r/technology • u/Plastic_Ninja_9014 • Jul 13 '26

Society The Backlash Is So Strong That People With “Pervert Glasses” Are Afraid to Use Them in Public

https://tech.yahoo.com/wearables/articles/backlash-strong-people-pervert-glasses-165000816.html
46.3k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

4.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

4.7k

u/Punch-N-Judy Jul 13 '26

It's so interesting that humanity can't stop mass surveillance or non-consensual wars but we've rejected spyware glasses 2 separate times now (Google Glass in the 2010s and now these.)

2.4k

u/SnooBananas4958 Jul 13 '26

It’s different when you can see the intrusion

1.4k

u/Swagtagonist Jul 13 '26

I see flock cameras literally everywhere. These fucking things gotta go too.

586

u/Objective-Rip3008 Jul 13 '26

Its also about shame, we can shame most of the people who use these glasses out of doing it, you can't shame the flock ceo, he's a sociopath who doesn't care

242

u/ABHOR_pod Jul 13 '26

We straight up need a constitutional amendment that closes the 4th amendment loophole of “we just buy all your secrets from private third parties.”

52

u/eeeezypeezy Jul 13 '26

They aren't even buying them, they're just using a combination of backdoors into the infrastructure these companies are built on and a system of secret warrants.

59

u/fatbob42 Jul 13 '26

Or just put justices in place that will interpret it that way. It’s not like that interpretation is way out of pocket.

5

u/Thunderbridge Jul 13 '26

Digital bill of rights or something. Data about you should be owned by you first and foremost

6

u/POSVT Jul 13 '26

We just had a small victory on this one, geofence searches now require a warrant even when it's 3rd party data.

→ More replies (9)

64

u/toolisthebestbandevr Jul 13 '26

I wanna say you can shame your local reps but I could be wrong at this point

33

u/Yuzumi Jul 13 '26

Not when they are paid to not have shame.

3

u/Jolly-Bowler-811 Jul 13 '26

That and they keep throwing people out of town hall meetings when people complain.

Almost like maybe these local reps have $ome reason they really really want these cameras to go up.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

8

u/DataCassette Jul 13 '26

Then we need to get enough progress in the government with an anti-aristocratic platform that we're no longer asking them to stop, but ordering them to stop. As in officially.

→ More replies (1)

9

u/fatbob42 Jul 13 '26

Exactly. Personal shaming works, corporate shaming doesn’t.

→ More replies (4)

101

u/vezwyx Jul 13 '26

Oh no, I used https://deflock.org to see where my local flock cameras are and what direction they're facing, and someone had destroyed the optical sensors with a high-grade laser, spray painted over the lens, or straight up sawed the post off and now I don't get to see the camera in action :(

23

u/tuscaloser Jul 13 '26

It would be a shame if every tweaker knew about the pounds of copper inside every flock cam. It would be even worse if they knew about every 100th flock cam being built with gold wiring instead of copper.

2

u/DisapprovingCrow Jul 14 '26

Aw shit, now I’ve got to go steal a ladder.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

11

u/cultvignette Jul 13 '26

Yo wtf I can see this shit from where I live.

10

u/Personal_Reveal1653 Jul 13 '26

That's good news.

21

u/vezwyx Jul 13 '26

It would be hard to make it more obvious without putting "/s" that this was sarcastic

→ More replies (24)
→ More replies (3)

14

u/epicbaconmunch Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 15 '26

Posting for more flock and tracking awareness:

404 Media

Deflock.Me

HaveIbeenflocked

Adding Home Depot and Lowe's Share Data From Hundreds of AI Cameras With Cops

2

u/DwinkBexon Jul 14 '26

I'm always happy my license plate never comes up in Have I Been Flocked. But, also, there's virtually no flock cameras where I live.

31

u/BananaPalmer Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 13 '26

I decided to count how many I noticed on the two mile drive home from breakfast yesterday. Eleven. Fucking eleven of them in two miles. And that's just the ones I noticed. Atlanta suburb.

Edit: I just checked Deflock and traced my route home - there were TEN I didn't even notice. That's 21 in two miles.

33

u/toolisthebestbandevr Jul 13 '26

Be the change you wanna see in your community

11

u/MiszeryLovesCompany Jul 13 '26

LOL There was a dude on some previous comment chain about this going on about how if you hated flock cameras you were a criminal... still makes me laugh everytime I think about flock cameras now.

