Birbla

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • The backlash itself may not mean much; it's what comes next that matters. If you want to regulate this, strike now while the iron is hot:

    Meta and everyone else with experience knows that, for disruptive technologies, backlash is the stage before adoption. In a sense, the backlash means you're achieving market momentum.

    Not all backlashes lead to adoption, but if you want to implement regulations (blur all faces in recordings, no identification, etc.), now is the time to move. At the adoption stage it seems to become normalized and people lose interest, like with other mass surveillance - obviously horrific and dangerous, but few will think about doing anything.

    by mmooss
  • I agree with the verbiage if not with the sentiment. These are a perversion of technology. People hold their phones up for entire songs at a concert instead of being absorbed in the experience. Removing friction from recording will multiply digital hoarding behavior no matter what other risks are at play. There is a balance there; it's nice to be reminded of experiences. But where is the line?
    by hallway_monitor
  • I hope one of these companies pulls off a compelling set of glasses with a display and no camera.
    by wombat-man
  • The product you describe would have very limited use. The full HUD of realtime information absolutely has benefits for the real world, but of course it will be used for things people would subvert for a more malevolent purpose. There's no avoiding that. Does the malevolent use out weight the beneficial use to the point the product should never be allowed?
    by dylan604
  • These exist already; they're sometimes called "XR glasses." They simply act as a monitor for a connected device.

    The market is maturing and the hardware is pretty cool. The software situation is pretty dire though; phone OSes don't have a way to use them effectively. Samsung Dex is probably the best experience right now to just use them as a desktop display.

    by JeremyNT
  • How would it analyze your surroundings without a camera
    by arealaccount
  • There's a kickstarter for "MemoMind One". Glasses with display and no camera.

    https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1963472698/memomind-one...

    by OnionBlender
  • It won't matter. People will assume it has a camera. The product category is most likely (and rather predictably) dead if it depends on people wearing them ubiquitously and in public.
    by andybak
  • Even Realities G2, and MemoMind One + NIMO glasses coming soon.

    Vuzix Z100 if you can find them anywhere as well...

    All of these are green LED displays though, not a full color HUD.

    by gavinray
  • > Gaby Luisa was standing outside a dance club in Arizona earlier this summer when a man wearing glasses threw out a pickup line.

    “Did I just run into my future wife?” he asked.

    She politely let him know she wasn’t interested and moved on with her evening.

    She was shocked to find out later that their interaction was recorded and posted on YouTube without her knowledge or permission, using smart glasses which, she said, looked like Meta’s glasses.

    Goddamn this wild. Maybe tell people you’re recording and later plan to upload to YouTube?

    by baxtr
  • Pick-up artists are not going to behave like decent human beings.
    by TRiG_Ireland
  • Both wild but also very obviously was going to happen with a product like this.
    by rimbo789
  • I do think its a bit odd to automatically and "obviously" default to the idea that people will be using these to be perverts. Its a bit strange of a default assumption to me.

    Although its even more disheartening that most people's reactions to just about anything these days is dread about how it'll make their lives worse without fail.

    by miladyincontrol
  • > Its a bit strange of a default assumption to me

    You come off as naive.

    by freejazz
  • > its even more disheartening that most people's reactions to just about anything these days is dread about how it'll make their lives worse without fail.

    Maybe because most (tech) things do make most people's live worse without fail (such as these glasses being available)? I don't see how you can blame people for a very rational reaction here

    by williamdclt
  • Exactly. I can find more positive and beneficial uses of these than a negative ones.

    And unless I see proponents of the wholesale ban to foam at people holding smartphones equipped with cameras, I think it's safe to assume they didn't think their opinion carefully and honestly.

    by subscribed
  • > Its a bit strange of a default assumption to me.

    What is _your_ default assumption re: use case? I honestly can't think of any use cases (outside of very niche a11y uses) that are not in some way offensive, though perhaps not 'perverted'.

    This product is absolutely toxic, and I can't imagine myself or anyone I know being willing to associate or socialize with someone wearing them (again, excluding some very specific a11y use).

    by Octoth0rpe
  • > Its a bit strange of a default assumption to me.

