It’s wild to me that Ray Ban chose to immolate their brand like this.
this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2026
302 points (98.7% liked)
TechTakes
2705 readers
76 users here now
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Long term brand image is worthless. Number must go up this quarter, even if the world burns down. ~~Especially burn down the world~~
Zuckerfuck is absolute cancer, but the even sadder part is how many losers buy this shit. Shame.
We had to ban these at my workplace.
They were already prohibited due to our existing mobile policies, but we had to especially ban them whenever someone brought them in.
Did you already know they were creepy, or did they out themselves?
I imagine Andrew brought them on day 1
Someone found the glasses charging. I don't know the individual, I can't even remember their name, and I've never interacted with them. As far as I am aware, it's a simple manner of not allowing someone to have a camera strapped to their head when working.
I'll give them the benefit of the doubt, they were a foreign national who claimed they needed to use them for translation purposes. However, such an excuse can in theory be used by someone trying to commit espionage, so we cannot tolerate it. It was just recommended to their department to provide translated materials to help them grasp work-related terminology.
Metas way to get AI training data is these glasses, palantir is flock cameras, Google is their existing inventory of video from mapping the entire fucking world, Musk has Tesla vehicles, they all have a means to watch the world and feed it to AI. Many have user data from all our devices and our online behaviors that can extrapolate and deduce what reality is.
We're legit fucked if these companies continue to operate in private, secrecy, and zero enforced return of value for he public well-being.
Zuckerberg is creepy so this follows. We are talking about a guy who would walk around his startup office with a samurai sword pretending to chop his employees with it. And a guy who deliberately got Julius Caesar’s haircut. And a guy whose original version of Facebook was a platform on which college students could rate the attractiveness of female college students.
The Social Network gives great insight into just how terrible and awkward he really is. Plus Jesse Eisenberg knocks it out of the park.
Zusk will later introduce an "off" feature for 10 bucks a month.
(it will still record everything surreptitiously)
10 bucks each time you turn it off
Governments should ban this crap. Too bad that they are in bed with Big Tech.
Sometimes literally.
I don't condone violence but,...
Actually, no, I do condone violence against these pricks. Zuck, Bezos, Musk & Co. deserve to be hung by an angry mob.
Ugh, this company is totally fucking creepy! If only there were a way to disrupt these glasses using readily available electronics...
There's an Android app that will constantly scan for their Bluetooth signature in the background and alert you.
I have this app. I work with a douche who wears these (despite then being banned), and this app didn't pick them up.
The app didn't detect the glasses that it was solely designed to detect??
Not in my case, no.
That must be a huge battery killer.
Nah, if you have Bluetooth on your phone is already doing it.
Basically this. The polling rate and client interrogation behavior can often be pushed to a far more aggressive stance than the usual defaults, but only in foreground mode on most mobile OSes.
I have it installed on mine & haven't noticed any difference.
I just bought new glasses and got an IR-blocking lens coating that's supposed to thwart facial recognition from things like these and Flock cameras and whatnot. It's not active disruption via electronics, but it is a countermeasure...
Countermeasures are good, despite them not being active...It's important to disrupt these terrible techs whenever possible!
They also make hats with IR LEDs that blind the cameras.
I thought IR only applies to night vision or low light modes, which not all cameras even use.
most surveillance cameras, including the ones being discussed in Meta glasses, just use regular optical sensors for well illuminated environments.
wouldn't IR blocking be completely useless when theres no Infrared LEDs projecting at you?
Oh, boy, Rapist Glasses
There’s a UK Parliament petition to “Introduce an immediate ban on the sale and promotion of smart glasses”. If you’re in the UK, you might want to sign it. [UK Parliament]
Given Parliament's track record, they'll probably respond by banning glasses that don't have cameras, but I still endorse this
@BlueMonday1984 @dgerard don't be silly, they will ban children from having glasses.
Isn't UK's usually problem the other way around, they use "Protecting the Children"^tm^ as an excuse to ban sensible things or take away privacy from adults? This would be a first, taking away something from Children to protect the adults.
@BlueMonday1984
> petition to “Introduce an immediate ban on the sale and promotion of smart glasses"
This seems like kind of a knee jerk response. How are "smart" glasses defined? Could such a ban also limit privacy-respecting digital facewear? When covering protests for Indymedia, I would have loved a wearable camera.
If the only thing that makes these different from carrying a "smart" phone is the always-on camera, maybe it would be better to propose regulation specific to that?
aka, Portable Flock cameras.
I've been calling them meat based flock cameras.
Meat Flocker.
You really should make it be a thing.
I don't get why these things even need cameras ?
For mass data collection obviously
"influencer" trash
@dgerard so...these camera's are recording without a notification light?
Thats...that has to be illegal...
When do we invent scanner darkly rorschack shit?