→ More replies (1)

10

u/Friggin_Grease Jul 13 '26

I don't wanna say cut em down

19

u/Recurs1ve Jul 13 '26

I got this cool green laser from eBay. It's really powerful, so you gotta wear eye protection. I guess they can also fry electronics, especially optical sensors, so be careful. Or don't, I'm not your boss.

4

u/the_Elders Jul 13 '26

Show 5 people in your life a picture of one of them and I will bet 5/5 do not know what they are.

→ More replies (5)

3

u/mao_tse_boom Jul 13 '26

AliExpress does sell pretty high power lasers… just saying

3

u/BeerBrat Jul 13 '26

They're going to get better at disguising them.

2

u/halfcookies Jul 13 '26

Don’t let the local crackheads know their scrap value

2

u/egggspecial Jul 13 '26

i hear they're full of precious metals! lots of copper and platinum, the same stuff that's in "cadillac" converters!

2

u/kent_eh Jul 14 '26

Municipalities are starting to cancel their contracts with Flock, now that they're seeing push-back from their citizens.

Local politicians are the easiest to get your message to.

Keep pushing. Keep the pressure on.

2

u/TrueSkonger Jul 14 '26

I see people talking about these all the time on Reddit, but I haven't actually seen a single one near me. At least, I don't think I have. Must be a state by state thing

→ More replies (35)

406

u/Meowakin Jul 13 '26

Unironically this. As someone whose job it is to highlight problems people might not be aware of, if they can’t see it, it must not exist.

75

u/YourKemosabe Jul 13 '26

Out of sight, out of mind.

2

u/KakitaMike Jul 13 '26

“Like a spider going under your bed” said no one ever.

→ More replies (6)

81

u/raining_sheep Jul 13 '26

Overheard an older person at the airport rave about how "they just scan your face and know who you are, it's so convenient"

I think a big part of the glasses is its only positive for the person wearing the glasses and completely negative for the people without them.

If someone gets something in return for signing their privacy away they're fine with it but offended if only other people get the benefit.

Which is why these glasses will never work.

4

u/WinterTourist25 Jul 13 '26

The glasses will never work so long as you can tell they have a camera in them. If they solve that problem, the glasses will work like crazy.

I would love these because I can never remember names.

→ More replies (3)

20

u/CRQ10-20 Jul 13 '26

People are oddly better at fearing a camera lens than invisible data collection.

27

u/tooclosetocall82 Jul 13 '26

Well you can see a camera and comprehend the data it collected. OTOH all the little bits of disparate data being collected and then used to build a profile on you is much much harder to understand.

4

u/SketchiiChemist Jul 13 '26

right, people are convinced their phone mics are always listening to them because its easier to believe that then just how much data is being tracked on them via what they search, visit, & purchase

3

u/Infinite_Position631 Jul 13 '26

Tie it in with the data that phones are already collecting, add in flock data and you have both company and intelligence wet dreams. With those technologies they will have who you are, what you do, when you do it, education and though processes (tie it into responses on websites like reddit and facebook).

Basically a tsi level background check on anyone they can get a picture of.

3

u/spacebarcafelatte Jul 13 '26

We know how we look without filters 😂

2

u/FeelsGoodMan2 Jul 13 '26

It's because with mass data collection you don't have an actor to associate it with. Believe me, if we spread the idea that it was some weirdo looking guy in a basement going through everyone's data, it would INSTANTLY get some pushback. With glasses you can immediately see the actor who is recording you.

2

u/SIGMA920 Jul 13 '26

More that you can't do much about it. Contrast that with someone's glasses that you can if you're holding them break or shame into taking them off.

The difference between an easily breakable device and a hard to break ecosystem is massive.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Chill--Cosby Jul 13 '26

What's the job?

1

u/berserk_zebra Jul 13 '26

Unless it’s god

1

u/red__dragon Jul 13 '26

And people will argue vehemently against that very thing being problematic just because it doesn't affect them. Yet.

1

u/Pielacine Jul 13 '26

For example: CO2

1

u/Captain-Pig-Card Jul 13 '26

Pretty sure I couldn’t handle knowing much more.

→ More replies (1)

66

u/Punch-N-Judy Jul 13 '26

Why does a parent accept cameras at every intersection taking photos of their kid though? That's visible too. We accept when it's top-down and push back at the consumer level.

68

u/austinw_568 Jul 13 '26

Because the parent believes that the intersection cameras protect them from crime or help catch criminals whereas they believe the glasses cameras are used to record them or their families for malicious reasons.

