My elderly mother-in-law is slowly going blind. She relies on Meta glasses to read print on everything — from the back of a can to the mail. She also uses them to help locate items around the house, whether it’s something on the counter or in the living room.
I’ve tried the glasses myself, and I’m convinced that wearable eyewear like this will eventually replace the mobile phone. With ongoing advances in miniaturization, it’s only a matter of time before AR and AV are fully integrated into everyday wearables.
amazingamazing · 10m ago
I don't understand how she's using Meta glasses to read print. You mean it's dictating it, or are they prescription? If the former, do you need meta glasses for that? If it's the latter, wouldn't it work with any glasses?
I also don't understand how they're used to locate items around the house. Is there some sort of GPS? Or do you mean it helps by virtue of seeing (e.g. prescription)?
AR glasses will be a hit, no doubt, but I don't see what's so special about glasses with a mic, camera and speaker on them. Seems especially for an older person that it would be more useful getting a phone with a screen and pointing at things and seeing it on a display.
sleepyguy · 2m ago
The glasses need to be connected to your smartphone, and then you ask.
Hey Meta, read the text on this label and tell me what it says.
Hey Meta, do you see the keys on the counter?
Hey Meta, can you tell me what is in front of me?
It projects the sound into your ear.
Janicc · 47m ago
I believe it's going to replace smartphones like smartphones replaced computers or more specifically laptops.
kepano · 15m ago
In what way did smartphones replace laptops?
fnord77 · 38s ago
[delayed]
acuozzo · 14m ago
OP is trying to say it'll only be a partial replacement.
epgui · 13m ago
That's exactly the point.
TiredOfLife · 12m ago
Ordinary people do everything on smartphones nowadays.
wslh · 26m ago
I don't think "replaced" is the right word, just like with smart glasses. The form factor and user experience are key attributes when choosing a device, independent of raw hardware power. It's likely we'll continue to live with multiple device types coexisting.
BTW, I have to consciously turn off my cybersecurity mindset when thinking about smart glasses. It's hard not to see all the new attack vectors they introduce.
gwbas1c · 1h ago
> and I’m convinced that wearable eyewear like this will eventually replace the mobile phone
Once there is an actual usable in-glasses screen, I will agree.
A few years ago I tried someone's smartglasses with a screen. It basically had similar functionality to my first Fitbit: it would show texts, notifications, caller ID.
I really want one of those and went looking, but couldn't find it.
themanmaran · 49m ago
You might be interested in the EvenRealities G1 [1]. It's the absolute best form factor I've seen for just the text HUD
Looks amazing. Unfortunately from a Chinese company, and given how deeply integrated with my email, calendar, etc it would be... no interest.
ge96 · 1h ago
What style was it, nreal (bulky) or something like Frame (though lower end in quality)
pizzathyme · 58m ago
I agree. Some threshold in the past few years has been passed. I wear mine every day (and I don't wear glasses normally). Music, photos, videos all super useful. AI is lacking but will get better. Feels cool and not-embarassing in public
I think that they've done it, this is Meta's iPod
ghostpepper · 17m ago
> I think that they've done it, this is Meta's iPod
I would love to try these types of devices but there is no way I'd ever give money to Meta or put my personal information into their systems or encourage my friends and family to do so either.
Hopefully Meta puts in a bunch of R&D to see what works in this space and then someone else (Apple?) just copies it.
SoftTalker · 1h ago
I don't think so. You still would have to wear glasses, which is annoying.
SirMaster · 16m ago
Right, I have no interest wearing glasses.
cshimmin · 1h ago
some of us have to wear glasses anyway :/
SoftTalker · 49m ago
Yes, and I am one of "us" but I still think they are annoying. I wear contacts most of the time. Glasses are just awkward in many situations. In the heat when you get sweaty they slide down your nose or completely fall off, in the cold when you walk in to a warm house they fog over, in the rain they get water spots, the frames are always visible and interfere with peripheral vision. I just don't care much for them.
eloisant · 1h ago
Then they'll have to find a way to separate the "smart" frame from the prescription lenses, so you can change the glasses when your sight changes without having to buy smart frame each time - or the other way around, upgrade your frames without having to buy prescriptions lenses again.
xnorswap · 50m ago
Maybe we'll work out how to stimulate the optic nerve directly and skip to bionic eyes for both corrective vision and AR.
