Post

Look, on the one hand they allow perverts to covertly film your children and upload the footage to pedophelia forums. On the other hand, they can save someone half a second by projecting in front of them information they'd otherwise have to glance at their phone to get. What's a regulator to do?!

Folks, I'm begging you. "They can be useful to people with disabilities though!" Yes they can, which is why we should heavily regulate them. A wearable designed to help the deaf hear or partially visually impaired people see absolutely doesn't need video recording or Facebook-linked facial ID!

I sometimes wonder about these "this technology really helps people with disabilities" claims that constantly get repeated by marketing people without disabilities and seemingly without actually asking anybody disabled. Could it be that the claims themselves are just a tiny bit ableist?

I am open to the idea that a wearable display could be useful to the deaf. It's just a completely different conversation to Meta Rayban Pervert Goggle collabs. An AR-15 might be a helpful crutch for someone with a broken leg but...

Didn't we already do this once with Google Glass and most of San Francisco coalesced around the idea that if you were wearing them the solution was that you got belted in the face the minute you walked in the bar?

The way resistance was mobilized the first time, though, was to go after how dweeby they looked, and people who want these things responded, so now we have ones that are approaching stylish. That simultaneously makes them much more dangerous and makes it harder to push back on them.

I really loved a line on here that said that at least by people wearing these glasses you can spot who is a "Specs Offender"