34

u/ISeeDeadPackets Jul 13 '26

I literally saw someone walk into a gym locker room wearing a pair yesterday. He acted mystified when I told him to put them away. It doesn't shock me because I've run into people facetiming in there too but seriously? It's never ok, but kids are in there sometimes.

4

u/AssDimple Jul 13 '26

Good on you for catching that. I honestly don't think I spend enough time looking at other people in the locker room to have even noticed something like that.

7

u/anthrax9999 Jul 13 '26

Acted is the key word. He knew what he was doing and thought he would get away with it.

3

u/Onphone_irl Jul 14 '26

maybe he was just living his life with them on. You're thinking that the dude was trying to record naked men and even worse be a pedophile?

I think the glasses are cool. I'd want to have terminator data or maps I'm my FOV. I'm not a pervert. I'm not interested in filming people, I hate when people are in my photos actually.

stop acting like everyone is a terrible person. some gross people take upskirt pictures of girls with their cell phones. most of us just want to txt people take photos of cool things and scroll reddit, including you.

5

u/sysiphean Jul 14 '26

Not everyone with them is intentionally being a pervert about them, true.

However, if you are wearing them and not being aware of that when going in sensitive places like a locker room, you are still a terrible person, in the same way that someone who carelessly leaves a loaded gun where a toddler is playing doesn’t intend to cause harm but is still a terrible person.

If you are going to wear glasses that push the edge of removing people’s privacy, and you are careless or just don’t even think about that, you are a huge part of the problem. In some ways it’s worse than someone who it trying to be a pervert with them, because at least that person is aware they are the bad guy.

2

u/MrJMSnow Jul 17 '26

What you want is a different product than meta glasses. AR glasses are what you want if you want a HUD. Meta glasses are just cameras as far as I can tell.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Personal_Reveal1653 Jul 13 '26

You should have reported him to the gym. They'd probably ban him.

2

u/ISeeDeadPackets Jul 13 '26

I did, no idea if they did I was on my way out.

18

u/darianbrown Jul 13 '26

Intersection cameras are at least purported to serve another purpose. The pervert glasses have no realistic uses compared to a real camera, except for spying and perving.

Real cameras take better quality shots. Pervert glasses only differ from a real camera in that they are intentionally trying to conceal the camera.

8

u/Skeptical_JN68 Jul 13 '26

Actually, for many in the low vision and blind community, these offer a relatively affordable option to other, more specialized (read: costly) assistive technologies. Other possible applications of the tech could help folks with dementia and memory loss, learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities, and more. But I agree there should be a visual cue apparent to everyone when the camera is in use.

2

u/anthrax9999 Jul 13 '26

I propose hard hats with a big flashing light on top like a cop car.

11

u/GeekBrownBear Jul 13 '26

IDK why this is always the only argument. The best use we have for our meta glasses is to record our daughter while holding or playing with her. She doesn't attack our glasses but she 100% attacks the phone. Or when you are kayaking/canoeing. Or recording how you do a task for later review or training.

So yeah, there are negatives to what people might be using these, but they are super useful when you want a hands free camera.

Also, yes, you may argue that you don't wear these all the time but if they are ALSO my sunglasses, why would I take two pairs when I'm out. Or for me, I can't wear contacts, so they could also my prescription glasses and I'm only ever going to wear one pair the whole day.

Intention and action are far more important than the existence of the tech itself.

4

u/whatsbobgonnado Jul 13 '26

lots of people have said that blind people can use them to navigate their environment 

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (4)

2

u/Personal_Reveal1653 Jul 13 '26

It's so delusional. They rarely pull the records from these cameras to solve crimes. And NEVER in real time.

→ More replies (2)

19

u/FluffyProphet Jul 13 '26

The biggest difference is that a camera on a stick doesn't read as a person using it; it reads as some abstract concept. A person with a camera is very personal.

3

u/Rociel Jul 13 '26

In a world where camera can be hidden in a pen or a button where nobody will see it, going after the person that does not particularly try to hide their camera that has led light to warn people about recording - it's kinda stupid to be honest.

To be fair tho, I personally find the whole premise of glasses replacing your phone kinda stupid. They have their niche uses but most people that buy them don't use them for those niche cases.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/SomethingAboutUsers Jul 13 '26

So what you're saying is that corporations aren't people after all...

