They're a good excuse to the punch the wearer in the face.

> They're the ultimate spy tool that will allow Meta to see exactly what you do every minute of every day. They won't need to guess anymore. And you can be absolutely sure they're going to sell this information to anyone who asks.

That's not the problem. Serious Facebook users are likely monitored sufficiently by their phones which get activated whenever they do something interesting. The thing is that now, because these will be always on cameras, these will be able to monitor everyone else as well. There's the real market. Google is evil, for sure, but kind of lawful-evil. Google would recognize that someone else's conversation, recorded with google glass, was really that person's data and couldn't be used for marketing. Facebook wi

Perhaps more troublingly; they'll allow facebook to see what the people you see do.

My good-faith advice to anyone who is considering letting zuck into their refrigerator just to solve the crushing problem of what to cook with available ingredients or whatever would be "probably not worth it"; but that's ultimately a them problem one way or the other.

The trouble is that much of the pitch here is that you are supposed to provide footage as you wander around; merrily making the you problem everyone else's problem as you do so. And, yes, 'no expectation of privacy, etc, etc.' but there's a fairly obvious distinction between "in principle, it wouldn't be illegal to hire a PI to follow you around with a camera while you are in public", which involves a typically prohibitive cost in practice and "you paid them to upload geolocated footage, nice going asshole", where the economics of surveillance change pretty radically.

If people want to outource their thinking to facebook themselves I'd have to be feeling fairly paternalistic to intervene; but given that the normalization of these is, pretty explicitly, about facebook having eyes on everyone I can only hope that 'glasshole' continues to be a genuine social risk to any adopters.

Having used machine translation for years, I am well aware that it screws up. Even so, it's very useful and you get used to the mistakes it makes and learn to interpret them.

That said Google's English transcription is better than a human now, and IME is close to flawless. Meta's is probably a lot worse, but the potential is there.

> I've seen a number of medical consultant and doctors use smart glasses at work before while gathering sensitive medical information, seeing naked bodies or just looking at medical records. This should not be happening.

That's addressing the wrong problem. Even if the doctor themselves weren't using the products, the security guard or cleaner or even just a lost patient can have to come into the room when they are doing something. That's normally handled by the doctor ordering the person out immediately and the person acting embarrassed and not reporting what they saw. Now Facebook will have the whole recording and anything the camera saw, even for one frame, is recorded and available forever.

These products should be force

This sounds like the (niche) example given in TFS about the blind guy getting refused taxi service. It's great that there's a way to record such incidents, but I'd imagine you could do so for a lot less than the $800 price. It strikes me that a small camera, with an SD card or similar attached to some glasses (or some other worn item, I guess) would solve for both use-cases quite happily. I dare say the Chinese could manufacture something like that for about $20.

So as I say, it's great someone's found their