    It's not an assumption. People started using it for being creepy almost immediately.

    https://nypost.com/2026/04/14/business/metas-pervert-glasses...

    https://fortune.com/2026/07/28/ray-ban-meta-pervert-glasses-...

    https://thenextweb.com/news/instagram-meta-glasses-harassmen...

    https://www.wired.com/story/the-rise-of-the-ray-ban-meta-cre...

    by dijksterhuis
  • Thinking completely selfishly, as a visually impaired person, I want these to succeed, because they can be a great assistive tool. And assistive tools being general consumer products makes them cheaper.
    by bigblind
  • These glasses are really great to use. The camera is pretty fundamental functionality because you can use it to tell you things about the world around you. At the Vancouver Aquarium we asked about some fish we saw and stuff. I was quite surprised at the speed of the multi-modal model. It recognized the fish type, and then gave us some facts about it. Fantastic stuff, honestly.

    It's also marvelous for taking videos of your children playing at the park. Here's my daughter at Port Moody https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcLAByw6ZYc

    Very ergonomic and you get your hands free to catch them if something is about to happen. In the end, we didn't end up using them that much because the whole charging thing makes it kind of annoying, but that's about the only reason. I can't imagine I'd use it in a context where I wouldn't wear a GoPro, but it's a cool form factor.

    by arjie
  • I'm sorry, but I was taken aback when I clicked on the link and it was met with a real vídeo of a child. I was sure that it would be a Rick Rolling link or something. Aren't you afraid of exposing your daughter to a bunch of anonymous people on the internet? I understand that you like the product, but not even Mark Zuckerberg uses his kids for marketing
    by tuesdaynight
  • How do the glasses distinguish between taking videos of your children playing at the park, and taking videos of other peoples' children playing at the park?
    by bjacobel
  • I agree, but unfortunately, they don't have great quality or support.

    First, I've had these for about 2-years. I purchased them to capture candid pictures and video's on a cruise and they were fantastic for that purpose but I've bought two pairs in two years and won't buy them again.

    When you email Ray Bans for support they send you a wall of text mentioning everything their warranty doesn't cover. It was enough to discourage me from continuing to get a case replacement 2-weeks after my purchase and I just bought a third-party adapter instead. I expected more from the brand. I won't buy Ray Bans (Meta or otherwise) again because of the hostility in that one email.

    My first pair died after 1-year (I gave them away after 6-months and they only lasted the new owner another 6-months). My second pair died after just over a year.

    I'd love to have a good pair of camera/audio glasses. The audio is one of the best parts. But these Meta glasses aren't it for me anymore.

    by codazoda
  • What comes to mind are those orange tip laws mandating that airsoft guns must be manufactured with an orange tip to differentiate them visually from real firearms.

    In this case, maybe there could be some mandated standardized high-viz indicator that there is a camera lens being pointed at you in wearable devices.

    I could see maybe allowing the high-viz element to be concealed if the mechanism concealing it also blocks the lens.

    by zlarin
  • They already have a bright light that when covered, disables the camera
    by bigzyg33k
  • I think mandating that all cameras have both flashing warning light and audible alarm would be good standard. Surely AI is now easily capable of eliminating those from the record so wouldn't be big deal.
    by Ekaros
  • Meta should use their Kylie Jenner et al connection to design a camera that is both stylish and obvious.

    AFAICT the main use case for camera glasses is very similar to the "gopro on your helmet" use case for cyclists:

    - to record cool first-person video to upload to TikTok et al

    - to warn cars / creeps "I'm recording this and will send footage to the cops"

    AFAICT, influencers generally want people to know they're influencers. They're using meta glasses not because the glasses let them go incognito, they're wearing them because a gopro on a helmet is dorky.

    And obviously an incognito camera is going to be much less useful staving off harassment than an obvious one.

    by bryanlarsen
  • I’ve said this before but Apple should make glasses where the whole frame glows when it’s in active use. Siri colors for using Siri’s , a distinct color for recording , a long exposed color for pictures, visualizer for music. Gives it the safety factor and a distinct look.
    by Jcowell
  • At some point, incognito will scale to hidden and I think that's the part that has to be reimagined. It's not about hidden camera, it's about cooperative and consent based.
    by j45
  • I'm sure someone other company will make exactly those glaces, obvious and stylish recording devices.

    In the meantime, it's quite telling that Meta is choosing not to.

    They want recording to be constant, impossible to detect, and normalized. That's why the camera light is so subtle and easy to cover. The more constant surveillance is normalized, the more they have data about every single facet of our lives to sell to advertises.

    by esperent