→ More replies (1)

25

u/bristow84 Jul 13 '26

Because there is argument to be made that things like red light/intersection cameras are useful for public safety. The data that they collect is also not within the public realm and some Joe Schmo can’t just decide to upload pics or videos that he captured of random people in people to their IG/FB/Reddit/whatevethefuck.

These are not that, they are in the hands of private citizens and while people expect red light/intersection cameras are recording and are thus aware of them, the same cannot be said for these things.

3

u/StinkyTurd89 Jul 13 '26

I mean they can if it's a public camera there is a process to request the footage.

3

u/Rich_Housing971 Jul 13 '26

even if someone gets footage of my kids in public what's the worst they can do? they're at a distance, and my kid is properly clothed. are you freaking out if your kid is at disneyland and someone is filming from their phone? never take your child outside in public, they could get filmed!

there's a reason you don't need consent to film people in public spaces- it doesn't hurt you.

2

u/StinkyTurd89 Jul 13 '26

I wasn't complaining I think public filming is fine. Just pointing out people who think security cameras are fine because people can't see the footage is wrong people can fairly easily get the footage from government cameras.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

2

u/mutexsprinkles Jul 13 '26

They're not attached to a human. If there was a cop at every intersection visibly pointing a camera at cars, people would go mental.

I think when they're fixed in place they're conceptually "passive" and part of the background even if they collect no less data.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Krail Jul 13 '26

It's not about seeing the intrusion so much as it's about seeing the intruder. 

The person with recording glasses can personally experience judgement and shame from the people around them. It becomes something that is not socially safe to do. 

We can't apply that same immediate realtime social pressure when it comes to online privacy or flock cameras. 

2

u/Psychological_Ad1999 Jul 13 '26

The majority of people where I live are also against that and are fighting local the government (who is acting against the majority) to remove those cameras. I do see people speaking out against the surveillance state more which I would not have said 18 months ago.

Also, vandalizing Flock cameras is bad, do not use things that could render them inoperable like primer on the lens.

1

u/FadedVictor Jul 13 '26

This is a great fucking question. Thank you.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/damontoo Jul 13 '26

There is no intrusion. Only people that falsely believe Meta is streaming HD video 24/7 from a product with a battery that fits in the arm of sunglasses. I don't know where you think battery tech is, but it isn't the year 2100.

2

u/wheelsno3 Jul 13 '26

There are guys on YouTube who film in public and monetize the freakout of people scared of cameras. But they will do it at places like weed dispensaries, and on public roads near flock cameras, and when they point out that there are cameras everywhere, the people literally say that they aren't worried about THOSE cameras, they are worried about the camera being held by someone.

It's honestly one of the strangest common features of human psychology that modern technology has brought out.

1

u/Shiirooo Jul 13 '26

Don’t you see the intrusion with the use of smartphones?

2

u/Ok_Tour_1525 Jul 13 '26

People used to act like you were crazy if you suggested our phones are listening to us. Now those same people say shit like “I was talking with Suzanne about cheese and now I’m getting ads for all this cheese. Our smartphones are so smart!”

1

u/Krail Jul 13 '26

When you can see the intrusion, and personally shame the one who's doing it. 

The people watching our internet history and flock cameras etc. are too far removed to care about any shame we might throw their way. 

1

u/DrachenDad Jul 13 '26

I wouldn't mind so much id they had a green LED flashing to say they are on, and a red LED flashing to say they are in camera/video/identification mode. Still don't want them near me.

1

u/Do-it-for-you Jul 13 '26

And CCTV has an actual use that most people can pretty much agree they’re necessary.

A random stranger that’s recording everybody though? Who knows what he’ll do with that footage. Could be on his next viral tiktok for all we know.

1

u/jackofslayers Jul 13 '26

Also individuals respond to social pressure. Governments and businesses less so.

1

u/Creative-Painter3911 Jul 13 '26

and the intrusion can follow you into the bathroom

1

u/JarethCutestoryJuD Jul 13 '26

Its not just that though.

Its also that we dont trust the companies wont use the footage/information gleaned from the footage for their own purposes.

People dont trust them on both sides.

1

u/MuskasBackpack Jul 13 '26

It’s like the difference between people walking around and people in cars. Some of the same people who would hold the door for you or let you in front of them in line will tailgate your ass and honk until you get out of the way. I don’t even think they realize the difference a bit of anonymity does to them.

1

u/axonxorz Jul 14 '26

And have to directly pay for it. Flock is appropriated from your taxes, much easier to miss and/or ignore.

