Snapchat Reportedly Doubling Down on Spectacles With Two New Versions in the Works

[5105973]

Right, because nobody can easily do that now in a locker room with a phone?

http://www.tmz.com/2017/02/09/dani-mathers-locker-room-pic-district-attorney/

And that's not even the worst of it ... there are already spy cameras in all manner of objects that someone can take into a locker room concealed if they want to do this.

As the Dani Mathers case proves, there are laws to prosecute those who would do what you suggest some people may. So, no they're not going to ban people who legitimately wear glasses, because Spectacles exist.

Just like everywhere else on the Earth, everyone needs to exercise personal responsibility to know their surroundings in common public spaces, even in their own homes, and when the unthinkable happens, the law will punish those who have violated your privacy, regardless of where it occurs -- that is the deterrent -- not banning legitimate eyeglasses.

That’s what I said, they do that now with a phone. And generally, in my experience having kids on school sports teams, smart phones are banned in changing areas. At least the ones the coaches at our school oversaw. I can’t speak for all of the schools.

As for the ban on all glasses due to people someday having designer glasses with cameras in them, well that’s a concern I have due to people tending to overreact and failing to see nuanced differences when formulating bans. Like the jurisdictions that ban all cell phone use in the auto, even when your phone is acting as a GPS and calling turn by turn directions to you.

 

[KiwiAdventure]

Look out if I see anyone looking at me wearing those glasses. Remember America is the land of guns so I wouldn't be seen wearing these types of glasses in public.

 

[blcamp]

...aannnnd they didn't get that it creeped out people when Google was selling glasses, spawning the term "glasshole"?! It's bad enough when there are dozens of fixed cameras on us everywhere we go already.

 

[Jesse Waugh]

I do not get it... maybe I am becoming to old...
But what management team thought that this would be a god idea?
It just seams so limited in its usage

It’s all about SURVEILLANCE.

 

[CarlJ]

Snapchat: "You know what we need to get us out of this hole we're digging? A steam shovel!"

 

[341328]

I do not get it... maybe I am becoming to old...
But what management team thought that this would be a god idea?
It just seams so limited in its usage

Have you seen the video footage? Great angle.

 

[TheRealTVGuy]

You can insult the useless SnapChat privacy invasion clown glasses, but leave my girls Lorelai and Rory out of it

 

[NightFox]

"Doubling down" - as defined by the Oxford English Dictionary:

to engage in risky behaviour, especially when one is already in a dangerous situation

The phrase has become such a misused cliche, but on this occasion the headline seems to fit perfectly!

 

[taco1138]

They’re trying to double down on failure.

 

[JoEw]

More appealing as a camera for my watch - no iPhone.

 

[SoyCapitanSoyCapitan]

I think they get their design inspiration from this:

https://img0.etsystatic.com/048/1/5824288/il_fullxfull.682521222_mure.jpg

 

[verniesgarden]

never quite understood the hate of these, they are a fun product to just have a simple "capture this" feature. honestly think everyone is trying to be too serious in life.

 

[Michael Scrip]

never quite understood the hate of these, they are a fun product to just have a simple "capture this" feature. honestly think everyone is trying to be too serious in life.

The problem is... people who use Snapchat already have their phones with them anyway. (and they have a lot more control using the phone too)

I haven't heard anyone say "gosh, it's too difficult to pull out my phone to Snap this moment"

And I'd imagine there are many more times you want to Snap... but you're not in a situation to wear sunglasses. Basically... Spectacles sound like a product that wouldn't get a lot of use. (if you bought them in the first place... which not many people did)

Oh... and there's the social problem of a camera constantly being pointed at the public.

I don't think people "hate" Spectacles as much as they share a collective "WTF" about this company's decisions.

They already lost $40 million on this "experiment"... so now they're re-releasing basically the same thing? Didn't they learn?

And if that wasn't enough... they're making a more ambitious model (likely more expensive) that will still have the same social awkwardness about it.

What exactly will be different this time around?

 

[0970373]

I do not get it... maybe I am becoming to old...
But what management team thought that this would be a god idea?
It just seams so limited in its usage

Honestly, if they get the tech right, they could sell or license it it for a lot of $$$. Forget about what Snap is telling you what it's for but think of the things the tech could be used for. I don't know if they think that many moves ahead but you never know.