[ryandrake]

That's one of the perpetually-SciFi use cases of Augmented Reality: You're walking around with AR glasses and whenever someone comes into your field of view, your display hovers over them their name, their job, when you last talked to them, what their hobbies are, and so on. A huge privacy nightmare, but useful for people who can't recall names and details about people they've met.

[egeozcan]

I don't think it'd be a privacy nightmare if it used private databases created by the user. Like a personal CRM, something like Monica, but with a real-time touch.

[avarun]

Wouldn't be from a legal sense, but the societal implications of technology like that becoming commonplace are still immense. The limitations of human memory provide safety in a way today that would quickly erode if everybody could remember exactly everything that's ever been said or seen around them.

[Breza]

I agree with you. I had a bit of a falling out with a friend and wanted to check in on her a few years later. The immediately preceding messages in Messenger were the largely-forgotten unpleasantness. Quite awkward. It really drove home how much of a blessing forgetting every little slight is.

[Cyph0n]

For an interesting exploration of this, I suggest watching the Black Mirror episode “The Entire History of You” (S1E3).

[nindalf]

Honestly one of the best episodes of TV I’ve seen, simply because it challenged one of my core beliefs. I’ve always struggled with a poor memory and I’ve tried all kinds of systems to improve retention and recall. This episode challenged the benefits of remembering everything pretty well and made me reconsider.

[chambored]

Safety from what exactly?

[avarun]

"You said X 3 years ago, but now you said, which is the opposite of X. How dare you?" is one class of problems. Another is that you can learn quite a bit more about a person than they wished to actually divulge to you if you're able to capture and study their exact behaviors over a long enough stretch of time.

[twerkmonsta]

Wait, why are people not allowed to change their mind on something? If anything this would make it more explicit and understandable when people did change their mind on something.

[Viliam1234]

> Wait, why are people not allowed to change their mind on something?

In theory, changing your mind should signal that you are capable of thinking about things, and changing your mind based on what you learn.

In practice, most people's opinions are determined by peer pressure. You believe X because the important people around you believe X.

From that perspective, changing your mind means that your loyalty has changed. Previously you tried to be friends with people who believed X, now you are trying to be friends with people who believe Y. No one likes a traitor.

[ziddoap]

>Wait, why are people not allowed to change their mind on something

I don't think parent comment is suggesting that people aren't allowed to change their mind.

They are pointing out that many people yell "hypocrite!" when someone does change their mind. It's already a phenomenon on social media where people will dig through someone's post history and drag them through the coals, using previous stances on a topic in an attempt to discredit the current stance. Parent is suggesting that this problem would be exacerbated.

[groggo]

Still privacy nightmare and creepy. There's plenty of public info on people, that once collected and assembled into one place is basically stalking. Not saying it's not a cool idea though :)

[Aeolun]

This is no different from my photo’s app automatically labelling faces right?

I’m fairly certain the vision pro could do it right now.

[rasz]

Install our virtual keyboard/virtual screen saver/dancing baby/flashlight app

/small print: requires read all, send all permissions

[HKH2]

And instead of just shrugging it off, you could tag strangers that annoy you and end up with a giant list of grudges against a whole host of people. The false positives (e.g. twins and doppelgangers) should make it interesting.

[dylan604]

Take it to the next step towards Black Mirror where the AR shadows out people you've blocked and then mutes their voice so you can't hear them

[earthnail]

That would make for fantastic comedic situations when you then physically bump into them after you erased them from your AR vision xD.

[EwanG]

Which feeds into Saint Motel's song "You're Nobody Til Somebody Wants You Dead" which has a bit about how the list just grows and grows until it's everyone you've ever known...

[pmarreck]

I had a product idea for an AR app that would do this for everyone who's opted into it. So for real-world networking events, you might choose to disclose some things about yourself but only for that venue and only for some window of time for example.

I never built it, but it's perfectly possible to do.

The genius idea IMHO was the business model- If you were into certain things you wanted to keep private from most but only wanted to disclose to other people who were into those same things, you could pay a fee, and it would then show you others who were in that "market" (of ideas, drugs, sex, whatever). (It might only ask you to pay it if it found someone nearby who matched. And then it would automatically notify the other person unless you paid an ADDITIONAL fee... Not sure about the latter idea, but it was an idea.)

The only issue is everyone holding their phone up in front of their faces.

[piva00]

> The genius idea IMHO was the business model- If you were into certain things you wanted to keep private from most but only wanted to disclose to other people who were into those same things, you could pay a fee

> The only issue is everyone holding their phone up in front of their faces.

No, the genius idea is its major issue, just by paying you gain access to private data (people's preferences) without any kind of chain of trust to make sure that someone is actually part of the group ("market" in your terms) for which they want access to.

By paying you could know that someone around you is looking for cocaine, or is willing to sell sexual services, or is looking to match other people from the same gender, or holds a certain political view against an authoritarian government, etc.

[pmarreck]

I answered this in a sibling comment. You could acquire credibility in a particular preference from the network over time.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39482786

[bluefirebrand]

Sounds great, I'm going to make a "credibility as a service" startup and we'll find ways to farm whatever score in whatever fields you want.

And you can be sure government agencies will do the same.

[pmarreck]

Odd that you think this would happen for my little idea when this hasn't happened for credit cards which is possibly the largest financial incentive possible. To my knowledge, I can't buy a credit score

[bluefirebrand]

Finance is a heavily regulated industry, so people trust credit providers with things like social insurance numbers, which are not transferrable between people

Your service would probably not be able to tie so uniquely to an individual, so there would be ways for people to transfer it.

Or just hire a company to pretend to be you for a while.

[HKH2]

How would you stop spies or undercover cops trying to infiltrate the "market"?

[pmarreck]

Or people who want to "out" gay people. I know.

That would be a good argument over not permitting a unilateral notification of a match (which, at the very least, I wanted to make very expensive and thus profitable, if it's allowed at all). If it notified both people 100% of the time, and one of you was a possible impostor, you could report them. And from a legal standpoint, showing interest in a market doesn't make you guilty. And, you could possibly also build "cred" in one of these tagged "markets" by getting cred from others who say you're legit, and that information would be revealed at the same time (possibly at your discretion).

[HKH2]

Makes sense. You still might get honeypots though; could you make cred work more generally with trust between friends, friends of friends etc. without compromising the markets?

[pmarreck]

Well, are there other markets where the same cred has worked? AFAIK, when Silk Road was a thing, one's cred on there was protected and valuable.

[HKH2]

True. I didn't mean to imply that it doesn't work.

[chowells]

So your genius idea is to get people to pay to put themselves on a future blackmail list when your data is leaked/stolen/sold? I have to say, it is a kind of evil genius.

[visarga]

Basically the Slack experience. You don't need to remember people, you can see your past interactions right there.