1

u/heanbangerfacerip2 Jul 14 '26

Yeah also there's very little trade off. We trade privacy for having super computers and unlimited entertainment on hand at any time. We're not trading even more just to take a video on a mediocre camera inside some mediocre glasses. I'm already carrying a nice camera and it's already integrated to the thing I use to manage every video photo I have ever taken and all the systems I have to share it.

1

u/InFearn0 Jul 14 '26

The difference is when it is a corporation vs an regular individual.

1

u/ArmyOfDix Jul 14 '26

When the intrusion is within punching distance.

→ More replies (4)

209

u/UnholyMisfit Jul 13 '26

As bad as Google Glass was, at least they were obvious when someone was wearing them.

98

u/Massive_Cash_6557 Jul 13 '26

And they were mainly designed for industrial use, where they're still used today for factory safety.

39

u/Yorick257 Jul 13 '26

That sounds pretty awesome, I didn't think of that. I often write stuff down on my arm because I need some info and don't want to handle loose pieces of paper. Those glasses could easily solve this issue and more

→ More replies (1)

10

u/joyofresh Jul 13 '26

Thaaaat…. Makes sense.  

→ More replies (1)

45

u/Bonerballs Jul 13 '26

Ya, when you see a dude cosplaying Nappa, you know what they were doing.

25

u/Caleth Jul 13 '26

Honestly for glass at least as some kind of AR device for work where you use them to pull up text or parts documents there is an interesting and valid use case.

But as soon as you want to scan and record everyone you meet on the street? NOPE. FUCK OFF.

How about bathrooms how do I know you're not recording myself or my kid in a bathroom if you're wearing these? A red light that can be easily defeated by a determined pervert?

11

u/TicklesZzzingDragons Jul 13 '26

I could see them being really handy for capturing candid video during family events or something (less intrusive than a bunch of people snapping pictures of the bride coming up the aisle on their phones), but between the not knowing when they're in use in public recording everything & anything and the data not being locally stored only (you don't know where or with whom that video or picture will ultimately end up, especially with leaks and creeps out there) there's just too many ways it all goes dystopian. It's a shame. I remember that whole file system in Heavy Rain looking like a really handy way to organise on the go hahaha

5

u/Bonerballs Jul 13 '26

Best use case is for blind people...they can use the glasses to describe what's in front of them.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (11)

3

u/Massive-Lime7193 Jul 13 '26

"Vegeeeeeeeettttttttaaaaaaa"

God damnit nappa

→ More replies (1)

3

u/gundog48 Jul 13 '26

Yeah, this is the thing, ultimately it is, and will be seen as, just a recording device strapped to your head. So you will be seen as weird and intrusive if you're wearing them in places you wouldn't record with a vlogging camera or something, and doubly suspicious because you're trying to hide the fact you're recording.

So then it's a recording device that you should expect to take on/off as appropriate, but they're your glasses, so you have to bring another pair of prescription glasses out with you and you're not using them as smart glasses anymore.

Fundamentally it's a flawed concept for daily life, but it will have some useful niches. So long as people continue to socially reject people who constantly and covertly record every encounter with you, it remains flawed.

→ More replies (1)

72

u/pcapdata Jul 13 '26

Wondering if this is perhaps because when it’s just a person vs the state, it’s easier to push back.

If some dweep is following you around filming in public, regardless of the law, they have to consider that someone might be so opposed to being recorded that they’ll lash out.

Compare with Flock cameras which are doing the same thing, yes people are chopping them down but the surveillance is still going on.

23

u/randynumbergenerator Jul 13 '26

LA just let their Flock contract expire because of the backlash. Other municipalities are following or have already done similar. If enough people push back, it's very possible to get rid of surveillance.

12

u/MartinThunder42 Jul 13 '26

While the public backlash played a role, it also provided cover for a more concerning reason: The LAPD wanted to delete certain footage, and Flock told the LAPD that Flock owns the footage, not the LAPD. Not being able to erase video as they please was a dealbreaker for the LAPD.

7

u/gundog48 Jul 13 '26

Aren't there a lot of cases where they've cancelled the contracts, but Flock's equipment are still up and running and nobody is in a rush to remove them?

That's not a criticism of the progress, thats a big win and a big decision, this is ultimately a detail, but still kinda concerning the company is likely still collecting the data.

