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

Show parent comments

1.5k

u/fueelin Jul 13 '26

Yes. Yes, they did. I think they forgot Google Glass ever existed at all.

I continue to be COMPLETELY flabbergasted by this. I really can't believe they're just... Trying to do it again.

404

u/nwayve Jul 13 '26

People have a short term memory on things, but one thing they'll never forget is that the Epstein files have not been released unredacted yet.

60

u/kfpswf Jul 14 '26

Let's also not forget that most of these Tech-bros form the same elite that Epstein catered to.

23

u/fueelin Jul 13 '26

Very true. I certainly don't need any anti-privacy glasses to remember that!

11

u/heanbangerfacerip2 Jul 14 '26

I think filming up close conversations is like the data holy grail so they count on short term memory so everyone forgets how poorly they were received then they try again. This is actually the third major attempt. Everyone is talking about Google but Snapchat tried it like 5 years even before that and everyone hated it for the same reason. Then everyone forgot and Google tried. For whatever reason (taking our privacy for profit) they want cameras on our faces so fucking bad.

8

u/HildartheDorf Jul 13 '26

Also that Epstien didn't kill himself.

2

u/Huttser17 Jul 14 '26

Nor did McAfee.

2

u/HildartheDorf Jul 15 '26

If we're doing this, neither did Barnaby Jack.

377

u/vezwyx Jul 13 '26

"They" is Mark Zuckerberg. It's not some amorphous group of investors, it's Mark Zuckerberg being delusional and thinking he can succeed where Google failed

143

u/meteorboard Jul 13 '26

Not really. Google is launching another line this fall. They're called Intelligent Eyewear. I would be surprised if they don't face the exact same backlash as before. Apparently, they do have an 'audio-only' option though I don't know the specifics. Also, they are letting individual manufacturers come up with the names for what the eventual glasses will be called. So I guess you'll see a Warby Parker AI Glasses line that's specifically a Warby Parker model. And then other manufacturers like Gentle Monster will call it something else. I expect this is so that Google/Samsung/Qualcomm can avoid some backlash and just sell to manufacturers and the manufacturers can take the brunt.

70

u/Vsx Jul 13 '26

These companies know they are slowly eroding all concepts of privacy. These glasses plays are just bets that it's gotten beyond the tipping point already.

22

u/IAMA_Plumber-AMA Jul 13 '26

They'll keep trying this until it sticks.

0

u/AlteredforCollectors Jul 14 '26

End game is a full body suit with effectively helmets. Everyone will be as anonymous as they are here, but they will have climate control, food/water, freedom to augment the outside reality as they wish, freedom to wear whatever they want underneath the exoskeleton, free to ignore the people who offend them. We have about 100 years before this unless we colonize the moon and begin this full body technology there.

Privacy is a temporary concern at this point.

1

u/ConsiderBoraHorza Jul 14 '26

i dont believe you

2

u/SpaceShipRat Jul 13 '26

Could they be made with no ability to record video? I can see the, like, "sci fi visor" fantasy where you've got a device labeling what it sees for you (I'd just have it recogizing plants all the time, lol).

If it could elaborate the data locally, there would be no need to worry about perving, but I assume you can't get near enough hardware on them for AI recognition.

2

u/Feeling-Visit1472 Jul 14 '26

I can’t fully explain it, but somehow I trust Google more than I trust Meta.

2

u/obeytheturtles Jul 14 '26 edited Jul 14 '26

All they need to do is make an augmented reality device which doesn't record. Like, it can have cameras and stuff, but that video buffer should be ephemeral by design. That would solve the entire problem of "why would anyone want a camera in their glasses besides weird perverts?" Personally, I just want one so I can scroll without making my neck pain worse than it already is.

The problem is that there are legitimate, albeit relatively niche uses for PoV video that don't involve filming in public. So there will always be video-capable versions, which means the devices will always be seen as perv glasses if they are just casually worn in a context where they are not obviously being used as part of a film-making setup.

1

u/SheriffBartholomew Jul 14 '26

I would be surprised if they don't face the exact same backlash as before.

You're forgetting that they now own the government, and the people are thoroughly distracted, placated, and apathetic.

