TL;DR: you now need to pay a $20/month “meta premium” subscription to use a 100% offline feature that runs on your own malware-ridden smartglasses.
If you don’t subscribe, you can use the feature that is already included in the hardware that you already paid for 3 hours each month
The now-paywalled feature boosts the voice of the speaker in front of you, something that even low-end ANC earphones are doing now. 5 minutes of free usage per day is basically nothing.
If you’re dumb enough to buy it…
good! hopefully this will discourage everyone who bought them from using them, so they just sit in a drawer somewhere or get recycled instead of spying on unwitting people, and meta will fail to make back the huge amounts of money they’ve invested in tech that most people don’t want 😌
It’s funny, I would love to some have the novel tech they developed (HUD / display built into glasses since I’m wearing them anyways). The problem, as usual, is corps taking the piss with prices and profit then spying on you and everyone around you non-stop anyways…
I would 100% be open to some HUD glasses delivered with a FOSS OS that works completely offline and/or via your phone (but still offline). But that’s seriously wishful thinking given our corporate and political overlords
I can’t think of anything I would want to have pop up in my view. I have a phone to hand all day, and the notifies me of important things.
Can you think of anything that you actually want so see constantly or so immediately you can’t pull a phone out of your pocket?
As someone with auditory processing disorder, the only thing i want is real-time closed captions of whoever is talking to me.
This, this is a really good answer. Thanks for bringing it up.
I think directions while walking would be better than carrying and looking down at a phone.
How fast do you walk that you need to constantly check? You can also have you phone all out instructions for the next turn.
I’d rather just have that overlay like Google already has for walking instead of pulling out my phone every few intersections or having it loudly announce that I’m a tourist to everyone in earshot.
Dude, you asked for examples of what people might find useful and now you’re just shitting on all of them.
Yeah, and the dork glasses will most definitely won’t give any weird vibes.
Anyway, on an entirely different topic, have you ever heard the term glasshole?
Unless you’re actively looking for them, the raybans aren’t going to stand out as smart glasses.
Christ, I’m not here to defend meta or the assholes walking around harassing women, I’m saying there is a potential use for AR glasses.
I think the number of comments below you show the uses of glasses like that. I really think they would a lot of people who are disabled etc. For me they would really help me with some of my memory issues, especially since i’m looking to have a career in a genre of music where’s it’s frowned upon to have sheet notes
And I asked because I am ignorant about some of them. I also think a lot of what has been posted has been looking for a problem, not solving something.
Needing Google maps when walking? Is honestly a terrible reason. Phones, sign posts, smart watches all already solve this.
Someone just posted about closed captions when people are talking to them due to a disability, that’s a really good reason to have some kind of smart glasses.
For your situation, I don’t think smart glasses are really the answer, and are more of a band-aid. The real answer in my mind is using the sheet notes and getting the stigma changed(but I understand that is a lot, lot, lot harder than just getting smart glasses).
Yeah, I also try a lot to break the stigma. But I think a lot of people are ingrained in their ways and tradition and it takes more time or effort to see past it. It would also help to get a type of Shazam for the tune that’s playing to know what sheets to play too.
In any case, fair play to you for recognising there are some uses that could enable people.
Yea breaking stigmas is always the most uphill battle. I know it is not the same, but you see a lot of resistance to better tech in cycling. Things like disc brakes which are just better(outside of the tiny minority of cases) having so much fight against them.
I will say i am pretty opposed to the tech in many normal cases. Especially as it just seems like such a massive privacy nightmare at best. Or just shoe horning in tech for no real reason. I do think that everyone is already so in grossed in tech(I know I am a lot of the time) that they forget to just look around them and take in the world, and I think that smart glasses are that tipping point of going to far for most people.
I am happy to see that some really good use cases have been brought up, I am not all knowing I would in fact call me ignorant about a lot of things as I can only know what I know. But almost every good(even great) reason I have read has been based around improving life and interactions for people with disabilities which I can honestly get behind.
Aren’t you supposed to wait for something to be widely adopted before you enshittify it?
I get long-term enshittification in pursuit of short term Line Must Go Up but I feel like this would significantly impede it even in the short term.
Kinda reeks of Meta being in financial trouble.
Subscriptions for offline features should be completely illegal. In fact Meta is probably already technically illegal.
My mom just caught one of her kids using these to cheat on a final. He had them Bluetoothed to his laptop and it disconnected at some point and she heard “the answer to number 7 is…” But she said he barely got a C on it even while cheating. So since she didn’t know about the glasses until after that student left and another student told her it was the glasses, she just kinda let it go saying “it’s honestly going to be his problem in the future.”
Edit: she couldn’t pin point the kid at the moment, and wasn’t informed who it was until after the kid was gone and the other student told her.
I’m not a teacher, but I dunno if that’s the right response to someone cheating. It is going to be his problem in the future, but as a teacher, isn’t it her job to teach the kid that that’s not OK? Sorta depends on the age, I suppose, but I’d definitely give the kid a 0% instead of a C.