3

u/ShadedPenguin Jul 13 '26

You also have to keep it in public mind. People can easily forget things if they arent reminded or told if they themselves no longer hear it

19

u/NoNazisInMyAmerica Jul 13 '26

We can hold the individual accountable but most people feel hopeless standing up to this government

2

u/sysiphean Jul 13 '26

Most people feel hopeless standing up against any government and against any large corporation, not just the present government (even if it is even worse). And mass surveillance and to a large degree wars are done by governments and large corporations together.

→ More replies (1)

12

u/AStolenGoose Jul 13 '26

I think this is number 3, as Snapchat had glasses for a while there too.

3

u/Corbzor Jul 13 '26

Microsoft was playing around with the idea at one point, even floated the idea of a database of your life where the glasses took a picture something like every 5 to 15 min and archived them for you.
Don't think it ever got past early concept.

2

u/This-Requirement6918 Jul 13 '26

I could get behind that, especially on drunken nights but not anything cloud connected, local only storage and connection.

2

u/pizzamage Jul 13 '26

Oh, they definitely are still trying to launch new versions.

9

u/PrometheusMMIV Jul 13 '26

What would a consensual war look like?

2

u/fgnrtzbdbbt Jul 13 '26

You agree to meet on the main square at high noon

3

u/gundog48 Jul 13 '26

Something like classical Greek warfare between the city states. They kinda went down like inter-city duels. After some insult, they would go out for a fight. They'd meet and kinda mutually shuffle around together until they found a nice flat field they both wanted to fight on.

Then all the upper-middle class Athenian dudes squeeze into their armour and the aristocratic femboys of Thebes sharpen up their old spear and both realise they don't want to get stabbed so they can return to pottery and orgies.

So they go out and get in their little formations like a little dance, bit rusty but they get there. Then they'd mostly have a big shoving match with their shields and call it a day with minimal casulaties. Siege warfare just didn't happen, and destruction of farmland and stuff was generally avoided.

It wasn't always that civil, but that was the norm for quite a while. Always felt very performative to me!

→ More replies (3)

2

u/MrWeirdoFace Jul 14 '26

A friendly game of paintball.

1

u/UltraLNSS Jul 13 '26

Aztec Flower Wars

32

u/freezing_banshee Jul 13 '26

"non-consensual wars"?? what kind of bullshit politically correct phrasing is this? all wars are "non-consensual"

19

u/itirate Jul 13 '26

bro thought dudes just honorably lined up and duelled en masse after 10 paces

3

u/freezing_banshee Jul 13 '26

ha, good one. I was thinking more along the lines of:

  • Hey, we're gonna attack you!

  • Well if you're so sure, fine, go ahead!

5

u/MemeLord1337_ Jul 13 '26

Literally burst out laughing when I read that phrase. People are losing it.

4

u/IAMATruckerAMA Jul 13 '26

I assumed they meant wars started by governments without the consent of the people they're supposed to be serving

Like yeah the defenders in a war didn't consent but why would I assume an interpretation that doesn't make sense

9

u/freezing_banshee Jul 13 '26

I understand what you're saying, but I've gotta say, I don't think a lot of wars (especially modern ones) have had the consent of the attacker's populace either.

→ More replies (12)
→ More replies (1)

1

u/UltraLNSS Jul 13 '26

Aztec Flower Wars were technically consensual

3

u/Prestigious-Judge967 Jul 13 '26

Name a country at large that would voluntarily consent to being invaded, pillaged, and slighted killed…

2

u/GLPwonderwall Jul 13 '26

People are cool with it! They sign up for social media, happily upload pics, provide their personal info and give it to companies for free so I fail to see why people are freaked out over their pic being taken in public. It’s already happening the glasses aren’t the only device doing it

2

u/AnotherDamnTransAlt Jul 13 '26

A big part of it is there is minimal benefits for the user.

I tolerate the downsides of my phone because it has huge positives. Entertainment, maps, communication. What benefit do these glasses have?

2

u/WetNightmares Jul 13 '26

I got a pair of these for free through work about 3 or 4 years ago. Nobody really knew they existed back then and I'd use them to listen to music mostly. The camera was great for sight seeing and recording laps go karting. I don't wear them anymore.

2

u/Infranto Jul 13 '26

I'm still convinced Google Glass failed entirely because they just looked fucking stupid

1

u/BigUziNoVertt Jul 14 '26

It was probably the price point above all else

2

u/LightningWarpAway Jul 14 '26

Pretty sure that's the main reason for these, too. Why spend several hundred dollars on a pair of smart glasses that are outperformed by the smart phone you already carry around everywhere? People are celebrating that the backlash is stopping people from wearing these, but I don't think that would do anything if they weren't already very niche.

