Google famously dragged on development of Glass for more than a decade stubbornly failing to admit that nobody wants to look like a cyborg the entire time only to be swept aside by Meta when they built a device that was glasses first with some recording and interactions built in.

If their leadership has an itch they'll scratch it until it's raw.

▲

saltcured 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Was this a difference in strategy or more random luck having to do with fashion trends in different time periods?

Did Meta patiently wait until exaggerated glass frames were viable in the market? Or did they get lucky?

Or did they have some Machiavellian plot to steer this fashion for years and pave the way for their product..? ;-)

	▲	munk-a 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Google glass released in February 2013 and "I, glasshole" was written in December of 2013 which was a good formulation of ideas that had been floating in the tech sphere for a while. That's less than 1 year into their run that "Making myself look like a cyborg obviously makes people around me uncomfortable" was a plainly accepted fact. I think wearable tech is awesome and was interested in this (I was much more interested in the earlier pendant projectors though) but the fact that you're constantly reminding people they're being recorded without their consent is just a big issue. The meta glasses themselves might suffer a similar fate if hacks to disable the LED become commonplace. Much like Sony's (I think?) nightvision cameras if stuff like this gets abused by creeps it will isolate you to use it yourself even for perfectly reasonable intentions.