. It has no API, no extensibility options, nada. I--and my friends--don't use Messenger, Facebook, etc. I fear it'll be the same w/ the Ray-Ban Display, so I doubt I will be upgrading. Such a shame.

sksum• 10 months ago

they demoed a spotify widget; will there be an sdk?

rossant2• 10 months ago

Not a big fan of Meta but got to admit the tech is interesting. Can't wait to see the competition on this market.

nicman23• 10 months ago

if there is a custom os for these i d buy them. i am not running meta os

senectus1• 10 months ago

gods the frames are always so thick and ugly...

gregwebs• 10 months ago

Is there a way to just use this as a computer monitor? That’s what the Viture glasses are and it’s great to have a portable monitor that focuses at a longer distance.

Giorgi• 10 months ago

They keep pushing this useless augmented reality to the sunglasses sometimes without sometimes with vr, ai, whatever new hype is there, it all failed, this one will fail too, there simply is no use.

tempodox3• 10 months ago

How does anybody see anything if they ban rays?

pilooch• 10 months ago

I like the glasses path, well I do wear glasses, but some elements remain unclear to me:

- are prescription glasses available for display ? I guess not ? - these glasses need to be online, I guess they do so with a phone and bluetooth connection nearby ? So that's the glasses, the band and the phone, oh and the glasses case, seems a lot to carry. - pedestrian navigation seems to be rolled out per city, so it's not like having gmaps available right out of the box.

regnerba• 10 months ago

I won’t buy another Meta device. Bought the Quest 3 and now they keep installing games and apps on the device that I cannot remove to promote things. I don’t want any of that. Will most likely be replacing it with the Valve Deckard/Frame device as soon as possible.

luis_cho• 10 months ago

Meta is the second last company I trust to put an wearable on my face.

_zoltan_5• 10 months ago

Incredibly cool!

anigbrowl• 10 months ago

Finally the Joo-Janta peril sensitive sunglasses I always wanted

victorbjorklund2• 10 months ago

I saw a review on these glasses on YouTube end for the first time I feel like: Okay now we're actually approaching something interesting. This is the first point where I feel like there is some glasses that I actually would want to wear almost. I probably still won't buy these because it's still the first generation of these types of glasses but I think it's promising in the sense that you know in a few years we probably will have some things that are really really good.

grigy• 10 months ago

It's actually the 2rd generation now, or even 3rd for the Ray-Ban Meta (Gen 2). First generation was Ray-Ban Stories.

victorbjorklund2• 10 months ago

I know. Meant 1st gen with display.

8f2ab37a-ed6c• 10 months ago

What's with the trend in photography with lighting the subject's face in chunks? I know they're trying to drive your attention towards the wrist and the eyeglasses, but having half the face be blocked out by a flag or masked in post is super distracting.

laidoffamazon• 10 months ago

Im sold, but it appears there isn’t a single place in my major metro of 7 million that will offer in store demo and purchase? Do they not want my money?!

OhMeadhbh• 10 months ago

Seems a bit "privacy eroding." Like Google Glass, but chonkeyer.

jamescontrol• 10 months ago

Nope. I like the idea, but that is just still way too bulky, and just the fact that this is meta makes me want to steer clear.

abbycurtis33• 10 months ago

Whether you like Meta or not, the success of their glasses line means Apple and other companies will respond.

wigster• 10 months ago

Really needs the cigar and greasepaint mustache

doublewhy• 10 months ago

Anyone using Meta Ray-Bans should be aware that your data is collected and used for AI training. There is no opt-out unless you're from EU. Also, the old Meta View companion app one day was renamed into the Meta AI app and started to provide ChatGPT like functionality.

1) “Meta AI with camera use is always enabled on your glasses unless you turn off ‘Hey Meta", which basically makes glasses defunct.

2) “voice transcripts and stored audio recordings are otherwise stored for up to one year to help improve Meta’s products.”

[1] https://www.theverge.com/news/658602/meta-ray-ban-privacy-po...

xandrius7• 10 months ago

Incredibile how people can still discuss the pure tech when it's tainted with Meta's touch.

How much can they do before some people think twice? Or are they all employees?

whimsicalism2• 10 months ago

i wonder if the CCPA applies here. too bad… I have trouble imagining they wouldn’t get enough data by just being opt-in by default like chatgpt.

tedmiston• 10 months ago

CCPA/CPRA provide opt out of data sharing for (ad) sales to third-party companies, but those were passed before the gAI boom. I imagine an analogue is already in motion for AI training opt-out in CA, but those two don't address model training.