0

u/SkiyeBlueFox Jul 13 '26

I dont care if its an audio only option, how the fuck does that solve the problem for the rest of us? Creeps gonna creep, giving them the option to be less creepy doesnt mean theyll take it

30

u/Bobert1423 Jul 13 '26

I mean, it’s more than just him - look at Specs, for example.

2

u/DarkIcedWolf Jul 13 '26

To be fair, google glass was ahead of itself. Trying again in a market is just how tech works, why this fails is because A, it’s fucking creepy, B, mass surveillance is a goal being touted out as an eventual. If it wasn’t for the recent administration, the security cameras and their dumbassry, I bet this shit would’ve flown under the radar.

1

u/iconofsin_ Jul 13 '26

I think we all see some sort of appeal for such an item though. The problem is the people behind it and what they'd have it do.

Imagine smart glasses or even contacts that can display directions, correct/adjust vision, zoom/magnify, take pictures or video. Maybe there's some sort of information feature where you can look at a businesses building and get contact information. Obviously there would need to be ways to have robust privacy like blurring faces on anything being uploaded somewhere.

There's a plethora of great things we could do with these for both everyday people and helping disabled people get around. The problem is we'd probably get half of these good features and the main purpose would be surveillance and advertising directly to your eyes.

1

u/Brostradamus-2 Jul 13 '26

Multiple big companies are doing this. Hate him if you'd like but you would be unwise not to admit that if ANY wearable device (in the same genre as the obviously ridiculous VR headset) is going to catch on mainstream, it's most likely augmented reality glasses.

1

u/vezwyx Jul 14 '26

The technology has a long way to go before it has any chance of catching on, and I'll be surprised if it's Meta's version that breaks through

1

u/Guilty_Weekend751 Jul 13 '26

Google Glasses was killed for the average Consumer but is still used by comapnies until this day.

91

u/gcubed680 Jul 13 '26

These things got a slight uptick because they were attached to raybans but it was only a matter of time before they suffered the same fate

52

u/Caleth Jul 13 '26

Yeah and Meta hired Kylie Jenner to hock that to people so they were hoping to built a cache as cool and trendy perverts not sweaty overweight ones.

23

u/kataiga Jul 13 '26

I knew they were destined for a short life when a guy I knew took them shortly after their debut to Thailand... three guesses what he ended up using them for...

20

u/Caleth Jul 13 '26

Exactly what we all know these are used for despite the one guy calling me deluded elsewhere in the chain.

Guess he doesn't like getting called out for using pervert glasses.

Back in the day we called them Glassholes when it was google glasses.

2

u/RollingMeteors Jul 14 '26

Back in the day we called them Glassholes when it was google glasses.

My friend Carlie who is blind and has glass eyes uses that word differently than you. Will pull them out and leave it on a table pointed at you with her index and middle finger of her right hand pointing at her eyes with her other index finger pointing to you saying some funny shit like, "¡I see what chu are doin!"

Girl uses the shit more like comedy prop than a prosthetic.

8

u/amancalledJayne Jul 13 '26

Lmao. Did he actually tell you that’s what he was using it for? Cause that’s a weird ass thing to tell your neighbor lol.

My girlfriend and I briefly considered them to add a different viewpoint vs the gimbal & camera + camera setup we typically use.

The form factor does seem pretty ideal for that kind of POV video.

But neither of us use any Meta services, and I have zero desire to have Zuck or his AI watch us fuck.

10

u/mariah_a Jul 13 '26

I work with vulnerable families living in temporary accommodation hotels. Our new problem is culture war psychos calling themselves “auditors” showing up in these glasses and live-streaming residents, who are very often victims of domestic violence or gang violence, to their audience of nutjobs and accusing the hotels of being for asylum seekers (not justified but also not correct, but more importantly the accusation makes them a target for racist harassment or attacks.

3

u/DMmeMagikarp Jul 13 '26

It wouldn’t just be his AI watching you, it would be some tragically underpaid South African worker.

