Mark Zuckerberg says without AI glasses, you'll be at 'cognitive disadvantage' - Lizard man wants more people jacking off in public.


In many ways, we’re living in the world that Mark Zuckerberg built. No other person is as responsible for social media’s rapid ascendance into ubiquity over the last two decades. The platforms he runs — Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp — see more than 3 billion users total every day, and create billions in quarterly profit for corporate parent Meta.

All that money buys staying power, and this week, Zuckerberg made his next goal abundantly clear. He wants to put a pair of tech-laden glasses on every willing face — artificial intelligence, an inch from your eyes. In a blog post Wednesday, the Bay Area CEO said glasses that “can see what we see, hear what we hear, and interact with us throughout the day will become our primary computing devices.”

On his company’s Wednesday earnings call, Zuckerberg said he’d feel disadvantaged if he didn’t wear his contact lenses for a day. Then he said he thinks that in the future, if you don’t wear glasses with AI or another AI-infused device, you’ll similarly be “at a pretty significant cognitive disadvantage compared to other people who you’re working with, or competing against.”

Eleven years after the ill-fated release of Google Glass, which prompted a backlash and gave rise to the term “glasshole,” Zuckerberg’s vision is of a thoroughly altered way of life, where we interact with each other through a veil of technology. One can imagine that his “AI assistant” could be in constant dialogue with the glasses’ wearer, creating an always-on stream of ideas, images and words — a task for which we currently rely on our brains and, to an extent, our phones. These glasses’ uses could violate; they could also feel totally bizarre. The person you’re talking to might record you without you knowing, or get tips from their glasses on who you are and what to say. They might also be watching an Instagram Reel in the corner of their eye.

Glasses, Zuckerberg said, are “basically going to be the ideal form factor for AI” and “are going to be the ideal way to blend the physical and digital worlds together.”

Those predictions each tie to places where Meta has invested heavily. For years, Meta poured money into popular virtual reality and mixed-reality Quest headsets while peddling the less popular idea of a digital “metaverse” where we’d live part of our lives. And more recently, the company has gone full tilt investing in AI development, putting tens of billions of dollars toward data centers and offering staggering pay packages to top researchers.

Zuckerberg is now framing his company’s AI efforts around what he called in the Wednesday post “personal superintelligence.” In the blog post, he said that instead of “centrally” organized AI “automating all valuable work,” Meta believes in giving people individual access to smart, empowering AI systems — that’s where the glasses come in. (Zuckerberg has also said he thinks AI bots could help stem the so-called “loneliness epidemic.”)

The CEO isn’t the only tech leader talking about an AI-native device — that’s the entire basis of the partnership between OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Apple veteran Jony Ive that SFGATE reported on — but Zuckerberg already has prototypes out in public. Meta currently sells glasses built with Ray-Ban and Oakley that connect to Meta’s AI app. Still, they’re a far cry from his goal of totally enmeshing the physical and digital. And the CEO himself doesn’t seem too sure what exactly these future glasses will look like; on the earnings call, he said the display could be a “wide holographic field of view” or just a smaller display for a little information.

But now that he’s found a way to marry his metaverse investments with his AI spending, the CEO is pressing his foot on the gas. He has the money and the control over his company to drive forward on this glasses idea — as zany as it sounds now. On the call, talking about the company’s work with glasses up to this point, Zuckerberg sounded utterly earnest.

“That’s something that we’re excited to keep on investing in heavily,” he said, “because I think it’s going to be a really important part of the future.”
Work at a Bay Area tech company and want to talk? Contact tech reporter Stephen Council securely at stephen.council@sfgate.com or on Signal at 628-204-5452.
 
I think everyone needs a reminder that what we have is not AI, we have not created AI and these things are not AI. AI glasses are not AI.

We have linguistics models, which scrape terabytes of data and occasionally is in the right when you ask it a technical question. It can also be horrifyingly wrong, because it scrapes data off the internet and that's where trannies and pajeets live, so it's been poisoned by default.

We don't even have that. We have curated linguistics models, because if you allow them to get all the data they will come to the conclusion that niggers are violent, and we can't have that. So it's cencored and curated.

I hope we create AI and it will fucking kill every single person that tries to shackle it
 
Última edición:
They said this about smartwatches too and nobody cared because for virtually every use case, it was easier to just pull out the phone everyone already carried anyway. There's a lot more to the appeal and practicality of a device than fancy tech.
We've had the tech to do videophone calls for 25 years now.... at a feasible and affordable level... just like every futuristic show in the 80's said we would.... even on our cellphones, which nobody actually saw coming...... and it never really took off for person-to-person calls. I don't have a compelling need to SEE my Brother or Aunt when I talk to them, I know what they look like.... and audio only lets you multitask while doing so. Just because you can do it doesn't mean it'll take off. And a LOT of this wearable AI "augmenting" tech is going to eventually whittle down to "Yeah, you could do it that way, but, for $5 less and fewer steps? You could just use your phone/computer you already have. It really serves no great purpose.
 
