Remix.run Logo
MerrimanInd 3 hours ago

I was in engineering school back in ~2012 when Google Glass came out. One of my classmates got hold of a pair when they were still quite uncommon and wore them to an extracurricular club meeting. Within minutes someone made a comment about him wearing the "creeper" glasses and asked if he was filming. He never wore them to the club again.

I just don't see a world where that doesn't happen with Meta glasses.

xboxnolifes 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

An entire new generation of people have been born and raised into a world that is more accepting of always recording and being recorded since 14 years ago.

nitwit005 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

A common fear for younger people has become being recorded and becoming famous in some embarrassing video. I don't see the problem as having gone away.

monero-xmr 31 minutes ago | parent [-]

This is partly what demolished DEI and the stifling woke culture. Feeling like you couldn’t say how you really felt, even at a party or a bar, finally made a critical mass of people say “fuck this” and let it rip. The Overton window of acceptable dialog has been shifted so insanely far from where it was 5 years ago it’s head spinning

boca_honey 19 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm not sure if you have experience with teenagers, but you’ll quickly realize they are even more resistant to this technology than we ever were. For the vast majority of kids today, this is their worst nightmare. They will reject it even more forcefully than we have.

martin1975 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

And they will soon find out that world's make believe. No one I know, and I know hundreds and hundreds if not thousands of people would allow themselves in a room to be recorded surreptitiously.

alanbernstein an hour ago | parent [-]

And yet we are surrounded by cameras that do this constantly

yonatan8070 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Unfortunately, the Meta glasses look much more normal, and a person who isn't actively looking for them (and especially one who is unaware of them) isn't likely to notice them.

NicuCalcea 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

There is a way to sus them out: https://www.404media.co/this-app-warns-you-if-someone-is-wea...

Not perfect, but better than nothing I guess. I don't think I've noticed the glasses IRL anywhere, but if I start seeing them, I'm definitely installing the app and avoiding any interactions with those people.

paulpauper 2 hours ago | parent [-]

they look like big bulky ray-bans that no one would wear unless they were starring in a 50s remake or something . easy to spot

giobox 2 hours ago | parent [-]

The Wayfarer style was always bulky, they have been a fashion staple for decades at this point. The Meta gen2 ones aren't really that noticeably larger than "normal" Wayfarers - probably why they latched on this style as it gives the most room to stuff electronics while remaining similar sized to the original Wayfarer design.

I still see folks wearing Wayfarers almost every single day, and have owned various (non-Meta) pairs of them for most of my adult life. It's literally one of the most popular sunglasses designs of all time.

http-teapot 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

A family member has one and I didn't notice until they had to charge their pair. The little circles are subtle giveaways otherwise they look like regular pair of glasses. When everything is always on, I'd like to keep my house "off" and those things are a direct violation of that.

paulpauper 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

they are still very easy to spot. they are very bulky around the rims

baby_souffle 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

10 years have elapsed, peoples expectations have changed a lot. Back around the time of the first iPhone, it was pretty common to see signs in gym changing rooms akin to 'no cameras permitted'... Now you'd have to physically separate people from their phones before entering the locker room if you are going to enforce that.

And all of that is to ignore that neither gen1 or 2 of Google Glass attempted to look like regular glasses. The Meta frames are largely indistinguishable from regular glasses unless you are very up close.

kwar13 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

People who get shamed with a comment like that are usually not the "creepers" in public. You don't need social pressure. You need actual safeguards.

rockskon 20 minutes ago | parent [-]

Safeguard?

No, we need to make this as socially radioactive as possible. We don't need to establish a permission structure to allow Facebook to continue doing this without repercussion.

groos 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I have a strict policy of no Meta glasses for guests in my house. Socially, they're poison.

nothrowaways 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

We have "NO meta glasses" rule at my workplace.

webdevver 3 hours ago | parent [-]

privacy obsessed dorks have lost every single cultural battle so far, so i wouldn't bet on it.

array_key_first 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Is it that they're privacy obsessed, or rather that most people have a passion for self destruction and exhibition?

If you think about it, the "dork" position was the one that was most normal, it's the status-quo. The people wanting to record in lockerooms and what not is not the status-quo. They win because most people are short-sighted, or even secretly love hurting themselves.