But ~782 million ChatGPT users vs a few million pairs of glasses.

amelius• 10 months ago

Already banned (no pun intended) in many places because of the intrusive camera.

guerrilla• 10 months ago

I'm sorry but these all look terrible still. Ya'll look like dorks walking around on with them on. It's such a privacy invasion too. So many people are just going to get punched in the face, literally.

m4tthumphrey• 10 months ago

Meta Ray-Ban Display is part of our vision to build the next computing platform that puts people at the center so they can be more present, connected, and empowered in the world.

Err what? How do glasses that let you procrastinate when physically connecting to people help that?!

Also the video demo has no sound and one of the examples genuinely looked like the wearer was having a text a convo with someone whilst sat across from people at dinner…

jonplackett3• 10 months ago

designed to help you look up and stay present. With a quick glance at the in-lens display

Right… so having notifications in your face ALL DAY is going to _help_ you stay connected to the real world.

jonplackett3• 10 months ago

I don’t see how this is any more socially acceptable than walking around with your camera on filming everyone all the time.

The fact that it’s FB that can see through your eyes doesn’t make this any better.

1gn153• 10 months ago

It'll become as socially acceptable as installing a dashcam on your car. Or having a camera on your motorcycle helmet.

jonplackett3• 10 months ago

I don’t think so. You’re just passing by people with your dash cam. And your dash cam does not send data to Facebook

XCSme• 10 months ago

Didn't Google Glass do the exact same thing and failed? Not because of the technology issues, but social issues.

People nowadays want to disconnect from technology more, not to have it even closer.

Kwpolska• 10 months ago

Google Glass launched too early, when people cared more about privacy.

946789987649• 10 months ago

Their problem was that they didn't look like normal sunglasses, so people were immediately intrigued/suspicious of them. Although these have the little light if you're recording, the amount of instagram videos where creators are using these and the random people they're directly talking to don't notice, should tell you all.

The rise of smart accessories (especially watches) should tell you that a lot of people don't want to disconnect

alex11383• 10 months ago

Bet you GG though actually treated your PII with respect

For all my numerous complaints about Google

mcdonje• 10 months ago

Google Glass looked unusual and was nerd-coded. Social norms are extremely strong. The only way something that looks like Google Glass would take off is if the tech is established with the well-to-do having elegant devices, and then something like Google Glass becomes working-class-coded.

epolanski3• 10 months ago

I really like the product, but the fact it's tied to having a meta account makes it a no go for me, won't test it.

drakonka• 10 months ago

The evolution of smart glasses has totally passed me by since the Google Glass thing. Whenever I heard about them I just thought they were still in the "gimmick" stage. But last week I heard about Meta glasses for the first time and realized that people actually seem to use them, in a practical way?

If these things are now to the point of realistic adoption, I'd be interested in getting a pair, specifically to record and get on demand info/maps/AI integration maybe on runs, hikes, and other adventure/exploration-type settings... and recording my cats... But now a whole can of questions is opened:

- What products are developed enough this area that are worth choosing between?

- Don't trust meta due to privacy and data exploitation concerns. Are any other products on the same level in terms of hardware + software quality, or is it just going to have to be a compromise (or waiting until something else is good enough?)

- Responsiveness/UX/photo/video quality etc...

Part of me kind of wishes I was still ignorant to the advancements of these so I could keep ignoring them as a gimmick and not be tempted to dive into researching the product category...

alex11383• 10 months ago

yeah so if you need info on people at Harvard just ask

i have over 4000 emails, sns...

"what? how'd you manage that one?"

people just submitted it, i don't know why. they "trust me". dumb fucks

cedws• 10 months ago

As many others have said, I also have no interest in buying a Meta device, but I’m glad that they’re at least pushing this space forward and hopefully other companies will start doing more R&D.

I had an Oculus CV1 in 2019 but sold it when it became mandatory to migrate to a Meta account.

holografix• 10 months ago

Can’t wait to see Apple’s response. Only reason I’m not buying one of these September 30th is I know apple will release something better.

Well that and it being a meta product.

Piraty• 10 months ago

so, everybody wearing this in europe will hand out 'may i take photographs of you or your property'-forms + 'do you agree to Facebook's TOS, as your photographs will be uploaded to and processed by them'-forms prior to using this in public? just like owners of all the rolling surveillance stations (some still call them EV) do?

spy state actor's wet dream comes even more true with this, even more than with already overly de-privaciced public spaces.

wpm4• 10 months ago

I was thinking today that I basically am going to have to start wearing one of those IR face blocker things around just to stop my visiage ending up in some god forsaken Meta server somewhere.