We'll need to overhaul the concept of limited liability before we do that though, the thought of someone being left without their eyes because a company goes bankrupt and no-one is at fault is pretty horrifying.
terribleperson · 27m ago
Unfortunately the unmaintained bionic problem is already real.
lokar · 57m ago
I often get updated lenses for my frames. Is that not what you mean?
barbazoo · 1h ago
Anecdotally, I haven't found it possible to buy lenses for a particular frame other than when you buy both new at the same time. Good luck getting the same lenses next time the prescription changes.
The frame will probably change slightly over time to make them incompatible.
zie · 44m ago
> The frame will probably change slightly over time to make them incompatible.
This is probably true.
The rest of your comment is probably not true for most people.
It just depends on how strong your prescription is and how willing the shop/website is to do special orders.
If you are almost blind, then your choice of lenses/frames will be much lower than if you are only slightly blind(most people). Any reputable eyeglass/optician shop should be able to make custom lenses for pretty much any frame. They can't always do the super sleek shades that some people like to wear.
kcb · 53m ago
Very confused by this. As far as I know it's standard for lenses to be custom made for your frame even when you purchase them at the same time.
I just sent an old pair of glasses to eyeglasses.com for new lenses. I never considered this to be a big deal.
sleepyguy · 1h ago
Lensology, you tell them the frames, and upload your prescription, and they send you the lenses to pop in. It's called reglazing, and millions of people do it all the time.
Ray Ban does it for their Meta glasses, but Lensology can handle stronger prescription lenses.
dmarcos · 1h ago
And contact lenses and lasik are popular because many don’t want to wear glasses. I see head mounted displays useful in constrained scenarios (e.g construction site and tasks where you already wear safety glasses and need free hands). I have a harder time seeing a world where people ditch phones and start voluntarily wearing glasses which is often uncomfortable and inconvenient. Just finished 5 miles run on treadmill, went to sauna and did bouldering. There’s no room for glasses but can occasionally check my phone.
someuser2345 · 24m ago
> I have a harder time seeing a world where people ditch phones and start voluntarily wearing glasses which is often uncomfortable and inconvenient
I see this world all the time at the beach; lots of people wear sunglasses there.
mollerhoj · 1h ago
i dont think youre very representative of the general population
ian-g · 1h ago
I’m very glad your mother in law has use for them.
With that said, I don’t think these can replace phones until they’re quite a lot smaller and lighter. And to make it worse, you’d need at least two pairs - regular and sun. Possibly three if you’re someone who regularly uses safety glasses.
criddell · 1h ago
I don't think I would be super comfortable walking around with Meta cameras seeing everything I see in my home. I'm not sure I'd trust any of the companies likely to build the product with that kind of access to my personal life.
PaulHoule · 34m ago
MQ3 is crawling with cameras for ‘inside out’ tracking which hypothetically could be used in privacy violating ways. Currently these are locked down so that you can’t build interesting AR apps —- you should be able to look at a QR code and access a ‘location based’ XR app but they don’t allow it, gotta scan with a phone and transfer it to your headset with Meta’s janky app which shows all the “carelessness” of someone who doesn’t care to make money.
Meta says they will open it up though.
criddell · 28m ago
I might trust individual developers. I don't trust Meta though so as long as the XR app is running on Meta hardware, I'm not interested.
PaulHoule · 22m ago
I’m more worried that shoddy development practices will cause the video to freeze up, cause me to fall or crash into something and experience “VR to ER” myself.
nhecker · 1h ago
Photochromatic coatings -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photochromic_lens -- have existed for a while and are sold on safety glasses, at least according to a cursory look at a large online retailer's site.
