this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2026
237 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

85243 readers
4258 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
237
Meta Furious Over Bombshell Smart Glasses Revelation (tech.yahoo.com)
submitted 10 hours ago by floofloof@lemmy.ca to c/technology@lemmy.world
26 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] artyom@piefed.social 26 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

And yet, according to the company's executives, it's "dishonest" to inform the public about a piece of unreleased tech that Meta has chosen to incorporate into a consumer product.

Meta referred to the discovery as "sensational" and characterized NameTag as exploratory. "We've said before we're exploring these types of features, and what you're seeing is just evidence of that exploration," the company said in a statement to Wired. "Nothing has shipped to consumers and no final decision has been made on what to do here, if anything. If we do decide to roll something out, we will take a and do so with full transparency. One decision we can be clear about—we are not building a central face database."

"It's not until [paragraph] four that Wired says this feature is 'not enabled,'" declared Meta spokesperson and VP of communications Andy Stone. "And then takes until [paragraph] 16 for Wired to reflect that Meta has no existing plans and this is exploratory. And not until [paragraph] ten does Wired quote its own expert saying the feature is not 'exposed to consumers.'"

"This is more than shoddy reporting, it's intellectually dishonest," Stone continued. "Pure advocacy-driven click bait."

The fact that you're "exploring" this tech at all is deeply concerning. You've done everything possible to erode the trust of the public so why would anyone believe you would do it "thoughtfully"?

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 13 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

"Ok, ok. Everyone calm the fuck down. We haven't actually released the see-through-clothes-a-vision feature. No consumers have access to it, and it's not yet been decided that we even will release this tech. We're just developing and testing this personal x-ray tech to explore the possibilities, that's all! We think it might have great applications for anatomy education, medical exams and law enforcement."

"Ah, come on. Don't get your panties in a wad. Yes yours. I can see them getting all wadded as I speak! Don't you want to be like Superman, but without any of the moral restraint?"

"Besides you're not allowed to get mad at us until after we've actually unleashed this mass privacy violation tech onto the world. If we do end unilaterally deciding to irrevocably destroy every semblance of modesty, privacy, and personal descretion for sharing one's own body, we promise, we'll be completely transparent about it. As transparent as your dress is to these glasses right now. Wowza!"