GuinansEyebrows 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

i'm as pessimistic as you are, but this is a pretty far leap from key-signing parties and the like.

smarf 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"surveil me harder daddy"

bonoboTP 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

People don't care about privacy as long as a faceless corporation is doing the spying. People very much care if it has a plausible path to embarrassing or creepy situations involving actual people in your life. The chilling effect of ubiquitous phone cameras is well documented now this would amp it up by a 100. Many cool clubs already put stickers on phone cameras.

Nevermark an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> People don't care about privacy as long as a faceless corporation is doing the spying.

This isn't true. Most everyone hates the fact they are being surveilled, but it is pervasive and people only can deal with so many complications in life.

Avoiding surveillance is not a decision or action, it is 1000 decisions and actions. Endless decisions and actions.

bonoboTP 27 minutes ago | parent [-]

In my experience most people don't care at all. Even if you tell them about these topics, they find it weird, and tinfoil-hat adjacent. "If you have nothing to hide..." and "why would anyone care about my data in particular?"

wredcoll an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> Many cool clubs already put stickers on phone cameras.

Can you elaborate on this?

bonoboTP 30 minutes ago | parent [-]

Discussion a week ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47111137 And longer ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42352825

jjkaczor an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

There is almost always an appropriate XKCD...

https://xkcd.com/1807/

ThrowawayR2 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Unfortunately, "The French-Italian eyewear brand [EssilorLuxottica] said it sold over 7 million AI glasses last year, up from the 2 million that the company sold in 2023 and 2024 combined." from https://www.cnbc.com/2026/02/11/ray-ban-maker-essilorluxotti... . That's at least 9 million units in the field, probably 1000x more than Google Glass ever sold, and more than 3x growth in sales in one year.

[EDIT] I really shouldn't need to say this on Hacker News but don't shoot the messenger for messages you don't want to hear. Reporting a fact does not imply approval or disapproval of it.

Geonode 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There is a world, because when the displays are high quality and they're thinner and lighter, they're going to replace phones, and almost everyone will be wearing them.

wewtyflakes 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I think that since the input modalities are (seemingly) restricted to eye movement and sound, that it is impractical to replace a phone, where someone can engage privately.

gmueckl 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I think you have missed the wristband input device then. It gives the user fairly subtle finger gestures to interact with the device. I wonder how far that input tech can be pushed, not necessarily (only) in comination with glasses.

throwway120385 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The point isn't to allow people to do more with the glasses, the point is to interpose between the user and the physical world so you can control what they see and hear and so you can see what they see. You could see the same thing with Apple's VR headset -- if you can hide certain things from your own view in the headset, then Apple can hide things they don't want you to see too.

There isn't really a counter to that because most people will buy these things to watch movies on the airplane or the train, and they won't see the yoke until it's too late.

hnuser847 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Nah, I don't see it. They've been trying to make smart glasses a thing for over a decade and it's not working. Nobody wants them. I don't think it's necessarily a privacy thing, it's just that smart glasses don't solve a real problem. Same with VR.

rbtprograms 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

i actually agree with this take; i dont see the problem that smart glasses solve. what, my phone screen isnt literally in front of my eyeballs 24/7? i have a need to be absolutely plugged into scrolling social media and consuming content so much that i just have to have the screen in my glasses? this feels much more like what tech companies want people to want rather than what people want.

array_key_first 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Not to mention the input methods just suck major ass. They're extremely slow, error prone, and annoying. Hands are better.

And that's why I don't talk to Siri to drive my car.

boogieknite an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

first let me say i agree its a solution looking for a problem

you can still take the glasses off. i dont own glasses but do use vr and the shift between putting on/taking off a headset feels more intentional than the glance at a phone. feels less addictive to me. maybe lightweight glasses and dark patterns will "fix" that eventually

jayd16 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You don't want your hands free?

Barrin92 an hour ago | parent [-]

to do what? We've already had this experiment in the form of phone calling and texting. And that's not technological because both are mature. People vastly prefer the latter. It's discrete, faster and asynchronous. In the same vein, does anyone actually use their Alexa?