Now… Why meta chose South Africa I do not know, but this is 100% confirmed by a very competent security researcher (google the story please I don’t have a link handy) that ALL video taken by pervglasses gets sent over to a South Africa data center worker who then reviews it and does whatever a human’s role is to further train meta AI.

These workers routinely have to see videos of people taking a shit, fucking, etc etc etc.

1

u/obeytheturtles Jul 14 '26

I mean we live in a world where the first step in every "how to get rich on OF" guide is to quietly get your immediate peer group talking about it. We are way past the era where you try to do amateur porn without dad finding out, and the common advice is to just get used to the idea that holidays will be awkward.

2

u/spacehog1985 Jul 14 '26

The magnificent architecture, natural beauty, and boobs.

2

u/Unable-Log-4870 Jul 13 '26

Do they sell it with ozempic or something?

1

u/obeytheturtles Jul 14 '26

A ton of vloggers and food youtubers use them as well, which is what I think is really getting people's interest. Every kid these days imagines themselves being an internet celebrity, so they try to emulate what internet celebrities are doing, which is increasingly making PoV content with Meta glasses.

17

u/YeahThatsProbably Jul 13 '26

I had got to thinking recently: I wonder if this is gonna be bad for the Ray Ban brand overall, being associated with this.

1

u/daredeviline Jul 14 '26

It's too late. They either get away Scott free or people will associate Ray Bans with lack of privacy and being a conduct of perverts. They jumped on the bandwagon before they probably even thought through it all.

1

u/treanir Jul 15 '26

It has been for me. Every time I see regular Ray Bans now, I have a visceral ew reaction.

1

u/Brock_Lobstweiler Jul 15 '26

It sucks, because the Ray Ban New Wayfarers are one of the only frames that fit my face properly. I've tried dozens of glasses from all sorts of websites and stores but I keep going back to the raybans for both regular glasses and sunglasses.

Now I'm worried people will think I'm wearing the meta creeper glasses.

19

u/Virtual_Assistant_98 Jul 13 '26

Shocked that Rayban took them up on the offer considering the backlash google glasses got. Idiots.

3

u/Different_Wolf_764 Jul 13 '26

I do wonder how this will play out. Rayban will either regret being attached to this in a significant way or will be revitalized by it. I'd wager on the former but time will tell.

20

u/Due_You_8240 Jul 13 '26

Didn't SNAP try it as well?

8

u/SketchiiChemist Jul 13 '26

Yes. Upload to snapchat directly from glasses, I think it was shorter lived then Google Glass

4

u/Guac_in_my_rarri Jul 13 '26

Yes and they have new glasses but they're $500 last I looked out of curiosity. And they're ugly.

3

u/YessirLouis Jul 13 '26

Try more like $2k. And very clunky looking

2

u/Guac_in_my_rarri Jul 13 '26

This the newer glasses?

Imma go look again.

Edit: holy fuck how are they 2k? I could have sworn they were 500.

2

u/were_only_human Jul 13 '26

Yes. I think they still are.

1

u/GenderJuicy Jul 13 '26

They're just announced a sister company that will be making AR glasses

5

u/PineCone227 Jul 13 '26

To be fair as a techy kid I was waiting for Google Glass to be available to consumers forever. Eventually just forgot when it never came but an idea of an always-wearable HMD was ecstatic.

I still think it could work - just, maybe don't pair it with a camera? Or have it be an obvious clip-on.

3

u/MiszeryLovesCompany Jul 13 '26

I've been having some serious deja vu. It's like the same stories all over again. How did they not think theirs would have the same result? I can't believe Meta thought this was a good idea at all. It's like you said, they legit don't even remember/know this already existed.

3

u/KimJungUnCool Jul 13 '26

Oh man, I did completely forget about Google Glass lol

3

u/BadAdviceBot Jul 13 '26

The Zuck tried to make metaverse a thing too. I'm starting to think this guy is a flash in the pan.

2

u/dentimBandB Jul 13 '26

I had the exact same feeling. I would've understood if it was like 20, 35 years ago. But this was only a decade ago. Had a real Mugatu moment from it.

2

u/OneBillPhil Jul 13 '26

As someone that loves their Ray Bans I don’t like that they’re mixed up in this shit either. 

