Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Snapchat Spectacles Now Available to Purchase Across Europe
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Technically, bullying and Snapchat sunglasses likely wouldn't be an issue at a school, because they would likely be prohibited or restricted in the same usage as a phone would be for a student. (Some school districts prohibit Phones, smart watches, ect).
I'm pretty sure you can use your phone anywhere except inside a classroom. And unfortunately, the kids use them inside the classrooms too.
They have 2 cameras in them, so to be fair, they were working around a serious challenge.
There are "spy cam glasses" out there where the lenses are impossible to spot, further, they did not have to outline the cams with those butt ugly circles. Wearing them would make one look like a metrosexual dork. Its the emperors clothes all over again. Things doesn't look cool just because those Snap guys say so. Then again, stuff doesn't look like crap when I say so, its my personal opinion they look like ****.
Last edited:
I think the spy glasses produce low-quality photos and usually with a fisheye view, right? I've seen ones with pinhole lenses, which really do not work well. Different use case because they're for spying, not taking nice photos. The Snapchat glasses are supposed to shoot nice photos and video, but IDK how nice exactly.
Your probably right regarding those spy-glasses.. I understand it's a challenge designing the glasses so they look cool giving the constraints, but Im sure it could at least look better than they are now..
I definitely wouldn't say the shape they chose is in fashion now. They kinda look like the "problem glasses" with those lashes, or just old lady glasses. But maybe I'm not the best judge... I'm sitting in a computer lab doing work at 2:30AM on a Friday night / Saturday morning.
Somewhere Tim Cook saw this and said brilliant! Our next new invention is right in front of us. We shall call it "Apple shades", (or some other lame name). 
Who in their right mind would wear those ugly ass glasses?
Snap made its Spectacles available across Europe today, almost seven months after the company debuted them in the U.S.
For anyone unfamiliar with Snapchat's first hardware product, the Spectacles are a one-size-fits-all pair of sunglasses that can record 10 seconds of video at a time and sync wirelessly with the mobile Snapchat app.
More than 55 million people use Snapchat daily in Europe for at least 30 minutes a day, according to Snap. It's unclear what sales number the company is targeting on the continent, given that the launch of the Spectacles in the U.S. didn't raise significant revenue, but today's rollout comes as part of a planned substantial investment in the product's marketing and distribution.
The camera-equipped sunglasses cost £130/150 euros and can be purchased from the product website or through "Snapbot" vending machines, which will appear on Friday in London, Paris, Barcelona, Berlin, and Venice. The vending machines dispense the Spectacles in either Black, Coral or Teal, and allow customers to try them on virtually using a built-in augmented reality display. A case and charging cable are included.
Article Link: Snapchat Spectacles Now Available to Purchase Across Europe
[doublepost=1496510916][/doublepost]
It's absurd to think that you are wanted in the photographs. You are overlooked just like if you took a photo while on vacation and a stranger was in the picture walking by.
[doublepost=1496511193][/doublepost]
How does sitting in a computer lab commenting on macrumors articles about Snapchat glasses equate to work? Lol, just joking
I couldn't imagine an old lady wearing anything this ugly.
Last edited:
Who said anything about being 'wanted'. Whether deliberate or 'collateral' filming, the idea of all this public recording just makes many people uncomfortable.
Lol, don't go anywhere then, cameras are everywhere!
I just can't imagine a situation where someone would be uncomfortable about being in a photo they will never see, but you are probably right, people are super insecure.
I guess public photography should be outlawed because some people don't like the idea of being in a photo somewhere.
To the people claiming they would punch someone wearing these...assault a person with a camera that records everything they see? Genius.
I thought the reason Snapchat was so popular is because the photo/video deletes itself after sent? So you are talking about a hypothetical photo that self destructs.
When the tech can identify who we are based on our pictures, then privacy is at risk. As is you would just be a random person in the photo. Most people try to avoid photographing strangers.
Last edited:
Sure, wear a mask in public all the time. Clearly it's the coming style for the hardcore privacy types. As Westley predicted in The Princess Bride:
"They're terribly comfortable. I think everyone will be wearing them in the future."