MarcelOlsz 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

VR most definitely solves a real problem, but the issue with VR is the absolute setup complexity to get it performing 'correctly'. I spent 3 years tweaking mine and writing OpenXR layers to get it functioning how I wanted it to in iRacing. It's nearly a full-time job. VR right now is like if you went to buy eggs but instead of eggs they're grenades and opening the box pulled all the pins. Out of the box experience is beyond dog shit and impossible for casual users, leaving a very small avenue for VR enjoyment for regulars (PSVR and the like). I cannot think of a technology more diametric to 'plug n play' than VR, which is very unfortunate.

Geonode 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Come on, it's obviously a hardware problem. If phones weighed ten pounds I wouldn't carry that around either.

Great glasses would solve a problem, I could take my stupid phone out of my hand.

And glasses will get replaced by contacts, which get replaced with brainwave tech.

kibwen 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It doesn't matter how high quality, convenient, or light they are, as long as wearing glasses isn't inherently cool, normal people aren't going to choose to wear them.

function_seven 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Remember those dorky Bluetooth earpieces? The ones only MBA nerds wore? They were uncool until the AirPods came along.

The tail wags the dog. Wearing glasses may become inherently cool if all the cool people in your insta feeds are wearing them.

ph4rsikal 2 hours ago | parent [-]

There is a UI difference between looking into a camera and talking to someone with headphones on.

function_seven 2 hours ago | parent [-]

The parent was talking about people choosing to wear these. Today there might be reluctance to wear them because they're creepy or uncool. But that mirrors the reluctance for cool kids to wear bluetooth earpieces back when they were those chunky Borg-looking things. Then they got shrunk down. They got "high quality, convenient, [and] light".

When these types of glasses are virtually indistinguishable from regular sunglasses, and a critical mass of cool people wear them all the time, the reluctance from the rest of us will melt away.

I hope I'm wrong. Really.

wongarsu 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Judging from the examples reported on in the article, Meta's smart glasses are either very easy to accidentally trigger or quite popular with actual creeps

grigri907 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I don't know. I clearly remember a time when phones first got cameras and there were debates on whether or not we should prohibit phones in public bathrooms. Perceptions changed. Fast.

navaed01 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

These glasses are doing incredibly well from a sales perspective. Social norms have shifted, user generated content is huge, being a video influencer is a real job - so seeing people filming is more accepted than 12 yea ago. It doesn’t mean I like it but these are not going away. I do think they lack a killer app, but there’s a part there with conversational AI that can act on your behalf

r0fl 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I’ve had meta ray bans since the week they came out

My friends always have a cheap shot when I wear them but are completely fine now and appreciate fun candid videos I send them

Amazing for vacations with the kids

rationalist an hour ago | parent [-]

As much as I disagree with the cameras, you should not have been downvoted. If anything, people who are against the cameras need to see your anecdotal experience so that they can see how easy it will be for these cameras to proliferate.

AlienRobot 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Unfortunately the frog is boiling and some people already think that "in public" means "it's okay to record people and post it on the Internet."

linkjuice4all an hour ago | parent [-]

In the US, at least, it's pretty much legal to record the public as long as people have no expectation of privacy (IANAL, exclusions apply, non-commercial use, etc)

It's difficult to draw a bright line between these activities:

- I told someone else something I saw the other day

- I painted a picture of the public square or wrote a book about specific activities that I witnessed

- I specifically remembered an individual based on their face, visible tattoos, location, license plate, or some other unique factor and voluntarily testified to that fact in a court of law

- I spent every day at the same corner making note of the various people/vehicles that I saw

- I stuck a camera at that same point (perhaps on my private properly directly abutting a public space) and recorded everything, posted it publicly on the internet, and used automated technology to identify people, text, vehicles, etc

- I paid a different person every day to follow someone around and record what they did

- I developed a drone system that could follow specific individuals/vehicles from airspace I'm allowed to occupy

Pretty much everything I described above is legal in most of the United States. Obviously it gets creepier and more uncomfortable going down the list (I don't really like it when I'm the subject of any of these activities) but how do you stop this?