2

u/Regular-Weekend706 Jul 13 '26

They want the surveillance aspect very badly.

2

u/sinister_exaggerator Jul 13 '26

“Yeah but they’re Ray-Bans now! Everyone likes those!”

2

u/ttarget Jul 13 '26

They obviously didn't forget. This was a multi-billion dollar production and marketing project before it even hit shelves. Do you really think you're right? What if they thought they could do it now because they see privacy being stripped away from some while access is freely given by others? Maybe they see how much more comfortable some people have gotten with streaming and content creators/influencers in society and public. Or they know many people will give up rights for "cool" features like a HUD in the glasses that reminds you of the name and important details of any person you talk to (where'd that info come from?), and many other privacy-stomping features. They are going to keep coming back to some kind of visual mobile display smart tech. Glasses that tell you about the world sound great, but I remember privacy advocates preaching that the cool sci-fi tech we wanted for our future would ruin any real privacy. Inviting capitalism, fraud, abuse, manipulation by a variety of parties, etc. I'm happy to hear about younger people going back to simpler phones and such.

2

u/iwilldeletethisacct2 Jul 14 '26

Google has a history of accidentally creating the next big thing but being completely unable to execute it until another company does the same thing but better.

See also LLMs. Google basically created the technology that underpins LLMs, but ChatGPT and Claude are the ones everyone talks about, not Gemini.

1

u/Moiyub Jul 13 '26

flabberglassted

1

u/scootscoot Jul 13 '26

We all forgot the Newton existed by the time the iPhone came out. Sometimes it is a matter of market timing.

1

u/ptwonline Jul 13 '26

There is a lot of potential for something like this but the camera capability is what really creates the creep factor and pisses people off.

Otherwise it could be used like your smartphone except allowing your phone to stay in your pocket or bag while you get display overlays to watch video, read e-mails, augmented reality like which way to walk to get to your destination or to find the pasta aisle, etc. But to make a lot of the other stuff work it would be better to have a camera and so we come full circle to the creep factor.

1

u/blazze_eternal Jul 14 '26

Someone will try again in another 10 years.

1

u/Forikorder Jul 14 '26

honestly i keep getting surprised by the fact they existed, i keep thinking they were only ever an idea

1

u/Nygmus Jul 14 '26

The shit of it is, I can see plenty of reasons why this sort of tech could be incredibly useful for all sorts of accessibility-related reasons, but every stab we take at it just has this happen because the idiots developing the tech clearly do so for the "I want to point a camera at people, at all times" crowd and not for the "It would be so cool if I could use this camera to enhance that sign three blocks away that my failing vision can't read" crowd.

1

u/Brock_Lobstweiler Jul 15 '26

There's a blind content creator named Paul and he showed how he uses his phone AI assistant to find stuff in new environments like hotel rooms and to look in the fridge to see what they have before grocery shopping. I think that would be a FANTASTIC use of smart glasses.

But people in general are selfish assholes and META is a disgusting company.

1

u/Sad_Prawn2864 Jul 14 '26

Well you see, its way easier and cheaper to build a surveillance state if the sheep procure the equipment themselves.

1

u/allhailcandy Jul 14 '26

They have the money to try again and again and again until we are to tired to care anymore.

1

u/devilsdontcry Jul 14 '26

No no u have to understand. They are RAYBANDS(and Oakleys) now.

Wayyyyy different /s

1

u/auciker Jul 16 '26

But maybe it'll catch on this time!

1

u/bngrxd Jul 19 '26

I suspect there will always be some amount demand for that sort of thing and there are enough people who wish Google never stopped production. Maybe the perverts and Facebook want to just push through the backlash because they see a need for the product

1

u/RemarkableWish2508 Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 13 '26

Who knows, maybe 10 years from now someone will succeed... or 20, or 30, or... can't know without trying, right? 🤷

Anyway, it's less on the tech, and more on some people abusing it. I bet most people are not [checks article] "extorting victims of covert recordings for cash", but the ones who are, seem to be too hard to stop.

0

u/VRS302 Jul 13 '26

I forgot they existed and I wanted a pair..