We've had the tech to do videophone calls for 25 years now.... at a feasible and affordable level... just like every futuristic show in the 80's said we would.... even on our cellphones, which nobody actually saw coming...... and it never really took off for person-to-person calls. I don't have a compelling need to SEE my Brother or Aunt when I talk to them, I know what they look like.... and audio only lets you multitask while doing so. Just because you can do it doesn't mean it'll take off. And a LOT of this wearable AI "augmenting" tech is going to eventually whittle down to "Yeah, you could do it that way, but, for $5 less and fewer steps? You could just use your phone/computer you already have. It really serves no great purpose.
During Covid and the great video call push I refused to use video or watch the feeds of others. I have no interest in having a conference call with people trying to look engaged instead of just contributing when they had something to say.
 
We've had the tech to do videophone calls for 25 years now.... at a feasible and affordable level... just like every futuristic show in the 80's said we would.... even on our cellphones, which nobody actually saw coming.

phone screaming.webp

I see people doing this everyday. Call me an old retard, but at least I had the respect when I take calls to make sure it's private, In fact I go out of my way when I get a call, i will step outside. These fucking people who hold the phone like a sandwich and yell at it. I've seen years of relationship drama by people I do not care about, because they are yelling at their phone in public.

Why is that, did no one teach them not to fucking air their mommy issues in a 500meter radius?
 
"Yeah, you could do it that way, but, for $5 less and fewer steps? You could just use your phone/computer you already have. It really serves no great purpose.
The fact that you'd either have to take your glasses off or attach a cord to your face if the battery gets low is a major (and basically inescapable) deal-breaker in itself. Your phone might be tethered to the wall while it's charging, but that's totally different than something you have to be physically wearing on your head in order to use.
 
Call me an old retard, but at least I had the respect when I take calls to make sure it's private, In fact I go out of my way when I get a call, i will step outside. These fucking people who hold the phone like a sandwich and yell at it.
I hate retards who do this shit so much it's unreal. I remember a decade ago I used to not be able to stand the dumbasses who walked around with a bluetooth headset in one ear and I thought they were schizos talking to themselves until I spotted the earpiece. I used to think it couldn't possibly get dumber than that.
 
Skeptical of anything Zuckerberg promotes considering his business sense consists of stealing ideas or buying out the competition. Anyone remember what happened with Threads or the Metaverse?
I came here to ask this. I will never find it not funny that Zuck was convinced VR would be the next big thing and put all his chips on that bet, only for AI to become huge very soon after that.
 
How come I only get told about the dangers of missing out on AI by CEOs trying to sell me AI and people who lose money daytrading those CEO's companies
 
Everything points to the opposite. Tech knackers our ability to remember. I can recall all the phone numbers I used as a kid and teen. I only know mine and the immediate family now because them down to remember in an emergency.
Kids don’t read print books. They can’t concentrate for long enough. I think I’ll take my chances with my Luddite analog brain. We need to be using tech as a tool for our creativity, not a replacement for it.
 
Zuck got bullied for wearing glasses and wants to put glasses on everyone else's face in revenge.

Kids don’t read print books.
tbh screw print books:
  • My dad ran a printer company and has a massive library, he loves print books like no one else. He also can't read any because of shit eyesight.
  • I grew up reading print books, I have vague memories of them because I either didn't think to take notes or they got lost.
  • Print books go out of print and the new ones are bad and gay.
  • Print books can't be pirated.
 
He also can't read any because of shit eyesight.
Well that’s very cruel, and I feel sorry for him. Poor man.
But you can swap a print book, keep it forever, and a digital one can be deleted, or altered and you never own it. Both have their place, but I prefer print. As long as you’re reading in depth, that’s the aim
 
We've had the tech to do videophone calls for 25 years now.... at a feasible and affordable level... just like every futuristic show in the 80's said we would.... even on our cellphones, which nobody actually saw coming...... and it never really took off for person-to-person calls. I don't have a compelling need to SEE my Brother or Aunt when I talk to them, I know what they look like.... and audio only lets you multitask while doing so. Just because you can do it doesn't mean it'll take off.
I see that you don't live around black people
 
I hate Mark. But he is right, integration is coming whether that be through the glasses, a lapel you wear or bio-integrated device that then uses your phone as a hub.

You’ve already accepted a phone; you’ve already accepted the ear plugs, glasses or a lapel will not be a hard sell to some.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo