Hacker Neue

Preferences
demosthanos parent
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
Crazy how much more acceptable this is only 12 years later.

People were so angry in 2013.

toast0
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 OP
Right, I'm not claiming Glass was good, but it at least attempted to use the glasses form factor for something.
toast0
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
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
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
It's not always on. How do you skeptics always manage to get things wrong to get your point across?
demosthanos OP
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.

[0] https://about.fb.com/news/2025/06/introducing-oakley-meta-gl...

elondaits
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 OP
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
how can it respond to voice prompts if it's not listening?
echoangle
The claim was always-on mic and camera. The mic might be always on, the camera doesn’t have to.
demosthanos OP
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
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 OP
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.

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/265.00

toofy
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.

This item has no comments currently.