• LastYearsIrritant@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    If they didn’t have a camera they’d be pointless, there’s really no reason to have a screen on your face if it wasn’t to help AR the world.

    Which is why it’s going to need an extremely valid reason to use them aside from being a creeper.

      • Buffalobuffalo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Wondering how we’re doing on echolocation or if sensors that are less invasive but still useful might be tolerated in public. The device might identify objects generically… Maybe there’s some middleground between useful and perverted.

    • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      there’s really no reason to have a screen on your face

      Look around. People have a screen on their face 24/7. Currently they need their hand to hold it there.

      Maybe you mean there is no need for a camera on your face. That I agree with.

    • darkangelazuarl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      So there are certainly some valid use cases. They could be useful for surgeries, engineering design work, surveying, etc. None of these have you wearing them all the time or in social areas through. It’s a niche product they need to focus on those markets and stop trying to force mass adoption. It’s the same as AI.

    • SaraTonin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Lidar, rather than a camera. Allows it to create a 3d model of what’s in front of it without being able to take pictures itself