At that point I will be able to have the fun of AR (gaming with paper toys or other papercrafts, displaying characters on a table for my tabletop RPG group, getting directions in a foreign city, identifying plants and insects just by looking at them, seeing where my cats are located through walls via their airtag collars) without any ads, without any data harvesting nor privacy concerns, and even being able to write my own custom apps or firmware mods. It will still be a toy rather than a necessary part of life like a smartphone has become but a fun toy nonetheless.
Meta Ray-Ban - already hacked by p0pcycle
Rokid Glasses - rooted firmware https://github.com/jaskier-os/client-glasses
Google Glass Explorer Edition - officially supported root access
Even then, look at Android. Graphene and similar are pretty good base operating systems, but almost the entire app ecosystem is corporate spyware.
this is very true, but it also has a huge FOSS app ecosystem and highly polished FOSS apps.
I've recently been having Codex patch closed source apps making them work offline and greatly reducing their permissions and it works really well.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=app.getatoms.a...
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.hybridcali...
Patching binaries of such mandatory garbage is a nice idea though!
This could solve the main problem I had with graphene in the past, which is that some applications I had to use (like for parking or charging a car or whatever) crashed on startup with a Null Pointer Exception, and the set of broken apps changed from week to week.
I imagine binary patching could be used to bypass hardware attestation checks too (you'd need to extract the key from the enclave, but that's usually pretty trivial, depending on the phone model). None of the apps I used required that.
The apps you use, sure, those are also optional, but using those same apps on a desktop would give them even more information about you and more power over your system.
Why stop there? Stream the camera to a CNN and black out all the ads in real time you'd other wise be forced to see walking down the street or in the subway.
I agree with the article that AR glasses are not a great future, but I think [ e-display eyewear / screen spectacles / whatever we call them ] that are dumb and just display what you feed them, are great!
- do you use these in 'ultrawide' mode (3840x1080)?
- if so, do you find the head tracking works well (i.e. it just works)?
- do you notice the lack of vertical resolution?
AR is a step too far. I don't actually need anything augmented. It's useful enough to just have a surface that I can put some status windows on while I walk around the house.
Then you can go about your day and only zoom it in if something happens.
You can even exercise with them on.
Particularly for exercise, a pair of glasses feels like too much, until baked in to prescription frames with no added weight
I don't want to learn morse code to know what price my ring has found for me. Glasses displaying a price, please.
So you want a HUD like in Oblivion or Skyrim? On you head? Telling you how healthy you are and when you need to eat? Will it play boss music when the police pull you over for speeding?
How much did you pay - what do you think about the price?
Do you use prescription glasses?
Uses - HDR high res video (4k/8k big screen equivalent)?
Design? Color accuracy?
Programming/writing and reading - precieved dpi and contrast? (Print, eink, retina, OLED, 1080p lcd?
I don't need all of the best from the above - but would like to know...
Display glasses are a subset of HMD's, a more specific term. The "display" part of it implies that they're monitor replacements -- both in their interface (DisplayPort alt-mode) and an FOV suitable for monitor replacement.
Still, if support for that becomes more standardized and the FoV gets better, I do think this category of displays is pretty exciting. I've found them useful despite those drawbacks!
There is something about distance which we can't fool our brains about (yet), I can watch something on 42" screen 1m from me or on 75" screen 4m from me, that big screen, despite visibly smaller makes somehow more 'wholesome' experience.
My fear is that as usual if they become popular, they’ll just be yet another device used for more invasion of privacy and spying. They won’t stay dumb for long. ... Look what happened with TVs lol
For instance, what if they invented "X-Ray Spex" like there used to be advertised in the back of comic books, that let you see through people's clothes. Do you have an "expectation of privacy" on a subway train against someone seeing you nude, if the technology exists to do it? I feel like similar cultural standards should apply when it comes to triangulating details about your identity from surreptitious recording devices.
But the truth is, there's too much utility in technology. If AR can do useful things that smartphones cannot, we're going to end up with mass proliferation of AR, regardless of what parasitic technologies accompany it.
You can be sure that almost twenty years later, they will use a new device type as an excuse to lock things further down. Remote attestation, no side-loading, no or little browser competition, etc. This has kind of already happened with smart watches, where there is no AOSP-equivalent, virtually no models with unlockable bootloaders, etc.
AR glasses will be the next venue to further trample on your rights. The difference compared to smart watches is that they could potentially replace smartphones.
All this is without taking into account the grave privacy violation AR glasses are to other people. Yes, phones can also make photos and film, but it is much more visible.
Luckily, at least where I live, most people find AR glasses creepy and there is a majority of parliament that wants to ban them (though the government is kinda weak as usual).
Unfortunately, new devices tend to inherit from smartphones instead of desktop computers; even VR devices like the Steam Frame are clearly based on smartphone hardware, even though it doesn't have (for now) a cell phone modem.
If anything the current set of HMDs are more capable and open than the average phone. What's special about the headsets that make them easier to lock down?
...sorry but that ain't happening.
There are plenty of areas where innovating would help people tremendously, with much fewer slippery slopes. Just because people ask you to be mindful of the areas where abuse is already the default use case doesn't mean there's nothing you can do.
Innovate what, exactly? The demise of democracy? Authoritarian rule? Technology innovation ain't societal progress, and we should aim for the latter.
A decent compromise I've tried is an e-ink phone, not a dumbphone or a minimal phone but an actual Android smartphone with an e-ink screen.
