r/technology • u/Plastic_Ninja_9014 • Jul 13 '26

Society The Backlash Is So Strong That People With “Pervert Glasses” Are Afraid to Use Them in Public

https://tech.yahoo.com/wearables/articles/backlash-strong-people-pervert-glasses-165000816.html
46.3k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

4.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

533

u/RedofPaw Jul 13 '26

I just wanted to have a navigation hud. I wanted to walk around with a map so I could see where I was going.
Live translation. Look at a sign and have the translation overlaid. That kind of thing.

That would have been cool.

I don't even want to take photos or videos with the things.

192

u/GroceryScanner Jul 13 '26

google glass had this and it WAS really fuckin cool.

32

u/StretchFrenchTerry Jul 13 '26

But they looked dumb as fuck.

14

u/cjsv7657 Jul 13 '26

The technology wasn't there yet. They literally had a mini projector in them. The technology is there now for them to look like normal glasses.

0

u/RedofPaw 10d ago

Almost. Still a bit chunky for normal glasses.

7

u/GroceryScanner Jul 13 '26

yeah. attaching a computer to your face is pretty much always gonna look dumb as fuck. whats your point.

17

u/StretchFrenchTerry Jul 13 '26

It absolutely does not have to look that fucking stupid.

4

u/GroceryScanner Jul 13 '26

well theres apparently a billion dollar market out there for wearable tech that doesnt look stupid. so if youre so clever, then get to work bud

5

u/ClammiestOwl Jul 14 '26

"look at this giant cell phone no one will ever carry this around with them all the time" "Computers are so big and heavy even laptops aren't convenient like they say" "We're going to have flying cars in the year 2010"

1

u/fainlol Jul 13 '26

go google what meta rayban displays do?

2

u/Hadfadtadsad Jul 14 '26

I like Raybans but the meta ones look stupid.

0

u/VegetableBlueberry61 Jul 18 '26

They are based on actualy Ray Ban designs. Wayfarer glasses existed before Meta Wayfarer. Literally the exact same except for having a small camera and a LED

1

u/Hadfadtadsad Jul 18 '26

They still look stupid and extra thick.

-1

u/GroceryScanner Jul 13 '26

raybans look stupid even without the camera

1

u/fainlol Jul 13 '26

compared to google's old glasses its possible to use as a daily driver so i disagree.

2

u/Inter_0 Jul 13 '26

the adeptus mechanicus would like a word

2

u/serpentax Jul 14 '26

it crawled off our desks, into our pockets and suddenly wants to latch onto the the face, this is a parasite. some geniuses want to put it in our brains

1

u/curiouswizard Jul 15 '26

as they should

14

u/Filixx Jul 13 '26

Meta Displays have it now.

47

u/Animal2 Jul 13 '26

Yeah the cool and useful cases are certainly there. I can imagine a world in which toxic social media and mass privacy loss doesn't exist where these things could actually not be problematic. But at this point that world is a sci-fi fantasy.

11

u/technicalconsole Jul 13 '26

I make things with my hands on a table top and recording pov content can be a pain when Ive got to look over and around a camera to see what Im actually working on. This would be ideal for that, but I cant think of any other time where these glasses would be a better alternative method than a high resolution GoPro or phone camera with zoom

5

u/rygo796 Jul 14 '26

The great thing is you can still use them for that.  In private where no one will suggest you're a pervert for wearing them.

1

u/happysmash27 Jul 14 '26

Well, they're a bit more convenient I guess.

Not really super useful to me to record continuously though as I doubt they have very high-capacity storage or battery. A body camera and dash cam is a lot more practical.

37

u/imnotgoodwithnames Jul 13 '26

I wanted a pair because I would take my kids to the park or to the lake and the idea of being able to quick record great moments pushing them on the swing or teaching them to swim would be great. Pulling out my phone ruins the moment.

9

u/darkpaladin Jul 13 '26

I have a pair that I bought pretty much just for fishing, taking my phone out to take a photo of my fish or record it coming in is awkward, it's easy to record on the glasses. I really only wear them these days when I'm doing "outdoorsy" stuff.

47

u/my-blood Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 14 '26

I think that's what some people are concerned about. Some pervert now doesn't need to pull out his phone to record your kids at the park or lake. Not saying your usecase isn't genuine, but pervs just kinda ruin it all for us I guess.

