I had PRK done at Stanford in 2007 or 2008.

Now it's nearly 20 years later, and I just turned 48.

My vision has deteriorated from "old age" enough now that I might have considered getting the procedure done again. Touch-ups are/were free at the Stanford clinic.

My vision has not deteriorated in the past 5 years or so, I am farsighted enough now that it is more comfortable to hold fine print things at arms length to read. And things far away are a bit blurry again.

But, I now think that getting eye surgery now to fix your vision is a bad move if glasses can correct it.

It's really just a strategy decision in the 'game of life'.

"Pretty soon", we are going to have wearable AR goggles that actually work.

When that threshold is crossed, "everyone" is going to have AR glasses, just like "everyone" has a smart phone right now.

Since you're going to be wearing glasses in a few years anyway, why risk the surgery?

▲

8organicbits 4 days ago | parent [-]

What would be the reason to wear AR googles all day? I dont think we have a killer app yet.

	▲	Workaccount2 4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		So you can reach the end-game of screen addiction.
	▲	traverseda 4 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Advertising beamed directly into your face. Eye tracking to build a better psychological profile to better manipulate you. The better question is do the major tech companies have enough power to force you to use smart glasses, like you can be forced to have a google or apple account to interact with certain banks? What can they break and make it so you need to use smart glasses to continue to use them? With the matter protocol and smart IoT, maybe you'll need glasses to turn on lights, or some much clunkier interface with a phone. Maybe something more facebook like where you'll need them to communicate with your friends, leverage some network effects. I'm sure someone is figuring that out as we speak. --- There's a lot of legitimate use for a HUD too, but I doubt that is what will drive investment.