My god, how fucking grim our future looks. I miss when tech was fun.

lm28469• 10 months ago

everybody wearing this in europe

The whole 17 nerds who will buy this toy will have to do that yes

jmull• 10 months ago

…based on data from nearly 200,000 consenting research participants…

They had to clarify it was “consenting” since it’s the opposite of their normal default.

(You also have to wonder how consensual it really was.)

fl73052• 10 months ago

It made me want to go back and check their other press releases to see where they did not include the "consenting" part.

weberer• 10 months ago

Privacy and vendor lock-in concerns aside, these glasses are ugly. They look like generic nerd stereotype glasses from an 80's movie.

maxehmookau• 10 months ago

I don't think I can state this hard enough, but there is no tech cool enough that would make me comfortable allowing meta to see through my eyes.

Just never in a million years.

seydor2• 10 months ago

I wonder if they plan to use the glasses as some rudimentary EEG device to read intent or emotions

thomasfl• 10 months ago

Imagine talking to a "glasshole" for the first time. The "glasshole" is being able to do facial recognition while talking to you, and see a ton if info about you before you've been able to introduce yourself. What could possibly go wrong?

kypro2• 10 months ago

Some very negative comments here... Regardless of personal thoughts about Meta and AR tech, it's undeniable that these are interesting and have some cool tech.

The live captioning with directional audio seems like it could be a huge win for people who are hard of hearing, especially given the display is invisible so is much more natural to use in real life than say a smart phone or a VR headset with passthrough.

Another thing that's cool is the neural band. It looks like it's a more robust and flexible implementation of what Apple is doing with hand tracking.

But generally the idea that you can interact with the glasses silently with your hands to your side while wearing what effectively looks like a normal pair of glasses is incredible. I think this this is the first time we've seen an implementation of AR in which a large group of people could see value in it.

Also the fact Meta was first to market with a solid implementation of AR and not Apple or Google is also notable. I think I would have doubted their ability to pull something like this off a few years ago.

shade• 10 months ago

Yeah, I've been deaf for over 40 years now and captioning glasses are something that I've wanted ever since I was a kid. I'm not a particularly big fan of Meta and I have some serious reservations around privacy that need to be satisfied, but at the same time it's really exciting to see this going from "pie in the sky thing I dreamed about having when I was ten" to "actual existing product."

There's a few other companies/startups working on this too, but a lot of the glasses they're producing are very ugly. There's a couple that didn't look bad, but from what I'm seeing Meta's are a combination of the best-looking ones and best display so far, and I'll be very curious to see the reviews.

nakedrobot2• 10 months ago

"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 — all without needing to pull out your phone. It’s technology that keeps you tuned in to the world around you, not distracted from it."

WHAT IN THE HOLY FUCK DID I JUST READ

rhetocj239• 10 months ago

"Meta Ray-Ban Display glasses are designed to help you look up and stay present."

Didnt that stupid AI pin have the same tagline?

liendolucas2• 10 months ago

Maybe we should really think twice when purchasing new amazing gadgets. It can be this, a drone, a phone or anything that comes to your mind.

The default has become to get consumers locked in as much as possible, be for your data or money exploitation or both (check the Slack thread for a non the non-profit HackClub).

If you pay 800 dollars for this device and a year after they ask you for your driver's license (as for the top comment). Are you willing to waste those 800 dollars you payed for it or will you upload any sensitive docs demanded from them? Or if they decide to phase it out early because there is no real adoption, will you get your money back? Will they make the device open so it can still be used by their "owners"?

So the way I see it: you give big money to already super rich companies. You also give them your data. You are forced to comply their rules and in even in any of those cases when they decide you shouldn't use it anymore they deprecate it and keep the device close. No, thanks.

The bottom line is this: do extensive research before making a single penny leave your wallet to try to minimize getting fucked up as much as you can.

We should educate as many people surrounding us as possible so they can make good or informed purchase decisions as well.

This should also be taught to children so from an early age they can understand very well that privacy and data has proven to be extremely profitable to virtually any company out there.

xutopia• 10 months ago

Meta for a company meant to connect people is doing its darnest to reel us into a virtual world rather than the real one.