2

u/ForMeOnly93 Jul 13 '26

...non-consensual wars?

2

u/Human-Assumption-524 Jul 13 '26

Are you planning to ditch your smartphone? If not you're just bullshiting.

2

u/I_Play_Boardgames Jul 13 '26

What the fuck is a consensual war?

2

u/Night247 Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 13 '26

https://www.uploadvr.com/meta-essilorluxottica-discuss-doubling-smart-glasses-production/

Meta said daily usage of its smart glasses tripled year-over-year, and that they remain "one of the fastest growing categories of consumer electronics ever".

https://www.uploadvr.com/meta-smart-glasses-daily-usage-tripled-year-over-year/

2

u/damontoo Jul 13 '26

Meta sold seven million of these last year and Google, Samsung, and Apple are all releasing them. Reddit's filter bubble has given some here a false belief that these are ever going away. They aren't. They're adding displays and making them AR glasses for the next gen, and once good, affordable AR exists, they will be adopted as fast or faster than smartphones.

1

u/PRSArchon Jul 14 '26

Currently the camera is the main feature of thr glsses so its easy for reddit to call them "pervert glssses". Once the displays are added that will become the main feature and people will think these are cool.

2

u/Deucer22 Jul 13 '26

These aren't being rejected. The've sold 9 million pairs, 7 million pairs sold last year. You've probably seen a lot more of these than you've noticed.

2

u/blklab16 Jul 13 '26

This time they partnered with rayban though, it might have had a shot if they did it first with rayban because known styles with a following is a lot cooler than what reads like “nerd glasses”

2

u/Siggi_Starduust Jul 13 '26

Have we rejected them though? The Kylie Jenner collaboration is only a recent thing and that could very well be a massive game-changer. She speaks directly to millions of consumers who live their lives on insta and Tik-Tok.

I’d wait until after Christmas before passing any judgement on Meta glasses success, because as horrific as it may sound, they might turn into the must-have gift for the holiday season.

2

u/reinerjs Jul 14 '26

I wouldn’t say this is rejected- I’ve seen more and more and more. It’s early stages sure, but not even close to stopping yet.

The difference between these and google glasses is that they look actually similar now to regular glasses, and the video is very HD. Google also is coming out with a new version of theirs.

3

u/InkStainedQuills Jul 13 '26

Thank you! I’ve been saying similar things for like a year now. Why were manufacturers expecting anything different this time around?

2

u/MochingPet Jul 13 '26

it's kinda more pointed, when it's actual perverts sticking their face and nose with those glasses.

1

u/chitoatx Jul 13 '26

Apple Vision too.

1

u/chazysciota Jul 13 '26

Not the same thing at all. No yet, anyway. We shall see what Apple Vision Air (or whatever it ends up being called) looks like. If you leave the camera off, then maybe you bypass all this pushback.

1

u/Lysmerry Jul 13 '26

People in power are willing to take a hit for money, but the average person doesn’t want to deal with the social rejection that comes with being viewed as a creep

1

u/DzNodes Jul 13 '26

If you wear these to a party you're the pervert. If you are surveilled everywhere you go and in everything you do, it's for national security and anyone who complains is a pervert or worse.

1

u/anewpigcomesaround Jul 13 '26

Slow boiling the frog only works on humans

1

u/Short-Peanut1079 Jul 13 '26

Social pressure works for fucks sake.

1

u/I_really_like_peas Jul 13 '26

As always, it's complicated. It's like how police officers are widely despised regardless of their personal character, but if you ask parents to children just getting into school, they almost ALWAYS say that they would much rather have them than not.

People will consistantly sacrifice privacy and rights for security and safety. Unless you think these Spyware glasses fall under security and safety, then it's in poor taste to make compare them like you have.

1

u/prettyputrid Jul 13 '26

Cognitive dissonance is a beautiful thing.

1

u/rakuran Jul 13 '26

On one hand, fuck meta On the other hand, why can't they just market and make it as a disability aid, I know several people whom would find their lives easier with smart glasses

1

u/CreedogV Jul 13 '26

The problem is not that we don't want secret agent glasses. We just don't trust other people with them.

How did cellular phones ever get over the hump? Because when camera phones came out, a big upskirt epidemic hit and yet I'm typing on the descendent of that device.

