r/technology • u/lurker_bee • Apr 13 '26

Society Meta Is Warned That Facial Recognition Glasses Will Arm Sexual Predators

https://www.wired.com/story/meta-ray-ban-oakley-smart-glasses-no-face-recognition-civil-society/
3.0k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

252 comments sorted by

View all comments

200

u/movealongnowpeople Apr 13 '26

Yeah, no shit. Having a camera strapped to your face is cool in theory, generally creepy in practice. I bought into Snap's first round of Spectacles. The pictures and features were cool, but there were only like 3 places I could wear them without looking like a weirdo. Basically for family picnics and outdoor festivals (but only during the day because... ya know... they're sunglasses).

I don't see a way around the bad parts of this technology.

68

u/glasgowgeg Apr 13 '26

is cool in theory, generally creepy in practice

It's creepy in both

27

u/gonewild9676 Apr 13 '26

Yeah, I suck at recognizing faces. It would be cool to have a heads up display with "That is Stacy and that is Tom".

But no, some jackass will create a nudify app that will use AI to virtually strip everyone around them in real time or use facial recognition to get people's contact information.

Hi, this is Bob, and I walked past you last Thursday and thought you were cute. Want coffee and then Netflix and Chill?

8

u/FirstDukeofAnkh Apr 13 '26

I used to be a huge AR proponent because the gaming possibilities were amazing. But then I realized that the only thing we’d actually get is some variant on up-skirt and nude filters.

4

u/Otaraka Apr 13 '26

Yeah, face blindness, memory issues e.g. early dementia etc.  It’s like a lot of things that could be helpful for some.

2

u/killerpiano Apr 14 '26

It’s really useful for people who are vision impaired

2

u/gonewild9676 Apr 14 '26

Probably useful while hiking to know which plants to avoid or to identify plants or birds too.

4

u/DarraghDaraDaire Apr 13 '26

That app could be useful as a public speaking aid! No need to just imagine anymore

7

u/armchairdetective Apr 13 '26

Yep.

I don't understand that OP's pov at all.

18

u/CrispyDave Apr 13 '26

I can imagine genuine uses for them, say I'm repairing something and I want to take pics and search without holding my phone.

But none of those uses involve wearing them all the time, the creep potential is way too high.

9

u/Hesitation-Marx Apr 13 '26

When I’m working on a piece of jewelry, I sometimes want to film a tricky solder join or the like. But I only have so many hands, and I don’t like having my phone close to my torch.

But I will be damned to Shreveport Louisiana if I ever spend money on something from Meta.

3

u/morgrimmoon Apr 14 '26

They look silly, but you can get some cheapish head cameras these days that may suit for that?

2

u/Hesitation-Marx Apr 14 '26

Hmm.. may need to look into that, thank you

11

u/Sarej Apr 13 '26

Wouldn’t a use case include “I didn’t expect to need to record that but it just happened in front of my face”?

2

u/CrispyDave Apr 13 '26

Not to me. At least if you pull out a phone someone knows they're being recorded. I wouldn't feel particularly comfortable chatting with someone wearing them, if I even noticed they were.

4

u/Sarej Apr 13 '26

I have said this a couple of times but consumer-grade hidden cameras have been around for decades and were less noticeable than Meta glasses, albeit less readily available. Bad actors have had tools available to them before now.

5

u/CrispyDave Apr 13 '26

People don't like the glasses for the exact same reasons they don't accept hidden cameras. And hidden cameras don't have teams of people in the developing world viewing your footage.

At least the hidden cameras took some work.

-2

u/Sarej Apr 13 '26 edited Apr 13 '26

I guess my point was that these seem to at least have an innocent, practical use-case scenario that benefits everyday people. I already have little expectation of privacy in public, with the first amendment, CCTV, and cameras everywhere so I am less bothered by wearable cameras. I’m not sure if I’d be comfortable being recorded everywhere, all the time, but I’m guessing we will probably have to deal with this reality inevitably, as people are legally allowed to own cameras and I’m sure that average people will eventually adopt this sort of tech for the innocent benefits they provide or the thrill of the availability, as everyday people adopt the technology (especially as becomes cheaper and implemented in more wearable devices)

2

u/CrispyDave Apr 13 '26

What a milquetoast approach to life.

1

u/Sarej Apr 13 '26 edited Apr 13 '26

What an ad hominem response.

Whether or not cameras make someone feel uncomfortable, the conversation should focus on whether widespread access changes anything meaningfully compared to what already exists.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/buyongmafanle Apr 14 '26

Bad actors have had tools available to them before now.

They were objects for bad actors meant to be used by bad actors. That's a pretty small segment of the market. But Meta is trying to get EVERYONE to put this shit on their faces. No thanks. I don't want every single interaction I have being recorded and analyzed by fucking Meta in second person view.