That said, I'm not sure I'd want smart glasses. Being stuck on a computer for work, I try to take some time every day to be completely free of digital things. It's hard enough to do that with a smart phone in my pocket vying for my attention. I imagine it would be only harder with smart glasses over my eyeballs.
foobarian · 1h ago
They may not replace the current gamut of phone features. However; I question how much of current phone functionality is actually something users strongly need/want, vs. how much is pushed by big tech. It would be pretty great if a small core feature set done well in-glass turned out to be enough to kick off large scale adoption. Ultimately I think the input is probably going to be the hardest issue
Loughla · 34m ago
Read and send messages. Make phone calls. Navigation and maps. Set reminders. Navigate a basic Google search, even if it's just a top level summary.
Those things on glasses and I ditch my phone immediately.
ge96 · 1h ago
What would be the interface, talking? I know they have pinching and hand tracking, guess it's no different than people talking "to themselves" while wearing earbuds.
dustbunny · 52m ago
I'm interested in hearing more use cases! Anyone else got one?
paul7986 · 41m ago
No they won't you can not take selfies with smart glasses!
Now I'm a Ray Ban Meta enthusiasts; have 2 pair and 1st since Oct 2023. I wear them almost daily and like without my phone on me I can take pics, vids and ask for the time. Look forward to when there's 5G built in they'll be able to do a lot more, but still can't take selfies and any replacement needs to be able too!
Whatever Open AI is cooking up with Jonny Ives a pin you wear with a hologram that can take selfies or something out there that takes selfies too is the replacement. Tho my bet is Open AI is just working on an AI phone where it's like the movie H.E.R. and almost everything is done from your lock screen including H.E.R. taking the best selfies of you (get u to the best lighting) or something mobile like that.
wiether · 1h ago
So how do you prevent Meta from gathering secrets displayed for even a tenth of a second on an employee' screen?
You'll have to ask security to check everyone's glasses now?
wwweston · 1h ago
Meta isn’t the last company I’d trust with a wearable always on video input (among other data no doubt), but they’re in the bracket.
smilespray · 1m ago
Who's worse? Palantir?
madog · 22m ago
Not to mention Meta is ad tech so these will be full to the brim of tracking and adverts to recoup R+D costs.
I'm yet to be convinced these are useful and not just another way to inject ads directly into eyeballs.
noisy_boy · 5m ago
Imagine you are driving or using a power tool or cooking with these on and an ad starts playing.
KennyBlanken · 39m ago
Or keep it from violating recording and privacy laws?
How are these "smart glasses" legal in places like Germany where you (supposedly) can't even have a dashcam?
OkGoDoIt · 1h ago
Still no SDK though, what’s the point of smart glasses that only do what Meta lets them?
I’m personally more excited about the Mentra Live glasses, which are fully programmable with AugmentOS.
dkobia · 1h ago
This. The meta glasses have so much potential and it is absolutely frustrating as a developer to have no way to make use of it.
noisy_boy · 8m ago
That's why they were spamming me several times in the last few weeks to buy the ray ban ones - trying to clear inventory.
kaycebasques · 58m ago
So there's no AR aspect to the lens on any of these Meta-partnered smart sunglasses, right? I assumed that was standard on all of them. Naive, I know, because that would require some amazing hardware. But it does go to show that we're still far from the Star Trek future that other simpleton consumers like myself might be hoping for / expecting.
dustbunny · 56m ago
I was stoked when I saw these headlines cause I generally prefer Oakley to Ray Ban in terms of style, but these look nothing like Oakley's! Personally I don't like round glasses, I like more square glasses. Dang!
kgilpin · 47m ago
I will miss being able to see people’s eyes.
Raed667 · 43m ago
Does it even matter if they have Oakley or any other logo on them? Aren't they all luxotica anyway?
jekwoooooe · 35m ago
Yes! Your 10$ and 600$ are made in the same place by the same company with largely the same materials.
I discovered goodr recently and they are great. 25$ high quality sunglasses that I can actually trust have real UV ratings. Seeing people wear ray bans or oakleys is really funny
kylehotchkiss · 7m ago
and when you inevitably lose your goodrs, nbd, just get another set for $25
divan · 1h ago
Weird take: my biggest annoyance with Meta glasses after 1+ year of almost daily usage is that there is no way to switch from Meta AI to any other voice AI.
toephu2 · 43m ago
No mention of weight in the article or on the official product page?
post_break · 51m ago
Until they make it so you can replace the battery I'm not going to buy.