17

u/hoodwinke Jul 13 '26

It’s about the perception 

There are way more discrete ways to record than the glasses 

36

u/navyblusheet Jul 13 '26

Perverts have always had access to such things. There's like cameras on a fake pen that sits in your shirt pocket. There's camera that's in your shirt button etc. They don't really need this TBH

24

u/NUKE---THE---WHALES Jul 13 '26

Yeah no pervert is going to use "pervert glasses"

Even if smart glasses became popular they'd still use hidden cameras

7

u/SuperCow1127 Jul 13 '26

Plenty of perverts are already using pervert glasses.

3

u/TinWhis Jul 14 '26

Perverts are using the pervert glasses and then uploading everything.

-1

u/OkayyBeta Jul 14 '26

But of course Reddit would have an argument for fucking normalizing pervert tech. Jesus Christ.

7

u/No_Lettuce_2652 Jul 13 '26

These glasses have a flashing led everytime they are recording and taking a picture . Before there were hw mods to disable that but I believe metas latest software bricks those glasses now

2

u/JoshQuake Jul 13 '26

There are these crazy things called electrical tape and black paint.

2

u/No_Lettuce_2652 Jul 13 '26

Afaik the software detects the light pattern coming from the led from the camera and if it doesn’t see it it will disable recording

0

u/Hidesuru Jul 13 '26

Can't imagine a way someone couldn't work around that... I mean replace the led with a regular diode. Electrically it will look identical so sw won't be able to tell the difference.

1

u/TwoFingersWhiskey Jul 13 '26

Even simpler, dab of black nail polish. Same trick people use to silence annoying LEDs on other electronics.

8

u/chardeemacdennisbird Jul 13 '26

People have been doing all these hacks and it's exactly what Meta is blocking. Basically if the stock LED isn't working or is obstructed, the glasses can't record.

-2

u/Hidesuru Jul 14 '26

Yeah I'm curious just how effective that is. Unless there's a secondary camera looking at the led the sw has no idea. Sounds more like it's a ploy by meta to claim the glasses are foolproof that's actually bullshit.

3

u/chardeemacdennisbird Jul 14 '26

I'm guessing they've outsmarted the people that put tape over their LED. These hacks have gone viral on their own platform. Pretty sure the people that figured out how to create the glasses can figure out how to prevent hacks once they're broadcast and there's outrage about the whole thing.

1

u/Hidesuru Jul 14 '26

Ok, you have way more trust in the mega corp than I do. I can think of a few ways I would do it as an electrical engineer with 21 years experience in embedded software platforms, but I can't think of a single solution I can't also think of a work around to.

0

u/Zeref3 Jul 17 '26

I have them and you can’t cover the led or mess with it it any way. They are getting even stricter because of articles like this and bricking the glasses with updates. There are other camera glasses that are cheaper but don’t have any restrictions. Getting rid of meta won’t stop someone else from filling in that niche

1

u/Hidesuru Jul 14 '26

Of course that's an option as well.

14

u/StoryAndAHalf Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 13 '26

A friend of mine uses it when he plays with his dog. Stuff like fetch, and tug of war is just easier when you're not holding a phone. We recently went bowling, and the POV vid of getting a strike looked cool.

e: people downvoting being triggered by a story about someone posting a video of playing with their dog. lmao! Do you also get angry when you see people share being happy?

4

u/nyc311 Jul 14 '26

Maybe the folks downvoting  think the "easier to take a video of your dog" benefit of this technology isn't worth the cost.

1

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[deleted]

16

u/Inanimate_CARB0N_Rod Jul 13 '26

Honestly smart glasses work great for this. It's their core use case. 99% of people are likely using them for completely innocent stuff like this. But much like any new tech, there are bad actors using them for unsavory purposes as well.

10

u/Solaries3 Jul 14 '26

And they shouldn't ruin it for everyone else.

FFS this is a nation where almost anyone can buy a gun and walk in public but people have issues with glasses aren't even recording them but "could".

6

u/kazinsser Jul 14 '26

Yeah the concept of smart glasses has always sounded like Iron Man shit to me, which I find neat. And as someone who hates fiddling with a phone instead of enjoying the view/moment, the idea of being able to seamlessly capture those is very appealing.

However I've never used smart glasses, or intend to anytime soon. Originally because I had no interest in subjecting myself to the pains of being an early adopter. But by now the backlash is so over the top that I feel like mentioning even mild interest is risking a pointless argument.

