this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2025
284 points (95.2% liked)

Technology

75434 readers
1712 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 15 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (34 children)

For me at least, the killer feature is going to be tagging faces with names. Face blindness sucks.

Edit: For the downvoters, in case you're unaware, I'm talking about a real life disability.

Face blindness, or prosopagnosia, is a condition where individuals cannot recognize familiar faces, including their own, despite having normal vision and intellectual function. It can be congenital (present from birth), developmental, or acquired due to brain damage from injury, stroke, or disease. People with prosopagnosia rely on other cues like voice, hair, or clothing to identify people.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 14 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

And that's also the main reason I don't want these to exist. I don't want to be identified by random people, and I especially don't want police to have access to something like this. People I spend time with know who I am, and I'm fine missing out on random same place/same time coincidences with people I knew from high school or something.

[–] Joelk111@lemmy.world 5 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

I'd want them to use a local database that you've created. After you've met someone, the glasses could be like "remember this person?" and you could choose to save them or not, or something like that.

[–] pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Yes. I'm all for an open specification, local only version of this.

But I don't think Meta releasing a set of smart glasses leaves anyone (other than possibly Zuckerberg) better off.

[–] Joelk111@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

One could argue that without Meta's investments into the technology, we might never get an open specification at all. With something like Valetudo, it wouldn't exist without the privacy nightmare that is off-the-shelf robot vacuums.

[–] Lfrith@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Its meta so they'll get their hands on that data the way peoples numbers end up in metas hands despite not having a Facebook account because people gave the app permission to contacts.

[–] Joelk111@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not talking about a Meta made pair of glasses. I would never buy those due to the privacy issues. I'm talking about a potential pair of glasses that are open source, or at least privacy focused, and don't phone home.

[–] Lfrith@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Average people will have it phone home for convenience. Just how things play out. I think the tech is cool, but not looking forward to how it'll be utilized in the end.

[–] Joelk111@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, not looking forwards to being in Meta (or any other massive company)'s database or whatever when a friend or family member wears one of these.

[–] Lfrith@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 hours ago

Like VR, meta's will probably be the best priced and have the best tech on top of it for the price, so end up getting the most market share too.

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 4 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Prosopagnosia, also known as face blindness, is a cognitive disorder of face perception in which the ability to recognize familiar faces, including one's own face, is impaired, while other aspects of visual processing and intellectual functioning remain intact.

I'm talking about recognising people I've met and know.

[–] markko@lemmy.world 7 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I don't see how that could realistically happen without whichever company is behind the glasses taking all that juicy biometric data for themselves though.

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 1 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

It's up to the govts to protect the rights of the people. If you're in the US, you're already on the verge of losing all rights anyway. For the rest of the world, there's no reason to think we couldn't regulate it in a reasonably privacy-friendly way. Local face tagging and recognition could work without cloud access, so that you'd only have access to information you keyed in yourself about somebody.

[–] pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

For the rest of the world, there's no reason to think we couldn't regulate it in a reasonably privacy-friendly way.

You're totally right in principle.

But the conversation for this pair of glasses is different, because of Meta.

If anyone believes that Meta obeys their local laws, please refer them my way for a pyramid business opportunity...(I believe I could easily rip them off, because I believe they are suckers.)

The EU has proven very willing to levy increasingly large fines against the tech giants until they behave.

[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 hours ago

You act like America is the only place in the world where tech is being used for mass surveillance.

Your own governments are doing it to you too, whether or not it’s legal.

Wake up, they don’t give a single fuck about you.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 4 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Sure. My point is that same technology can and will be used to violate peoples' privacy, and in some cases could create dangerous situations (e.g. domestic violence victim being recognized by their attacker).

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 0 points 12 hours ago

(e.g. domestic violence victim being recognized by their attacker)

Not sure how or why the attacker wouldn't be able to recognise them normally.

My point is that same technology can and will be used to violate peoples' privacy

Every technology can be used to do shitty stuff, and in most cases has been. It's up to the govts to protect the rights of the people. If you're in the US, you're already on the verge of losing all rights anyway. For the rest of the world, there's no reason to think we couldn't regulate it in a reasonably privacy-friendly way. Local face tagging and recognition could work without cloud access, so that you'd only have access to information you keyed in yourself about somebody.

load more comments (31 replies)