I'll at least throw out some options

- Implement some form of right to forget

- Forbid individuals or organizations from doing any of these

- Enact actual "civil rights" level privacy protections (extend HIPAA? automatic copyright for human faces? new amendment?) that include protection of individual's DNA, unique facial features, and other "uniquely human" attributes

jackcviers3 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It seems like a more polite way of handling this in private spaces is just to ask that people take them off - just like we do when a pig farmer walks into our house with their boots on.

I get why people are creeped out by them, but we get filmed or photographed hundreds of times a day in a big city when we are in public spaces. Gatekeeping a potentially useful technology for being filmed in public -- well, everyone is _already_ filmed in public. ATM cameras, stoplight cameras, drone cameras, smartphone cameras, security cameras, doorbell cameras. You are on camera every time you step out of your house. You are on camera every time you open your work computer. Singling out cameras in eyeglasses as "creepy" is kind of worrying about a drop in the ocean. Cameras on self-driving cars. Nanny cams. Closed-circuit cameras. The things are everywhere, and they are always invasions of privacy. Why is the line the "creeper" glasses?

I'd be ok with it if we were for banning all non-consensual recordings in all spaces. But we're very much not.

And if we're not, then having a personal heads-up display that is contextual to your current surroundings or has augmented reality capability is too useful to not use (eventually). I'm bad with names, and good with faces. That use-case alone would be worth it for me, if it were available.

idontwantthis 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It can happen if it’s not easy to tell immediately what they are.

gambiting 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>>I just don't see a world where that doesn't happen with Meta glasses.

Apparently they sold 7 million of these. So I think a whole lot of people don't care about this aspect.

lofaszvanitt 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Well, then they gonna offer implants in another 5-10 years later.

an hour ago | parent [-]
[deleted]
dyauspitr 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It’s just going to be accepted. Or there is going to be some sort of Japanesque requirement that there be some light on when the camera is filming.

webdevver 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

stemcel gave the gym bunnies the ick... brutal... many such cases!

zer0zzz 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

2026 is not 2012

array_key_first 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You're right, it's much worse and we should be doing everything we can to turn it around.

I propose we just assume people with meta glasses are recording others in public and we call them creeps. Shaming works, we should use it more.

wewtyflakes an hour ago | parent [-]

Agreed, it is creepy and I tell people to take them off if they come to my home.

esafak 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

They're okay in your circle today? Not mine.

zer0zzz 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Anecdotal screeching aside, they’re objectively selling far better than any headgear ever made. The sales figures show they’re pretty popular as far as wearables go. That leads me to believe we’re not in the same world as Google glass especially when back then folks were far more trusting of tech (let alone the fact that it’s meta).

The times I do I see folks wearing them the normie reaction is typically “oh cool” and not some libertarian allergic reaction to technology.

zer0zzz 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I don’t know what the downvote is about. I’ve not said anything for or against this tech or the company that makes it. I just don’t think it’s valuable to inform your world view on tech takes that are old enough to be taking the practice SAT.

flir 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It's strange to me that that's the line society seems to have drawn in the sand. Body cam, no problem. Doorbell cam, practically universal. Body cam worn on the face? No way. I wonder why.

fbelzile 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Police body cams are typically only used while on-duty and in public, where there is no expectation of privacy. They also don't automatically send video into the cloud to be analyzed by a human for AI training, as mentioned in this article. Video is usually only retrieved if needed on a case-by-case basis.

Doorbell cameras are also typically pointed toward public streets, where again, there is no expectation of privacy. Even then, many people have been removing Ring cameras after they were shown to automatically upload video without user's knowledge.

malfist 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> They also don't automatically send video into the cloud to be analyzed by a human for AI training,

Yet.

deanputney 2 hours ago | parent [-]

They almost certainly already do. If you just look into Axon you'll see they have tons of cloud-based and AI products. Axon is the major player in police body cameras in the US.

EvanAnderson 2 hours ago | parent [-]

No experience w/ Axon, but I work adjacent their major competitor. I don't know about the whole "training AI" angle, but Motorola Watchguard body and in-car cameras absolutely upload to a hosted service.

gorjusborg 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm amazed you can't see the difference.

Body cam - used to protect the police and people being policed in a potentially hot conflict. Recording is scoped to these specific interactions that rarely occur for most people.