Bender · 1h ago
This is just my opinion but these look even worse that the 1940's+ military issued BC glasses. BC as in birth control. [1] At least it will be easy to spot the glassholes [2] for now at least.
Looks cool but I just hate the heaviness and feel of wearing acetate. If they ever make titanium smartglasses I'll be all over them.
kube-system · 3h ago
Titanium is about 3-4x the density, they're normally light only because less material can be used... which is probably problematic when used as an enclosure for electronics.
syntaxing · 3h ago
Titanium for electronics isn’t much of a problem (look at Apple Watch and a bunch of Apple product). The issue is that it’s a considerably more expensive material (every cents count when you scale to consumer electronics) and a bit harder to work with.
kube-system · 2h ago
We were talking about weight -- you don't hang those devices on your face.
Titanium glasses are lightweight because a very minimal amount of material is used. This is possible for regular glasses because you can make them with a ~1mm cross-section. When you want to put electronics inside of them, you need much more material.
LtdJorge · 1h ago
Does sheet titanium not exist? I know it’s a tough metal, I don’t know if it would be feasible to make it out of folded sheet titanium.
Edit: Just checked, it does exist.
kube-system · 1h ago
The weight is the issue. The guy above said he doesn't like the weight of acetate glasses. Acetate frames for traditional glasses are 10-20 grams. Titanium frames for traditional glasses are 5-10 grams.
Between the weight of material and the electronics, I don't really see anything approaching the feel that someone that discerning would want.
saltcured · 42m ago
You may be right, but I think they are imagining a tubular frame construction. It would contain a volume of battery or electronics inside the hollow skin.
I guess the problem is can you extrude and form something so small with the precision and metallurgical properties you want to maintain. You probably don't want to just cast it in the final shape, right?
diggan · 2h ago
Although parent asking for titanium for the feeling, so maybe something in-between would be fine? Lightweight material inside and structurally, but titanium or something else as the "skin".
saltcured · 38m ago
Like a surfboard, or a toucan's beak.
I assume the poster above imagined the something inside could just be voids, like a tiny aircraft. But yes, some kind of low density filler could also add some stability in areas you don't want mass metal but also don't have electronics or battery "cargo".
isatty · 1h ago
Why? If 1mm cross section titanium is just as or stronger why does it need to be thicker? For anchors?
kube-system · 1h ago
Because the electronics used in smart glasses go inside of the frames. It's not a structural problem, it's a packaging problem.
LtdJorge · 1h ago
Even if it’s an order of magnitude more expensive, they would make money on the glasses. Oakley (and every brand controlled by the Luxotica monopoly) glasses have extreme margins. On the order of, could be sold for under $20 making a profit but are sold for $300+. I don’t think the titanium work and the electronics can offset that.
woleium · 3h ago
The material is not the majority of the expense. The cost comes from the difficulty encountered when working the metal using standard tooling. It is difficult to work, low tolerance and high failure rates made it impractical prior to modern (very expensive) machines.
LorenDB · 3h ago
Come on, why would you make smart glasses with a clear shell and then hide the electronics behind an inner shielding layer? I want all the circuits on display.
duped · 2h ago
Light can affect the operation of many electronics, it's just easier to not worry about it and enclose the entire thing. Some models of RPI had this problem.
sodokuwizard · 3h ago
ah yes to satisfy that world famous market of giga electronics nerds in oakleys
longtimelistnr · 3h ago
Well i know this is sarcastic but have you seen the preferred design language of the Oakley founder? Exposed circuitry is righttt up his alley.
luxuryballs · 2h ago
it sounds like he got in trouble for exposing his circuitry in public
luxuryballs · 2h ago
I was looking at the Ray-Ban version of these for a few minutes before I realized there’s no HUD… I wouldn’t even consider a dev kit for one of these unless I had some kind of ability to add a dragon ball scouter widget to show the power level on the lens…
excalibur · 1h ago
If that's what you want, you can find some pretty good deals on Google Glass on ebay.
paxys · 2h ago
Why did Zuck think it was okay to post a photo of himself wearing them? Does he think his cool looks will drive sales? The little interest I had immediately disappeared after seeing it.
some_random · 1h ago
Do you typically make your tech choices based on who they have modeling them in ads?
