5 ms·

Interesting that the price is only around $100 more than regular Ray-Bans

tpmx 3y ago
Subsidized by Meta for getting them more data? I would also imagine that Meta is paying them handsomely for the obvious brand risk here - getting Ray-Bans associated with glasshole behaviour. The Ray-Ban brand is owned by the Italian-French EssilorLuxottica conglomerate. Market cap 74B EUR. (Meta market cap: 770B USD.)
- KaiserPro 3y ago
  lol, facebook can barely get the glasses to play sound reliably, they aren't spying on you with these glasses.
  - tpmx 3y ago
    There's very often a large difference between the v1 capability and the long term aspiration, both in technical capabilities and market capture. Compare Windows 1.0 (https://winworldpc.com/product/windows-10/101 https://winworldpc.com/product/windows-10/101) with Windows 10/11.
    - capableweb 3y ago
      And also teams within the product pushing for different things, like the recent Google Marketing Team vs Google Chrome Team wanting different approaches.
    - KaiserPro 3y ago
      Windows 1.0 was release 38 years ago, microsoft has changed persona at least three times since then. Not that we shouldnt be suspicious of facebook, but we really must actually seek evidence rather than just decry them as witches. It lets other companies get away with loads simply because they are well liked.
      - tpmx 3y ago
        Which is it, they are incompetent or they are just misunderstood?
  - ParetoOptimal 3y ago
    > lol, facebook can barely get the glasses to play sound reliably, they aren't spying on you with these glasses. Based on what do you assume playing sound reliably is a harder or more priority problem than spying on you?
    - KaiserPro 3y ago
      based on engineering a product that has a power capacity of <2 watt hours, to work reliably and is able to play and stream audio correctly. To spy on someone using these glasses would mean decent audio stack that can actually reconnect by its self, rather than having to power cycle the entire device. Not only that, but a level of attention to detail that means that what ever spying it does can happen reliably and inside a tiny power envelope. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying don't be suspicious of facebook, What I'm asking is to actually interrogate their level of skill. facebook are frankly shite at software, just use any of their supporting apps. o Portal, great hardware, shame that it never connected reliably. o oculus: They have the power of facebook/instagram/social graph, yet its impossible to join your mate in game. Something Steam nailed in the days of dialup o Rayban: cannot play audio reliably, pretty tricky to download pictures. o Advertising: fuck me, its like oracle had a baby with SAP, and force fed it MS access forms. Yes, yes its an advertising giant. But have you tried to get any usable and accurate data out of it? Stop building them up like they are an unstoppable genius factory. Its basically a bunch of confused cats trapped under a duvet. The difference being those cats can drive advertising clicks.
  - syndicatedjelly 3y ago
    Facebook/Meta isn't a member of FAANG for nothing
  - AlecSchueler 3y ago
    They're a surveillance company, not an audio company.
stefan_ 3y ago
Take into account that the regular Ray-Bans are about 99% margin
- polar8 3y ago
  Source?
PeterStuer 3y ago
I'm sure you are paying meta more than enough by all the wealth of data they will get on you from this.

tpmx 3y ago

Subsidized by Meta for getting them more data? I would also imagine that Meta is paying them handsomely for the obvious brand risk here - getting Ray-Bans associated with glasshole behaviour. The Ray-Ban brand is owned by the Italian-French EssilorLuxottica conglomerate. Market cap 74B EUR. (Meta market cap: 770B USD.)

KaiserPro 3y ago
lol, facebook can barely get the glasses to play sound reliably, they aren't spying on you with these glasses.
- tpmx 3y ago
  There's very often a large difference between the v1 capability and the long term aspiration, both in technical capabilities and market capture. Compare Windows 1.0 (https://winworldpc.com/product/windows-10/101 https://winworldpc.com/product/windows-10/101) with Windows 10/11.
  - capableweb 3y ago
    And also teams within the product pushing for different things, like the recent Google Marketing Team vs Google Chrome Team wanting different approaches.
  - KaiserPro 3y ago
    Windows 1.0 was release 38 years ago, microsoft has changed persona at least three times since then. Not that we shouldnt be suspicious of facebook, but we really must actually seek evidence rather than just decry them as witches. It lets other companies get away with loads simply because they are well liked.
    - tpmx 3y ago
      Which is it, they are incompetent or they are just misunderstood?
- ParetoOptimal 3y ago
  > lol, facebook can barely get the glasses to play sound reliably, they aren't spying on you with these glasses. Based on what do you assume playing sound reliably is a harder or more priority problem than spying on you?
  - KaiserPro 3y ago
    based on engineering a product that has a power capacity of <2 watt hours, to work reliably and is able to play and stream audio correctly. To spy on someone using these glasses would mean decent audio stack that can actually reconnect by its self, rather than having to power cycle the entire device. Not only that, but a level of attention to detail that means that what ever spying it does can happen reliably and inside a tiny power envelope. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying don't be suspicious of facebook, What I'm asking is to actually interrogate their level of skill. facebook are frankly shite at software, just use any of their supporting apps. o Portal, great hardware, shame that it never connected reliably. o oculus: They have the power of facebook/instagram/social graph, yet its impossible to join your mate in game. Something Steam nailed in the days of dialup o Rayban: cannot play audio reliably, pretty tricky to download pictures. o Advertising: fuck me, its like oracle had a baby with SAP, and force fed it MS access forms. Yes, yes its an advertising giant. But have you tried to get any usable and accurate data out of it? Stop building them up like they are an unstoppable genius factory. Its basically a bunch of confused cats trapped under a duvet. The difference being those cats can drive advertising clicks.
- syndicatedjelly 3y ago
  Facebook/Meta isn't a member of FAANG for nothing
- AlecSchueler 3y ago
  They're a surveillance company, not an audio company.

stefan_ 3y ago

Take into account that the regular Ray-Bans are about 99% margin

polar8 3y ago
Source?

PeterStuer 3y ago

I'm sure you are paying meta more than enough by all the wealth of data they will get on you from this.