Re:Don't buy AR glasses
by buellerbueller on Tuesday November 10, 2026 @09:15AM
(#50440695)
Countercounterpoint: by participating in this ecosystem which is ad-subsidized, you legitimize it via network effects, contributing to a shittier world for all, even if you yourself block the ads. I don't want the be the target of someone else's AR glasses, and I shouldn't have to give up being in public to accomplish that.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Don't buy AR glasses
by bryanlarsen on Tuesday November 10, 2026 @09:35AM
(#50440999)
The open source, open hardware glasses the OP wouldn't be ad-subsidized.
Re:Don't buy AR glasses
by buellerbueller on Tuesday November 10, 2026 @09:55AM
(#50441268)
And the surveillance state part?
Re:Don't buy AR glasses
by bryanlarsen on Tuesday November 10, 2026 @10:45AM
(#50442005)
Yes, that too. Open source / open hardware can be an effective counter-measure against the surveillance state.
Re:Don't buy AR glasses
by buellerbueller on Tuesday November 10, 2026 @11:24AM
(#50442552)
No, because it will eventually have people-identifying apps.
Sousveillance
The research and industrial pipeline would be ad-subsidized, in Schlagbohrer's account, because it starts with Meta/Alphabet/etc proving the market and establishing demand for microdisplays (and other components). This gives the knock-off market a target to optimize until the components are cheap enough that some small business sets up an open hardware glasses kit on crowdsupply for Schlagbohrer to buy.
For myself, my smart glasses use case involves darkening headlights of oncoming traffic as I drive at night. The road curves a bit in parts of the city I live in, and the headlights shine in my eyes. It's not worth 5,000$ but car insurance also feels expensive until I need it.