542354234235 · 1h ago
The entire history of advertising would indicate that a lot of people do make choices, especially fashion related, based on being modeled by beautiful famous people with established parasocial relationships with their audience.
spiderice · 1h ago
Whether or not we want to admit it, people definitely make tech choices based off how cool the people in the ads look. To deny that would be to deny the effectiveness of marketing.
Apocryphon · 1h ago
Well, when they’re wearables…
mkoryak · 1h ago
hes trying to show off his 100k watch
toephu2 · 41m ago
Really? What watch is that?
foxygen · 1h ago
What is wrong with it?
Workaccount2 · 2h ago
A side note, but it is very unfortunate luck that the pendulum of fashionable eye-wear has swung back towards 80's/90's style thin frame/no frame glasses.
You really need young people to carry tech like this, and needing them to wear millennial fashion from 10 years ago so camera and compute fit will just make it that much harder.
No comments yet
amazingamazing · 2h ago
won't buy these, or any others smart glasses until there's a way to replace the battery. I'm annoy'd enough that it's difficult to do with bluetooth headphones... with my quest 3 at least there's an option to plug it into an external battery, given the traditional use cases.
No comments yet
make3 · 1h ago
I don't think we should normalize pointing cameras at people's faces all the time. I hate these things.
neuralkoi · 38m ago
I agree completely with this comment, but I just want to point out that this cat's been out of the bag for at least the past 10 years.
There's camera's everywhere at this point: every doorbell/garage, every store, every light on the street, even my friend's pet/baby monitors when I visit. I hate it.
robhlt · 39m ago
I agree. The white light these turn on when recording is not enough for the average person to realize recording is happening.
I was visiting a museum yesterday and someone was using these to livestream/record their own (bad) tour. Security stopped someone doing this with their phone earlier, but had no idea what this guy was doing.
dynm · 54m ago
Maybe they have some light to show if they're on. But is everyone supposed to just know that? Pointing a video camera at everyone you talk to is an... interesting social choice. Glasses like these should be designed with a physical mechanisms to cover the cameras.
tomhow · 2h ago
Stub for oftopicness
DHPersonal · 2h ago
The difference between the stylish product shot and the goofy candid is stunning. The glasses look ridiculous on Zuckerberg.
badlucklottery · 2h ago
I think part of the issue is that Zuckerberg is a smaller dude and they're pretty big sunglasses so he has a bit of that "Look! I'm wearing dad's glasses!" thing going on.
gardenhedge · 2h ago
So that's half of men and most women ruled out?
ChrisMarshallNY · 1h ago
Big glasses are actually quite popular with women.
Heavy frames and large lenses tend to compensate for larger noses, and other facial issues (although they won't come out and say that). Clear glasses can really focus on the eyes.
I know a couple of women that have made large, heavy-rimmed glasses into a real fashion statement.
jebarker · 2h ago
Ridiculous seems strong. They’re not my style but I see people making far more surprising fashion choices everyday
Usually I prefer second-hand sources over press-releases, as press-releses tend to be a bit too much navel-gazing and pats on the back.
demosthanos · 2h ago
In general I agree, but The Verge in particular tends to just say exactly what the press release says with less detail. If we're going to do a non-press-release source it should be because they're offering context and information that the company would not willingly choose to provide themselves.
diggan · 2h ago
Yeah, also agree with you in general, if it's the same, doesn't really matter :)
But at least the last paragraph seems to be adding something, although the rest of the article is indeed just a re-hash of the press-release.
> Meta recently signed a multi-year deal with EssilorLuxottica, the parent company behind Ray-Ban, Oakley, and other eyewear brands. The Meta Ray-Bans have sold over two million pairs to date, and EssilorLuxottica recently disclosed that it plans to sell 10 million smart glasses with Meta annually by 2026. “This is our first step into the performance category,” Alex Himel, Meta’s head of wearables, tells me. “There’s more to come.”