Perhaps he foresaw the rise of camera glasses!
How does a desire for privacy relate to being insecure? I've given speeches, taught classes, done news broadcasts, and worked in television production both behind and in front of the camera. But if I decide I don't want to be on camera anymore - and I have indeed - then would you say I'm insecure? Or, how about accepting my explanation that I realize the very real dangers that come from exposure? Insecurity has nothing to do with it.
No. Indiscriminate use of the camera is what we're talking about here.
In the film days, even though there was almost a certain guarantee that no one outside of the immediate friends and family of the photographer and the techs at the developing lab would ever see what was on their film, common courtesy drove people to either postpone their shot until the frame was clear, or they would ask folks if they minded being in the shot. Professional photographers used to carry permission waivers with them in case they found an amazing shot yet wanted to be courteous and get permission from the people accidentally caught in the frame.
Now that people can burn as many shots as they want without wasting expensive film, cameras are ubiquitous and people snap away, oblivious to the wishes of those around them. And those people have no say in where those photos end up. Given that nothing is ever thrown away on the net - even if its deleted from the host, Google and archive.org will generally snap up the info and squirrel it away until doomsday - the chance that your photo could be spotted by the wrong sorts and used/abused grows daily.
Lest you seize on that and say "ah! insecurity!", know that my biggest objection regarding widespread instant access video/photos is based on the algorithms applied to our daily lives, more than any photoshop campaigns against people. How about all those companies out there that want to know the intimate details of our lives? They will use facial recognition to identify you, learn where you go, what you do, who you're with. Levels deeper, they will analyze how close you get, how many times, to other people they're interested in.
Again, there has to be a way to stop this, and nothing so ridiculous as wearing a mask in public. DIY equipment for defeating CCTV can be built for about $50, so I'm hoping a solution presents itself.
Yeah. See the main body of my post. You're a little late to this game.
The very real dangers from being in a Snapchat photo? Good grief, you are wanting absolute privacy in public locations? Not going to happen. i was unaware that Snapchat was creating a database of people's faces so they could tie people to certain locations without their consent.
Last edited:
I'm not singling them out. They're just a small part of a larger problem.
I've said this in other threads, I'll repeat it here: no one particular data point or modality is going to be a problem. No one on the face of the earth cares how often you eat pizza, how often you run, what shoes you buy, where you get your gas, or the color of your hair. Its ridiculous to think that my pulse, or whether I use my garage door or my front door, or what pet food I buy means anything. No one person gives a damn about what music another person likes, or if they prefer football to baseball, or if they like Mac or Windows or iPhone or Android. None of it matters.
But when you have the ability to gather factor after factor after factor, and adjust it for changing conditions, and observe all of this over time, that data starts to gain - and hold - value. Demand for that data by governments and supra-national corporations is at an all-time high, at least until tomorrow when the demand will be even higher. If you understand economic theory you see what happens when you apply scarcity to a store of value - It becomes a currency of sorts. If you study money, and what governments have done to it over the past 150 years, perhaps you can see what could happen, and what I'm getting at. That this "currency" could be used to manipulate and control the population is unavoidable, and its going to be voluntary before it becomes mandatory. Unfortunately its being sold to the public as "gee whiz thats cool!", and people raised by the system can't see the danger apparent in it.
I'm framing this in economic terms instead of privacy concerns like I normally do because I wish to avoid the usual "what do you have to hide" retort that is all too common amongst people who live their lives online. Cognitive dissonance prevents such people from seeing past their own immediate gratification.
There are very real privacy violations that actually happen, this is not one of them. I'm pretty big on privacy myself but come on man, this is not a threat to our right to privacy. I'm not arguing with you about whether we should be concerned, we should.
Having said that, I'm not sure what privacy breach can come from catching a stranger in a photo. Clear the streets, I'm considering taking a picture.
I will say this, you are spot on with your concerns about government spying and data collection. This does not apply to that