[mullingitover]

> Many of these services, which use simple tools like drills and dental probes to disable the recording light, have been advertised on Meta's own platforms. There are also dozens of videos on YouTube offering DIY tutorials.

This right here is why these stupid camera-on-face products are non-starters outside of very niche applications. They're never going to the next iPhone because people will assume you're secretly recording and there's a non-zero chance someone is going (rightfully) get freaked out and suddenly make it a very serious problem for you. Like did these product people ever talk to the average parent from the midwest and ask what kinds of violence they'd gleefully mete out on someone they believed to be covertly recording their children?

It's a scenario that makes these things unthinkable for public use.

Beyond this, everyone already has an excellent camera on their phone and there just isn't a need to have a face camera on all the time.

These products seem like a very easy IQ test for product managers and investors and yet huge market cap companies are failing it.

[johnnyanmac]

I'll admit, I thought some 15 years of constant surveillance would get people desensitized to the idea of always being recorded, so there was a non-zero chance that proper smart glasses could succeed where Google Glass failed.

But I guess time is a circle and personal surveillance is much easier to rebel against than the government. Or perhaps the places desensitized (older folk who don't understand the tech, but are a louder votwe) aren't the same as the audience targeted for these glasses (youth, starting in tech hubs).

Not that I care about making these things succeed, but it seems japan might be a good example on how to enforce consent. Cameras are required to have a loud, unmutable shutter. Perhaps such regulations could have a mandatory red light?

[digitaltrees]

Since when did zuck care about how users feel. They intentionally cause anxiety and depression in teens because it made engagement go up. They want the glasses in the world for ambient data collection.

[cwillu]

The thought is that he should care because it affects our willingness to tolerate him and his.

[digitaltrees]

He had a product with the most product market fit ever. He thinks everything he does will have the same user tolerance for his brutalist disrespect for humanity. Thats why everything else he tries to build fails so he has to buy the competition.

[johnnyanmac]

His product fit relied on doing the dirty work behind the shadows to make his company worth trillions of dollars, but he's so obsessed with being a front-facing personality when he simply specced low in charisma. He is fundamentally not going to be the person who will convince anyone to put anything on their face.

[digitaltrees]

I have 4 different types of smart glasses. I feel visceral aversion about the meta glasses because of passed abuses of data.

[MengerSponge]

I'm curious what those conversations in Meta sound like:

A> People are calling our omnipresent surveillance technology "Pervert glasses"

B> Are the people who wear them perverts?

A> Most probably aren't.