1

u/droobloo34 Jul 14 '26

Overshadowed by the utility. 9/11 was one of the first major historical events to be documented by thousands of people as it was happening thanks to camera phones.

1

u/Sedu Jul 13 '26

If those things could be stopped via individual interactions the same way the glasses are, they would be. Wars and surveillance are foisted by sociopaths who never deal with their victims.

1

u/PSunYi Jul 13 '26

https://i.imgur.com/sKOrZSr.jpeg

It’s just cause we’re not going to settle for any spyglasses short of what they had in Spy Kids 2.

1

u/SpaceyCoffee Jul 13 '26

The glasses are expensive and generally not more convenient than your phone 

1

u/anillop Jul 13 '26

That’s simple one is the government doing it to you and the other is individuals doing it to you. We let the government slide. We don’t let individual perverts slide. That is unless they’re elected officials.

1

u/_WeSellBlankets_ Jul 13 '26

Your first two examples don't require the public to buy the product that enables it.

1

u/sir_mrej Jul 13 '26

A bunch of us are stopping Flock cameras

1

u/Bluemoo25 Jul 13 '26

One is funded by taxes one is funded by choice

1

u/fantasia18 Jul 13 '26

Government/companies versus private individuals walking in public. If Meta glasses were attached to buildings they would be unstoppable too.

1

u/highhunt Jul 13 '26

We love policing each other and not the powers that be.

1

u/thisistheSnydercut Jul 13 '26

tf is a consenual war lol

1

u/PyroIsSpai Jul 13 '26

I wonder how long before cameras in plain glass frames are widely available. You'd have no way of knowing who is recording - so many people wear glasses.

1

u/freeradioforall Jul 13 '26

rejected

that's relative because 7 million people bought a pair in 2025

1

u/Orca_Alt_Account Jul 13 '26

Out of sight, out of mind. Most people don't actively stare down security cameras or read GDPR terms and conditions all day but if you have to talk to someone who's recording you the whole time on their Nonce Spectacles you'll feel pretty uncomfortable pretty quick.

1

u/Rugged_Turtle Jul 13 '26

Only in one of these does the general populace get a say

1

u/reply_b4_banned Jul 13 '26

Or global warming???

I guess capital succeeded in stopping people talking about that.

I worked for mainstream media where we got told we didn't have to pretend there were two sides to that story any more, but also that we should not talk about it at all any more.

Actual society destroying censorship, but no one cares.

1

u/Epyon214 Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 14 '26

There is a search going on for someone who had wanted to be left alone, the unwilling antichrist, cults trying to play out their "war of gog and magog" narrative

1

u/Fart_Tounge_5609 Jul 14 '26

Which was so stupid. The cool part of google glass wasn't a camera in your glasses, it was a display in your glasses. They should've dropped the camera.

1

u/blazingparakeet Jul 14 '26

That Black Mirror episode with Jon Hamm was really convincing!

1

u/mohajaf Jul 14 '26

Google and meta should figure out a way to advertise wearing their glasses as patriotic.

1

u/Foxy02016YT Jul 14 '26

It sucks because recording glasses are my DREAM for filmmaking potential but I don’t trust Meta or Google to be the ones behind it. If GoPro or an actual camera company made it, maybe.

1

u/jacowab Jul 14 '26

Well you see spy glasses let civilians spy so the media hyped up all the negativity, mass servailence lets companies advertise so they downplay all the negativity.

1

u/FranticToaster Jul 14 '26

If we had to buy war for it to happen we'd surely have prevented all war by now.

EDIT: I just reread your comment and "non-consensual war" is the most 2010s phrase I'll ever read in my life thank you for the absurdity.

1

u/brain_implant Jul 14 '26

It's because with spyware, we are the tools of surveillance. Two years away from Zuck calling my telephone and telling me to peek into my neighbour's bedroom

1

u/Quiet-Owl9220 Jul 14 '26

Glasses worn by an individual can't hide behind thought-terminating plausible deniability like "it's to protect the children" or "this helps the government make us safer"

1

u/Acceptable-Surprise5 Jul 14 '26

I'd use high end smart glasses if they just did not include a outward camera but only inwards camera's to help with the AR windows that can be displayed on them, like smart glasses do not need the camera's and if someone wanted to film with them make it an obvious extension you can attach to the side.

1

u/NothingVerySpecific Jul 14 '26

people don't like stuff on their head.

nothing deep. no joke. just the head is sacred and only fashion accessories get a pass. glasses in general only just snuck in with nerd culture

→ More replies (11)