No comments yet
add-sub-mul-div · 2h ago
Right, journalism adds commentary and context. People may often think it's bad, or not like or agree with what they read, and conflate that with thinking journalism is bad or forgetting what it fundamentally is and why it's important that it exists. A straight up ad from Facebook would not be better than this.
deafpolygon · 2h ago
Whaaaat the heck is going on in the reflections on Mark Z’s glasses?
foxygen · 1h ago
His wife holding a phone?
newsclues · 2h ago
Oakley quality tanked since luxottica bought them.
Unfortunate.
No comments yet
demosthanos · 3h ago
Somehow we've actually managed to regress from 2013's Google Glass.
Always-on microphone and camera sold by one of the world's sketchiest privacy invaders? Check.
Display that actually takes advantage of the glasses form factor? Nope. Sounds like this could just as easily be the Humane pin.
awongh · 2h ago
Crazy how much more acceptable this is only 12 years later.
People were so angry in 2013.
toast0 · 2h ago
Google glass was a display that was up and to the right of where you want to be looking.
I don't know about everyone, but I found it pretty hard to use. Caveat, I didn't get them fit to me, I was supervising an intern working on a speculative Glass project, and they were fit to him.
AR would be neat, but voice interfaces are acheivable at an approachable cost. I'm not one to talk to a computer, and I wear prescription lenses, so these glasses don't appeal to me, but I can see there's a market there, not sure how big or if Meta can capture it.
demosthanos · 2h ago
Right, I'm not claiming Glass was good, but it at least attempted to use the glasses form factor for something.
toast0 · 56m ago
The camera to capture 'what you see' seems like using the form factor pretty well.
Mic and speakers, too.
Glass attempted a display, but IMHO, it was unusable, so I understand why you would try the same thing with no display. Or the same thing, but mounted on your wrist (Google Wear).
georgeecollins · 2h ago
Well it shows you what was the real problem with glass, it looked dorky. I wish people cared about privacy but in general they don't.
kotaKat · 2h ago
It's one of those times you just want to "OK Glass" the person around you that says "Hey, Meta" with their privacy-invading cameras.
Handy-Man · 2h ago
It's not always on. How do you skeptics always manage to get things wrong to get your point across?
demosthanos · 2h ago
If you can ask "Hey Meta, ..." while holding a golf club and unable to touch a button (which the promo video [0] shows you can) then the mic is always on. It may not always be beaming data to Meta, but that's a matter of trust, which I don't have much of for Meta given their history.
The camera may or may not be always on, but it can be turned on by software activated by the always-on mic (again, demonstrated by the promo video), so it would be best to treat it as though it is.
The “Hey *” (Meta, Siri, Alexa) is typically handled by a simpler mechanism on a short buffer that triggers the proper recording and speech recognition workflow in order to save battery. But if you’re not going to trust the company, then the fact that it responds to Hey Meta shouldn’t make any difference because it could still be quietly recording. The fact that it responds to a wakeup prompt changes nothing.
demosthanos · 1h ago
I'm aware of the mechanism, but that mechanism relies on a mic that is always on.
I agree that the primary issue is that it's a software-controlled microphone with no off switch controlled by software written by Meta. I only emphasized the wake word listening in response to OP's claim that it's not always on when it must be.
meepmorp · 2h ago
how can it respond to voice prompts if it's not listening?
echoangle · 2h ago
The claim was always-on mic and camera. The mic might be always on, the camera doesn’t have to.
demosthanos · 2h ago
I responded to that above. If the mic is always on and controls the camera (both of which are demonstrated in the promo video), any reasonable approach to infosec needs to treat the camera as always on as well.
echoangle · 2h ago
Maybe, but that doesn’t mean that the camera is always on. It’s like saying a person holding an empty gun and a magazine is holding a loaded weapon because they can quickly reload it. It doesn’t really change the effect but it’s still an error.
demosthanos · 2h ago
Whether an empty gun and a magazine counts as a loaded gun varies state-by-state, so the distinction is not as clear-cut as you make it sound. New York State penal code defines a loaded gun as follows:
> 15. "Loaded firearm" means any firearm loaded with ammunition or any
firearm which is possessed by one who, at the same time, possesses a
quantity of ammunition which may be used to discharge such firearm.