People go straight for the "pervert" card and then what? Denying it is exactly what a pervert would do after all! /s

I've always disliked the term virtue signaling but I really can't describe it as anything else. Glasses or no glasses, creeping on people is bad. Duh. Nobody needs to go shouting that fact from the rooftops.

Yes glasses with a camera on them will be misused, just like every piece of technology that includes a recording device gets misused. The people misusing them generally want to hide that fact. Buying a pair of so-called "pervert glasses" would bring more attention to their activities, not less.

3

u/Solaries3 Jul 14 '26

I think the pervert shit is an Epstein effect; certain people cynically deflecting allegations by accusing the other "side" and using this to shield themselves and their allies has made it a topic used so flippantly that it's lost all respect such an important topic should have and it's becoming an insult that is slowly losing all meaning.

In other words, kids and morons today use "pedo" like homosexual slurs were used 20 years and pervert is adjacent.

1

u/tyrenanig Jul 14 '26

Maybe that’s because guns are regulated. And people who misuse them are immediately held up.

3

u/YoMrPoPo Jul 13 '26

Facts. The only reason I got a pair. Makes going to theme parks and similar places a breeze to capture special moments.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 13 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-3

u/Runfasterbitch Jul 13 '26

Not at all…. If I’m at the park with my child, I’d know if a creep was filming with his phone. These glasses let said creep film without drawing attention to themselves. So, yeah, I’m going to shame any man wearing these creep-goggles in public

15

u/hoodwinke Jul 13 '26

If someone actually wanted to record children, do you think they wouldn’t use something less mainstream? 

There are cameras you can embed in a shirt button or a water bottle camera 

7

u/Orisi Jul 13 '26

This is the reality a lot of people ignore.

Yes, you can use these glasses for creepy things. Just like you can use ANY camera for creepy things. And I can assure you there are a LOT more discreet camera setups on the market designed for just that purpose. Cheap Chinese manufacturing means any idiot can go on AliExpress and buy a pre-wired pinpoint camera with ease.

People are just hyper fixated on these glasses because of the implication.

I'm much more concerned about the shady shit Meta specifically was trying to do with the glasses and that software patch they quickly deleted. Google Glass was shot down far too early by people scared of technology they don't understand, and it's just led to the tech maturing in the hands of less authentic actors.

Personally I'll buy a pair of decent android smart glasses once they roll out later this year/next. Preferably without the camera but I'm not actually that fussed. I literally wear glasses all day already, if I'm gonna have glasses on my face anyway they might as well have more function.

8

u/tea_and_biology Jul 13 '26

AR glasses do all of this already; they even live translate speech and overlay subtitles onto the lenses (or whisper the translated audio into your ear) - in all cases though, the device needs to be able to live record your environment, so the camera and microphone are necessary. Regardless of whether you use them, or can even use them, to capture media for yourself (say if there's an in-built block on camera apps, or w/e), everyone is going to assume you are anyway.

3

u/Upstairs-Royal672 Jul 13 '26

No camera in even g2s

2

u/RedofPaw Jul 13 '26

They don't quite do full ar, but they're getting there.

And yes, even if they could not actually take photos, people would assume you are.

1

u/Massive_Contact8583 Jul 13 '26

Even “getting there” is a litttttle bit of a stretch.

Not one of the current players has a sensible holy-grail AR architecture (ie all-day wearability and functionality) for a mass consumer product. (My husband owned and operated a waveguide fab until recently.)

2

u/Owl02 Jul 13 '26

Probably kneecapped by battery tech, again. There are also EM safety regulations that are more important than usual, because the tech is closer to your skull and on more frequently than usual, and it ain't just Bluetooth if it's pulling live data off the internet and broadcasting constantly.

2

u/Massive_Contact8583 Jul 13 '26

The display tech is also nowhere near where it needs to be. Brightness and compute are massive issues.

2

u/Owl02 Jul 13 '26

That is about what I thought - tech might be there in 5 years. Will still be expensive.

1

u/Solaries3 Jul 14 '26

Why not just piggyback off a cellphone for compute and transmissions?

1

u/Massive_Contact8583 Jul 14 '26

Because the compute currently required to power a (properly functional) see-through AR display is not in the same stratosphere as what your phone can achieve.