Imagine seeing everyone with glasses with suspicion because you don’t know if they’re filming you, reading notifications or actually conversing with you.

pnt12• 10 months ago

Cool tech, wrong company.

The tech is impressive, but people are already getting concerned about excessive screen time via zombie doomscrolling. Moving it from the pocket to literally in people's face will only worsen it.

And by Meta of all companies, with concerning privacy practices and of course motivated to hold your attention to serve you more ads.

88j88• 10 months ago

Smart glasses featuring cameras, a control bracelet, and in-lens displays represent significant technological progress with particularly valuable applications for people with disabilities. The non screen version could be transformative for blind users, while the display equipped model offers great potential for the deaf community. However, there's a notable double standard in social acceptance: while these devices are welcomed when serving accessibility needs, they face resistance when used recreationally, reflecting society's discomfort with wearable recording technology in casual social settings.

olibhel• 10 months ago

Why does this read like AI slop?

sundar_p2• 10 months ago

I can't wait to read the privacy policy.

A reminder, users cannot opt out of current Meta Ray Bans data recording/storage/training if you actually want to use them as smart glasses.

user19999192• 10 months ago

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.

user19999192• 10 months ago

Gen Z stare intensifies

tsoukase• 10 months ago

Suggestion: do not use this device in a neurological clinic or they think you suffer from epileptic absence seizure (loss of contact, gaze fixation for a few secs)

probablypower• 10 months ago

The penultimate final frontier, adverts directly in front of your eyeballs 24/7, and tracking not just your position but your attention.

Only step beyond this is neural implants putting purchasing decisions directly into your grey matter.

rkomorn• 10 months ago

Maybe the next step of the business plan is to sell blue (or green) screen shirts to individuals on which AR glasses can display targeted advertising that only you see (eg: everyone you see in those shirts is wearing Nike gear, but everyone I see is wearing Ralph Lauren because I am fancy).

Then everyone whose shirt is used to display ads can get revenue-share.

tokai• 10 months ago

Wouldn't these be illegal to wear while driving/riding in most of the world?

robofanatic• 10 months ago

These glasses look exactly like my grandpa used to wear back in 1980s

bilsbie3• 10 months ago

I just decided I’m buying this just for the live AI. Assuming they fix the issues.

I’d use it for so many things. Cooking, repairs, maybe even motivating me to do yard work? A full time AI assistant is just such a crazy sci fi idea.

bilsbie3• 10 months ago

Any chance someone could root this and run open source software connected to user controlled AI?

I love the product but hate all the privacy issues and just not being in control of such an intimate device.

bloomingeek2• 10 months ago

I heard an article on NPR, which the interviewed one said the world was now ready for this technology. He said he thinks the "glasshole" opinion of most people has most likely passed. I freely admit, the price and the attitude was what stopped me from getting a pair back then.

Now I won't hesitate, although the in-lens display is fantastically intriguing, I'm wondering about safety concerns like: walking down the sidewalk or crossing a street, at the wheel of a car(!), work related issues, etc. Gee, I guess I am hesitating! It will be interesting to see a study on how these glasses change our brains as it deals with this new paradigm.

boogieknite• 10 months ago

id be surprised if my opinion is a common one, but one thing i prefer in ar glasses over phones is that i can take it off

put glasses on, do what i want to do, then take them off. more like a laptop or tablet (or my ps4 jfc) where there is just enough friction to keep it from being overly compulsive

i wonder if any major ar product will embrace that people want to only wear glasses for tasks and want to take them off, or if theyre all going to push toward something one always wears like meta seems to. most successful tech products arent for constant use

asadotzler3• 10 months ago

AR glasses, at their best in the medium term, will be closer to your smartwatch than your phone, and probably closer to your car's HUD than your smartwatch.

yalogin• 10 months ago

The glass hole term came up because of the price of the device. The conversation should shift to privacy and security now that it has become accessible to everyone, and it’s a really important and urgent conversation

bloomingeek2• 10 months ago

This is what Google said and was my understanding: glasshole (plural glassholes)

    (derogatory, slang) A person who wears spectacle frames equipped with PDAs (especially with cameras) that display into the user's eyes, and who acts like a jerk or films inappropriately. [from 2013]

nirav723• 10 months ago

The specs indicate 6 hours of battery life. Not really something you can use all day.

linuxftw• 10 months ago

There's a lot of hate for Meta in here. They are actually innovating unique new products here. I don't know if they will be commercially successful, but they at least look interesting.

waffletower• 10 months ago

The Neural Band has the potential to be an amazing musical instrument. Would be interesting to see API support for the device.