So I guess I'm using the New York definition of an always-on camera.
and you trust meta with this? i don’t mean to be crass but that would be crazy.
they have proven over and over and over and over again they are absolutely not trustworthy.
at some point we have to come to grips with the fact that people like zuck, elon, andreeson, and other tech monarchs are openly hostile and despise us when we ask for anything remotely resembling transparency for their companies but repeatedly abuse us and openly scoff at our privacy.
the fact that we collectively don’t understand the repercussions of this really is a bad sign.
i very well may have misunderstood your meaning, tho. i hope so.
I’ve tried the glasses myself, and I’m convinced that wearable eyewear like this will eventually replace the mobile phone. With ongoing advances in miniaturization, it’s only a matter of time before AR and AV are fully integrated into everyday wearables.
I also don't understand how they're used to locate items around the house. Is there some sort of GPS? Or do you mean it helps by virtue of seeing (e.g. prescription)?
AR glasses will be a hit, no doubt, but I don't see what's so special about glasses with a mic, camera and speaker on them. Seems especially for an older person that it would be more useful getting a phone with a screen and pointing at things and seeing it on a display.
Hey Meta, read the text on this label and tell me what it says.
Hey Meta, do you see the keys on the counter?
Hey Meta, can you tell me what is in front of me?
It projects the sound into your ear.
BTW, I have to consciously turn off my cybersecurity mindset when thinking about smart glasses. It's hard not to see all the new attack vectors they introduce.
Once there is an actual usable in-glasses screen, I will agree.
A few years ago I tried someone's smartglasses with a screen. It basically had similar functionality to my first Fitbit: it would show texts, notifications, caller ID.
I really want one of those and went looking, but couldn't find it.
https://www.evenrealities.com/
I think that they've done it, this is Meta's iPod
I would love to try these types of devices but there is no way I'd ever give money to Meta or put my personal information into their systems or encourage my friends and family to do so either.
Hopefully Meta puts in a bunch of R&D to see what works in this space and then someone else (Apple?) just copies it.
We'll need to overhaul the concept of limited liability before we do that though, the thought of someone being left without their eyes because a company goes bankrupt and no-one is at fault is pretty horrifying.
The frame will probably change slightly over time to make them incompatible.
This is probably true.
The rest of your comment is probably not true for most people.
It just depends on how strong your prescription is and how willing the shop/website is to do special orders.
If you are almost blind, then your choice of lenses/frames will be much lower than if you are only slightly blind(most people). Any reputable eyeglass/optician shop should be able to make custom lenses for pretty much any frame. They can't always do the super sleek shades that some people like to wear.
I just sent an old pair of glasses to eyeglasses.com for new lenses. I never considered this to be a big deal.
Ray Ban does it for their Meta glasses, but Lensology can handle stronger prescription lenses.
I see this world all the time at the beach; lots of people wear sunglasses there.
With that said, I don’t think these can replace phones until they’re quite a lot smaller and lighter. And to make it worse, you’d need at least two pairs - regular and sun. Possibly three if you’re someone who regularly uses safety glasses.
Meta says they will open it up though.
That said, I'm not sure I'd want smart glasses. Being stuck on a computer for work, I try to take some time every day to be completely free of digital things. It's hard enough to do that with a smart phone in my pocket vying for my attention. I imagine it would be only harder with smart glasses over my eyeballs.
Those things on glasses and I ditch my phone immediately.
Now I'm a Ray Ban Meta enthusiasts; have 2 pair and 1st since Oct 2023. I wear them almost daily and like without my phone on me I can take pics, vids and ask for the time. Look forward to when there's 5G built in they'll be able to do a lot more, but still can't take selfies and any replacement needs to be able too!
Whatever Open AI is cooking up with Jonny Ives a pin you wear with a hologram that can take selfies or something out there that takes selfies too is the replacement. Tho my bet is Open AI is just working on an AI phone where it's like the movie H.E.R. and almost everything is done from your lock screen including H.E.R. taking the best selfies of you (get u to the best lighting) or something mobile like that.
I'm yet to be convinced these are useful and not just another way to inject ads directly into eyeballs.
How are these "smart glasses" legal in places like Germany where you (supposedly) can't even have a dashcam?