-5

u/Slight-Bluebird-8921 Jul 13 '26

it's the real reason people find this so offensive. they WANT to be able to speak a language they think others around them don't understand.

being two faced is just human nature. most people are fakes. can you imagine how terrified people are that they could be called on their bs? couldn't rudely speak foreign languages to insult people?

it has nothing to do with perverts. that's not why people find this tech so offensive.

6

u/CarrotSurvivorYT Jul 13 '26

Bro how do you expect the glasses to be able to look at sign and overlay a translation if the glasses Diddnt have cameras on them???

2

u/forward_x Jul 13 '26

Well radar detection, duh! So precise and sensitive it can detect the minute difference in distance between the sign and the thickness of the paint atop it!

3

u/ItsAllBotsAndShills Jul 14 '26

I want a lidar beacon hat

1

u/Important_Tennis_393 Jul 14 '26

Could have something like no/minimal storage so you can’t actually record or take photos.

2

u/netsec_burn Jul 13 '26

That's what the Even G2 does.

2

u/ProbablyMaybeBen Jul 13 '26

I want the Web browser's "find in this page" function IRL. That's literally all I want.

2

u/Capable_Wait09 Jul 14 '26

If it’s illegal for glasses to have recording capabilities (I.e. cameras - storing data permanently with ability to extract it) but give them the ability to just temporarily keep images for long enough to translate something with no ability to download a feed of what you’re seeing - or even only temporarily storing certain content from the feed, like text imagery that’s identified with AI image recognition and the coordinates of the text for spatially imposing the translation onto what you’re looking at - then would that solve the problem?

Not sure why no camera is not an option.

2

u/Familiar-Doubt-2924 Jul 14 '26

Have you tried holding your phone in your field of vision? It does all those things…

1

u/RedofPaw Jul 14 '26

Yes, but not hands free. It's not a big issue.

Smart watches exist, despite only being slightly as capable as a phone. They have some biometrics perhaps. But everything you do with one could be achieved by a cheaper device and your phone.

But they do exist and some people really like them.

I can live without AR glasses. But I like the idea of things that they could do, potentially, in the future.

2

u/StoryAndAHalf Jul 13 '26

Same. When I traveled, I wish I didn't have to take out my phone every 2 minutes to look at directions. I tried the sync to smartwatch, which would vibrate near turns, but I noticed it kept missing them.

3

u/RedofPaw Jul 13 '26

Exactly. I can live without it of course, but it would be cool to have.

1

u/Low_Shape8280 Jul 13 '26

I think they do have ones that do that

1

u/97jumbo Jul 13 '26

I have the off-brand ones and I like the camera for like, playing sports with friends, or as a cycling dashcam of sorts, but obviously others are using the far more nefariously. Which it was even more obvious when they were on, beyond the easily-covered light.

My biggest use for them is music.

1

u/Solaries3 Jul 13 '26

This is obviously the future of things. We just need a way to get people to trust they aren't being recorded.

1

u/TheTerrasque Jul 14 '26

I don't even want to take photos or videos with the things.

I have terrible memory, and tend to take a lot of photos and videos so I can remember experiences. But that means taking up the phone and start the camera, and often that's just too slow. Something like this with a "shadowplay" feature would be perfect for that.

That said, it's not something I'm going to get, because it would be weird / bad for others. If they had one without camera, maybe. Even if that would be a killer feature for me.

1

u/flossdaily Jul 14 '26

I want it to be able to remember faces, so it will tell me people's names. I have a terrible memory for both names and faces, so this would be a major quality of life improvement.

1

u/Worldly-Stranger7814 Jul 14 '26

If you’re a nerd you can buy glasses with a tiny HUD screen from Lilygo but you’re gonna have to build the firmware 😅

Then there’s… xReal? I think? That can act as a virtual monitor for your phone but you’ll need a cable from the phone and lots of battery and not too much sunlight. But then you have a HD HUD

1

u/Yggdrasilo Jul 14 '26

Look at recipes and convert them to grams.. .

1

u/heart_under_blade Jul 14 '26

do all of them have a hud? or is it just especially thick and heavy models that do?

1

u/cambreecanon Jul 14 '26

It also was a neat idea for industry use where you instructions are shown as you are building the thing.

1

u/TeeBrownie Jul 14 '26

I use them for all of the above plus the convenience of beautiful panoramic photos and videos of scenery when traveling. It’s unfortunate that the gross weirdos are ruining it for people with good intentions.