To be ancedotal, I have never in my life seen anyone anywhere using these devices even one time. By no means does this feel like a technology that is "coming"
Great turn or phrase. (And/or, great company name. Probably both :)
You might see ads everywhere, but see my little meme gallery project plastered instead of every single of those ads, I see real time translation as a tourist, I see an advisor whispering in my ear the proper way to say thank you to this merchant.
You assume those will degrade the same way cellphones did. I am saying: lets make sure it doesn't happen by doing some work now since we absolutely do know what to expect from corporates.
Being able to see your heart rate, length/set counts, head pitch, and a whole bunch of other metrics in real-time is really helping me improve my swimming. Not affiliated, just a happy customer.
I think this was the same situation last year too.
All the original services for it are long-dead so it's immune from the nightmare scenarios in the article. It's pretty decent for heads-up biking directions after vibecoding an app for that (https://github.com/zakwilson/OsmGlass/).
And they've come roaring back, on the wake of the well intended but arguably misguided GDPR specification about cookie notifications. It's now common to see popups on many sites in the exact same style.
Popups are such terrible UX that it forced websites to mostly abandon them, but once people were used to them for another reason, ads were quick to follow. They are usually an ad from the site itself rather than a 3rd party, but that hardly matters.
Even the cookie notifications are rife with dark patterns, making it difficult to get to the option with minimal necessary cookies.
I'd rather read articles on an AR display than a little 6.6 inch screen.
If you don't want ads, the solution is running open source OS's on these things (which is the most likely outcome for people here anyway), not avoiding the hardware entirely.
Im waiting for prices to come down but having experienced AR glasses before, they're a great compromise between VR (too sweaty) and having to use either a larger laptop/ipad.
Or when you're putting something back together and you end up with two screws left over.
Or if you want to see your friends' annotations in the book you're reading.
We gave control over the web to third parties. We can have nice things again if we just stop doing that.
There was a time, at least for myself and a lot of people in the AR wave, where we were trying to make computing integrated into everyday life such that they kind of disappear.
The idea was that genuinely we could have “spatial” computing where there really was very little difference between the digital and the physical because we could build a digital twin of the real world
The only way you can do this reliably is to have a constant stream of data from fixed and egocentric sensors which have context about the world around you to give you more information to make your life easier and more integrated.
This was in a time where we were the surveillance web was just starting to really ramp up around the 2010s
Of course, the massive government corporate surveillance state dashed any hopes of being able to do any of this with human dignity.
We did used to dream of a better world, not naiively I and others have been writing about the risks and dangers of all these things while still pushing them forward.
Short of an overhaul of human society, I don’t see the kind of technological future that we all wanted happening
I still use my xreal glasses from time to time but the social ecosystem doesn’t exist to actually make progress. Maybe in another half century
I'd welcome AR glasses - it would mean looking at my phone less. The contextual information and HUDs are a net gain.
Niantic Spatial mapped over 30 billion real-world images and street scans from millions of players visiting public parks, sidewalks, murals, statues, and general urban landmarks featuring over 1 million distinct mapped locations including many government and military installations.
Or might this become a case of some AI app on the phone summarizing everything the user is looking at and doing?
Tue Nov 10 15:18:58 UTC 2026: User is staring intently into the eyes of a sheep.
Tue Nov 10 15:20:07 UTC 2026: >smart-watch< User heart rate increasing.
> REAL-WORLD POPUPS? Are you insane?
Indeed.
They even say "if it becomes mainstream" and then argue as if it has. Total clickbait
I don't find the claim that people will be expected to wear them constantly as having any credibility. The post overall reads as absurd hyperbole to me, on par with AI-bros fawning over how their machine god can exterminate humanity.
The idea of always on 6 dof tracked advertisements that show up all the time is a bad product that consumers would not buy. The battery would not last long, it would be annoying to use compared to other devices, and it would struggle to deliver value.
The author writes as if web browsers, Windows, Android, and iOS have ads built into them popping them up randomly when that is nowhere near the case.
See: the web itself, search engines, app stores, desktop search, operating systems from desktop to mobile to TV... the list is endless and the trend is relentless. It already started with AI, now injecting ads directly into chats.
So I think it's not a stretch to predict AR platforms will be the same and the ads will be in your eyeballs. It doesn't really matter that these anti-features will cause the product to be worse for users if it makes the platform more profitable for owners.
I can also guarantee with complete certainty that any sort of "neural implant" technology will one day be serving ads directly into your brain.
Do these people think that you can stop a technology be telling people to not use it?
"Do not buy books from Amazon, go to a library". "Do not use Google Maps, paper maps are perfectly fine". "Do not have Slack on your phone, your boss does not need to be able to message you off-hours".
"Do not use LLMs, they are just bad".
Is this just plain virtue signaling? Can't imagine anyone thinks telling people to not use AR/AI will actually work.
But this is about imposing your will on people "I think AR is shit, so I ask you to agree with me and stop using it"
The same people who say don't buy AR glasses because they will turn your whole world into the internet, are the same people MAKING that happen.
You don't want your phone to be out all the time? Build the infostructure for labeling priority notifications, and allowing them permanent access to your field of vision also allows you to hide the phone and low priority communications almost all the time.
Email used to be really disruptive to my focus, everyone expected fast response. Slack didn't just add to our disruptions, for many of us it allowed us to drastically scale back the time spent on lower priority communication like email.