I’m personally more excited about the Mentra Live glasses, which are fully programmable with AugmentOS.
I discovered goodr recently and they are great. 25$ high quality sunglasses that I can actually trust have real UV ratings. Seeing people wear ray bans or oakleys is really funny
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GI_glasses
[2] - https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=glassholes
No comments yet
Titanium glasses are lightweight because a very minimal amount of material is used. This is possible for regular glasses because you can make them with a ~1mm cross-section. When you want to put electronics inside of them, you need much more material.
Edit: Just checked, it does exist.
Between the weight of material and the electronics, I don't really see anything approaching the feel that someone that discerning would want.
I guess the problem is can you extrude and form something so small with the precision and metallurgical properties you want to maintain. You probably don't want to just cast it in the final shape, right?
I assume the poster above imagined the something inside could just be voids, like a tiny aircraft. But yes, some kind of low density filler could also add some stability in areas you don't want mass metal but also don't have electronics or battery "cargo".
You really need young people to carry tech like this, and needing them to wear millennial fashion from 10 years ago so camera and compute fit will just make it that much harder.
No comments yet
No comments yet
There's camera's everywhere at this point: every doorbell/garage, every store, every light on the street, even my friend's pet/baby monitors when I visit. I hate it.
I was visiting a museum yesterday and someone was using these to livestream/record their own (bad) tour. Security stopped someone doing this with their phone earlier, but had no idea what this guy was doing.
Heavy frames and large lenses tend to compensate for larger noses, and other facial issues (although they won't come out and say that). Clear glasses can really focus on the eyes.
I know a couple of women that have made large, heavy-rimmed glasses into a real fashion statement.
Not sure why theverge gets linked so much here.
But at least the last paragraph seems to be adding something, although the rest of the article is indeed just a re-hash of the press-release.
> Meta recently signed a multi-year deal with EssilorLuxottica, the parent company behind Ray-Ban, Oakley, and other eyewear brands. The Meta Ray-Bans have sold over two million pairs to date, and EssilorLuxottica recently disclosed that it plans to sell 10 million smart glasses with Meta annually by 2026. “This is our first step into the performance category,” Alex Himel, Meta’s head of wearables, tells me. “There’s more to come.”
No comments yet
Unfortunate.
No comments yet
Always-on microphone and camera sold by one of the world's sketchiest privacy invaders? Check.
Display that actually takes advantage of the glasses form factor? Nope. Sounds like this could just as easily be the Humane pin.
People were so angry in 2013.
I don't know about everyone, but I found it pretty hard to use. Caveat, I didn't get them fit to me, I was supervising an intern working on a speculative Glass project, and they were fit to him.
AR would be neat, but voice interfaces are acheivable at an approachable cost. I'm not one to talk to a computer, and I wear prescription lenses, so these glasses don't appeal to me, but I can see there's a market there, not sure how big or if Meta can capture it.
Mic and speakers, too.
Glass attempted a display, but IMHO, it was unusable, so I understand why you would try the same thing with no display. Or the same thing, but mounted on your wrist (Google Wear).
The camera may or may not be always on, but it can be turned on by software activated by the always-on mic (again, demonstrated by the promo video), so it would be best to treat it as though it is.
[0] https://about.fb.com/news/2025/06/introducing-oakley-meta-gl...
I agree that the primary issue is that it's a software-controlled microphone with no off switch controlled by software written by Meta. I only emphasized the wake word listening in response to OP's claim that it's not always on when it must be.
> 15. "Loaded firearm" means any firearm loaded with ammunition or any firearm which is possessed by one who, at the same time, possesses a quantity of ammunition which may be used to discharge such firearm.
So I guess I'm using the New York definition of an always-on camera.
https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/265.00
they have proven over and over and over and over again they are absolutely not trustworthy.
at some point we have to come to grips with the fact that people like zuck, elon, andreeson, and other tech monarchs are openly hostile and despise us when we ask for anything remotely resembling transparency for their companies but repeatedly abuse us and openly scoff at our privacy.
the fact that we collectively don’t understand the repercussions of this really is a bad sign.
i very well may have misunderstood your meaning, tho. i hope so.