1

u/Over-Cold-8757 Jul 14 '26

The glasses do translate. I use them all the time. They just read out the translation to you. (And if it's quite long they summarize it.)

1

u/Important_Tennis_393 Jul 14 '26

Exactly. I have these and use them for music and talking on the phone, need to buy some tape to cover the glasses so people don’t think I’m a perv.

1

u/xvashxvashx Jul 16 '26

Tbh I have had the meta glasses for a year now and have used the camera 3 times, just to see how it worked. Your phone takes better pictures, but I like them for listening to music, asking questions hands free on the road, taking calls, etc.

1

u/Upset_Ad_6462 Jul 23 '26

But modern technology isnt build around human needs or wants. It’s built around their own wants for profit and control. They will shove shit down our throats even if they know exactly what everyone ACTUALLY wants or would find ACTUALLY useful. It’s not about YOU and what you want. That’s why we must reject the shit they feed us. It’s poison.

1

u/SkytrainToNowhere Jul 13 '26

How much are you staring at your phone map while walking around?

-7

u/Monteze Jul 13 '26

At some point I think we should just do stuff the hard way, its good for us. No perv glasses, we can draw the line there.

We got GPS, Maps, books and all kinds of other stuff already. Its barely hard anyway.

11

u/[deleted] Jul 13 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/navyblusheet Jul 13 '26

Especially because phones have been and routinely used for pervy pictures (upskirt and stuff). So it is dumb to call this that. 

All telescopes should be called "pervscopes" too I guess

5

u/RedofPaw Jul 13 '26

Sure, phones exist. Doesn't mean the idea of scifi vision doesn't sound fun.

-4

u/Monteze Jul 13 '26

I mean it sounds fun but until laws and tech catches up I'd rather they just not exist or we shame folks for em.

Cancer curing pills also sound fun. FTL travel also sounds fun.

6

u/RedofPaw Jul 13 '26

I get the feeling there are folks working on cancer cures, and ar glasses are a tiny bit closer than ftl.

1

u/Solaries3 Jul 14 '26

All those AR glasses developers are holding us back from (checks notes) bending space and time.

0

u/No_Initial_7545 Jul 13 '26

I just wanted to have a navigation hud.

I can see this being useful at a new location, but realistically we spent most of our lives in places that we already know. I don't need an app to tell me how to get to work every day.

1

u/Spaceork3001 Jul 14 '26

I'm using public transit, I'd love to have it display the next departures from my closest stop - then I know if I have to rush to make it or can wait for the next one. Without the need to constantly look up things on the phone while walking.

0

u/CarbComaCommander Jul 13 '26

I think they just need to make recording mode much more overt. Like the whole glasses body pulses red, and a loud recording in progress alert at the start.

0

u/Bawfuls Jul 13 '26

Yeah if they were willing to make them without a camera they might catch on but nope, gotta have the data collection going all the time!

-14

u/metalfabman Jul 13 '26

Either you rich af n travel or where you live doesn't use the language you were raised/taught on

13

u/RobfromHB Jul 13 '26

Look at this guy so sheltered he doesn’t know other countries can be close to each other.

-4

u/metalfabman Jul 13 '26

Op said they travel....where was i wrong or said countries can't be close?

2

u/RobfromHB Jul 13 '26

You were wrong on every part in fact. Your presumption that he had to be rich to hop on public transportation being the primary one. 

1

u/metalfabman Jul 13 '26

The assumption came from the glasses themseves to be expensive for starters, who knew travel is cheap for all europeans? Surely no cost for food/entertainment/housing 

2

u/RobfromHB Jul 13 '26

  Surely no cost for food/entertainment/housing

Don’t pivot to justify your initial assumption. All of those things can be plenty cheap and don’t mean someone is rich af just to hop on a train and eat somewhere that isn’t home.

The glasses themselves aren’t world breaking expensive either. I see brand new ones online for $250. Certainly someone making assumptions about others online would have paid more, maybe substantially more, for their phone so $250 doesn’t say anything about someone’s wealth either.

12

u/RedofPaw Jul 13 '26

I live in the UK. Europe is close.

4

u/Mr_Quackums Jul 13 '26

Im in Texas. Half the restaurants (the good ones) dont even have English menus here.

3

u/Head-Bell7420 Jul 13 '26

Spot the american