9999000009993• 10 months ago

Just a thought experiment, if I interview at Meta can I use these glasses ?

"I ABSOLUTELY love your mission, and I envision everyone wearing these! It's cool if I use them during the interview, I feel this will help me understand the end user experience."

unsupp0rted3• 10 months ago

There's decorum. You can wear the glasses, but it doesn't mean you should be recording confidential meetings, anymore than you should be recording your partner during an argument.

Just because your iPhone has a video function doesn't mean it has to be on all the time.

9999000009993• 10 months ago

Correct, but isn't the entire point of these glasses to make life easier.

Of course I would ask for permission, and I'm 99% sure they would say no, but what if I'm actually interviewing for the AR team ?

What better way to embrace the product than to use it ?

1gn153• 10 months ago

And just to add on, if someone replies "but you can see if someone is video recording": not audio recording. That one is completely invisible.

whimsicalism2• 10 months ago

Not surprised at this point at the negativity here anymore, but this looks like really cool technology - especially the wristband. The speed at which people are typing in the demos… I think it is awesome to see a proliferation in new ways of talking to computers.

also: looking for a good discussion forum where people are interested in technological advancement

redbell• 10 months ago

Today at Connect, Mark Zuckerberg debuted the next exciting evolution of AI glasses..

Why this wasn't written as: "Meta debuted the next.."? You know what?! I have always felt that Meta is owned, managed, and totally controlled by Zuck alone! No board members and no investors.

I have been following Zuck in his Metaverse journey and more specifically, in his interviews like the one with The Verge and he is always speaking with this tone: "This is how I see it", "My vision is..", "I plan to make it this way..", like he is the only employee in his company.

If it was Apple that released this product, we would read something like: "Cupertino: Apple debuted the next exciting.." which reflects the vision, strategy, and innovation made by the company as whole and not a single person. I don't recall that Steve Jobs had behaved like this even in his prime time.

foodevl• 10 months ago

Zuck owns 13% of Meta shares and 61% of the voting power

Jensen Huang owns 3.8% of Nvidia and 3.8% of the voting power

Tim Cook owns 0.021% of Apple and 0.021% of the voting power

Previously, Steve Jobs owned 0.6% of Apple and 0.6% of the voting power

So yeah, there's a structural difference here and Meta is much closer to being owned, managed, and controlled by Zuck alone

suyash• 10 months ago

How long does the recording last and is there a developers SDK?

maherbeg• 10 months ago

These would be great for outdoor running to keep tabs on your pace, HR, time etc. Paired with the new airpods 3, you could be phone free and watch free.

Bjorkbat• 10 months ago

My thoughts as I reconcile my conflicting feelings on this. I think it should be objectively cool that Meta has finally managed to come out with a pair of smart glasses that come incredibly close to being a practical wearable.

The thing is, it's honestly hard to imagine doing anything cool with them. I think this has less to do with hardware limitations and more to do with vendor restrictions.

I think Meta is fundamentally incapable of making anything cool. Hence why they had to partner with Ray-Ban to make these glasses rather than making their own. I think Meta's failure to realize their version of the metaverse had to do with their inability to recognize coolness and taste as much as anything else. I think any and all apps Meta ships with these glasses are cursed to be a mediocre experience.

I think Apple could do a better job but at the end of the day I think the most interesting (not necessarily best) would be ones with the most developer freedom.

mettamage• 10 months ago

I think it's sort of important to remember scifi student films like this [1]. Just to remember that, it seems that this is where we're going towards to.

And it freaks me out a little.

Note, not the end though. That's more Neuralink.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lK_cdkpazjI&ab_channel=TheCG...

aeturnum• 10 months ago

There's also Hyper-Reality from a few years back: http://hyper-reality.co/

QuantumNoodle• 10 months ago

What implications does this have to recording conversation you have with others? I for example live in a state where both parties need to give consent.

staplers• 10 months ago

  live in a state where both parties need to give consent

Meta donated a lot of money to the current administration. Confer what you will.

jessepasley• 10 months ago

Shoving people wearing these into lockers is completely legal, btw.

xunil2ycom• 10 months ago

Now people can text and drive while appearing to attend to the road.

mvdtnz• 10 months ago

I don't believe I've ever seen a Hacker News thread astroturfed this hard behaviour. Interesting stuff.

hackpert• 10 months ago

Meta Ray-Ban Display

Related Stories