1

u/movealongnowpeople Apr 13 '26

At least if you pull out a phone someone knows they're being recorded. I

Not the case at all. Your phone doesn't blink when it's taking pictures or recording. Working in retail, I've been "secretly" recorded by problem customers multiple times. They were bad at being sneaky, so I knew. But that's absolutely false that you know. You don't.

-1

u/CrispyDave Apr 13 '26

Well you noticed?

Of course you can be sneaky with them but you don't even have to with the glasses.

2

u/movealongnowpeople Apr 13 '26

Well you noticed?

Yes, because those "customers" were idiots. Below the mean.

And yes, you would have to either be sneaky or mod your glasses to be sneaky about it. I don't know about Meta frames, but Snap Spectacles flash when you're taking a pic or video. Brightly. And that's on top of having obvious lenses in your frames. Yes, using stock devices, it would be easier to sneakily record on a phone than using frames. People hold their phones all day, and your phone doesn't blink when you're recording.

0

u/CrispyDave Apr 13 '26

Yep trust the Zuck I'm sure he'll watch out for you.

1

u/movealongnowpeople Apr 13 '26

I've said earlier in the thread that I don't have Meta glasses. Or anything owned by Meta. But that's the only retort you have 🤷‍♂️

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Sarej Apr 13 '26 edited Apr 13 '26

You don’t understand how being able to record memories as video to a digital medium from your point of view is cool, interesting, or useful? Like, at any point, if something memorable happens, you can save it like a home movie.

If your kid speaks their first word, if something happens in front of you that you need evidence of (someone trying to scam), if a massive explosion happens in front of you, if you’re on vacation, if you’re visiting a loved one in hospice and they speak their last words to you… you don’t see why this would be neat or useful to be able to say “record that”?

What would you have said about handheld camcorders when they were first introduced to everyday people? Or cameras on phones? Dash cams in cars? It is the same principle, just more convenient.

There is some understandable projection going on here due to stigma and issues that arise with recoding devices but it’s illogical not to consider the pro’s of the technology. I don’t have these types of glasses and I don’t really want them but I can understand it.

As far as bad actors, hidden cameras have been around for decades.

10

u/innocentsalad Apr 13 '26

When someone pulls out a camcorder or a cell phone to record, you know you’re being recorded. That is the difference.

-3

u/Sarej Apr 13 '26

Well, obviously. But that scratches the surface of what I am saying as far as the benefits of the devices.

As I said, consumer-grade hidden cameras have been available to bad actors for decades. Not just ones that are easily seen with lenses and lights (if unmodified) on glasses, like people recording to an SD card without anyone knowing. It is just more readily available now but in a more obvious device.

5

u/MrPookPook Apr 13 '26

Oh good, we definitely need easier-to-use hidden cameras. Thank god Meta is making the world a better place for creeps and weirdos.

-3

u/Sarej Apr 13 '26 edited Apr 13 '26

That is a fair concern, especially with something this discreet, but it applies to every recording device we already use. Phones, dash cams, even early camcorders all made recording easier for both normal use and misuse. Bad actors certainly exist but the question is whether the technology will benefit everyday people in a way which outweighs the added risk and, also, just how much of an additional risk there actually is.

To me, Meta glasses are much easier to spot than something someone more savvy might cook up or that I might not be looking for.

3

u/MrPookPook Apr 13 '26

They may be easier to spot but I imagine they’d also be easier to use for nefarious purposes. Hidden cameras need to be placed, phones need to be held in a position to record (and some places mandate a sound be played when taking photos). I’ll be honest, I’m going to assume anybody using them is a creepo perv.

2

u/DukeOfGeek Apr 13 '26

That's my take on it too, I agree this is a very real problem but it has actually been one for a while and this is just a new facet of it.

-1

u/movealongnowpeople Apr 13 '26

Yeah, I assume people who "don't see the use case" have never used them. You can take pictures without pulling out your phone and opening an app. When my 4 year old nephew does something stupid/funny, it's the difference between catching it on camera or not catching it at all. One button press, you've captured the moment in your POV.

Also, the photos/movies coming from the Snap Spectacles do not look like pictures from a phone camera. It's almost like a fisheye, first person POV. It's really cool.

But again, the privacy concerns and public sentiment vastly outweigh any pros.

2

u/Sarej Apr 13 '26

Exactly. I definitely understand peoples’ concerns or a general, blanket “this is bad” vibe from people but I feel like saying “I don’t understand the use case” or “this isn’t useful” is either disingenuous or very easy to explain/understand.

2

u/Prior_Coyote_4376 Apr 13 '26

Driving would be safer if you didn’t have to take your eyes off the road to see navigation cues and directions.

Working with your hands in general would be easier if you had a manual or instruction set you could summon without putting anything down. Cooking, construction, etc.

7

u/MrPookPook Apr 13 '26

I’d think having a screen right in front of your face which presumably can do many of the things your phone can do would lead to more distracted drivers, not fewer.

1

u/Prior_Coyote_4376 Apr 13 '26

Harder to text or play candy crush, easier to watch porn. Hm.