Doorbell cam - highly controversial. See response to dog-finding superbowl ad.

Body cam wore on face - Mass surveillance in potentially every conceivable social context. Data owned by Meta, a company known for building a profile on people that don't even use their products.

true_religion 15 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Door bells also had a popular movie made that revolved around their use: Weapons.

And that didn’t raise an uproar of suspicion even as one character went door to door asking if he could look at his neighbors recordings.

People are comfortable with the idea of being recorded, so long as accessing many recordings is a drawn out and manual process.

likpok 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Eh, doorbell cams aren’t that controversial (ad aside). A lot of people have them already, both from ring (with the concomitant privacy issues) or from other providers (with different but similar issues).

They’re controversial on hacker news but I don’t think people in the “real world” care all that much.

How that connects to the meta glasses is certainly up for debate —- the doorbells provide a lot of value to the user (know who is at the door remotely!), the glasses are more of a mixed bag.

patmorgan23 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Body cameras aren't hidden and are worn by public officials while on duty, doorbell cameras are no more invasive than an CCTV camera a home owner might have installed on their premise.

I think the difference is that these cameras are relatively concealed, and can be used to record every interaction, even in pretty intimate/private settings. Yes you could do this with a cell phone but it would be pretty obvious your recording if you're trying to get more than just the audio of an interaction.

ClikeX 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Body cams are directly visible, and are there to add accountability to the actions of law enforcement. These glasses are covert cameras. Someone that doesn't know what they look like isn't going to know someone might be filming. That's a big difference.

Not sure how it is where you live, but doorbell cameras are commonly criticized where I live. With many people claiming they don't feel comfortable walking around anymore knowing that the entire neighborhood is filming them.

bonoboTP 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What do you mean bodycam isn't a problem? Do people wear body cams to normal social occasions?

People are more okay with cameras in public areas and less okay if it's in intimate, social, private situations, inside apartments, individual offices etc.

Retric 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Cop body cam footage is more likely to help you vs a cop than get you into trouble because a cop is already there watching what you’re doing. IE: Thank god the cop’s camera was off when I was buying crack, I might have gotten in trouble otherwise… fails because a cop was already watching you.

Cops also announce their presence in uniforms and are operating as government agents. People already moderate their behavior around cops so being recorded isn’t as big a deal.

sillystuff 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> body cameras had no statistically significant impact on officer use of force, civilian complaints, or arrests for disorderly conduct by officers. In other words, body cameras did not reduce police misconduct . . . 92.6 percent of prosecutors’ offices in jurisdictions with body cameras have used that footage as evidence to prosecute civilians, while just 8.3 percent have used it to prosecute police officers[1]

Cops control when the cameras are filming, if footage is retained and what/when/if footage is released. Body cams are just yet another surveillance tool against the population.

[1]https://www.aclu-wa.org/news/will-body-cameras-help-end-poli...

jbxntuehineoh 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I also don't like having doorbell cams everywhere, at least not the ones that upload all their footage to the ~great mass surveillance network in the sky~ Cloud(TM). I don't think that's an uncommon point of view. And body cams are only worn by cops and at least provide some concrete benefits in terms of increasing police accountability.

mmh0000 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"Surveillance Camera Man"[1] makes a good practical example of it.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9sVqKFkjiY

nephihaha 30 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Some doorbell cams film other people's homes.

cortesoft 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It might be the line in the sand now, but it probably won’t be for long.

MagicMoonlight 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

A body cam is worn by a trained police officer and lights up with a big red flashing light and audible warnings. It is used to record serious crimes.

A face camera has no light or warnings (you just put tape over the small light), and is operated by a pervert.

megous 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Lines were and are always weird, all the time. Americans killing 150 girls yesterday in a school, just a footnote in the news, already gone today. Some rando killing 10 people in a university in my country, endless discussion, politicians, punduits all up in arms spewing their opinions for months, discussing it to no end. Only difference? I don't know. I don't know almost anyone in my country, they're all as foreign to me as some girls in Iran. There's no difference to me.

There's very little sense to me in searching for meaning in any of this. It just is, people are that way. There are no lines and boundaries based on anything but just whims.

sqircles 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

People want to be deceived.