write an article - within 300-400 words - The Meta glassholes have arrived

In recent years, wearable technology has become increasingly popular and integrated into our daily lives. One such device that has gained attention is the video-recording face computer, commonly known as smart glasses. While Google’s version, Google Glass, faced backlash and criticism in the past, a new player has entered the market – Meta.

Meta, formerly known as Facebook Reality Labs, has launched its latest product, the Meta Quest 3 virtual reality headset. This innovative device allows users to not only play games but also interact with the real world seamlessly. The Quest 3’s full-color, low-latency passthrough video feature enables wearers to perform various tasks, such as cooking, cleaning, or even enjoying a cup of coffee outdoors, all without taking off the headset.

As users began to explore the capabilities of the Quest 3, some took to social media platforms like TikTok and Reddit to share their experiences. Videos emerged of individuals recording their surroundings and engaging with strangers in public spaces. For instance, Jay Mayo posted clips of his adventures on the New York Comic-Con floor, showcasing the possibilities of mixed reality technology. Another user, Kukurio59, filmed themselves waiting for an elevator, capturing everyday moments from a unique perspective.

One particular video caught widespread attention. XR and AI enthusiast Cix Liv boldly walked into a San Francisco coffee shop, placed an order, and shared the entire experience online. While some viewers found it amusing, others raised concerns about privacy and social etiquette. Ray Ng, the co-owner of Fiddle Fig Cafe, the establishment featured in Liv’s video, considered it a playful stunt rather than a serious breach. However, the incident raises questions about the boundaries of acceptable behavior and the potential consequences of such actions.


This is not the first time wearable technology has faced scrutiny. About a decade ago, Google Glass faced significant backlash, leading to bans in various public establishments, including diners, movie theaters, and casinos. Some even resorted to physical violence against individuals wearing the device. However, societal attitudes towards privacy, public photography, and wearable tech have since evolved. With smartphone cameras now ubiquitous and influencer marketing on the rise, small businesses often welcome exposure rather than discourage it.


In light of the current situation, it is worth examining whether Meta was adequately prepared for the potential misuse of the Quest 3. While the company took precautions with its glasses-like Ray-Ban Stories, providing guidelines on public use and disclosing recording activities, similar guidelines seem lacking for the Quest 3. Additionally, the device’s recording indicator, a subtle white light, may not be immediately noticeable to bystanders, leaving room for confusion and discomfort.


Ultimately, the acceptance of wearable technology like the Quest 3 will depend on a delicate balance between individual privacy rights and the benefits brought by these devices. As technology continues to advance, it is crucial to establish clear guidelines and foster open discussions about the responsible use of such devices in public spaces. Meta and other companies should take proactive measures to address privacy concerns and set appropriate standards for user behavior.

In conclusion, the emergence of Meta’s Quest 3 and the subsequent rise of “Glassholes” provide a glimpse into our evolving relationship with wearable technology. While some individuals push the boundaries of social norms, others question the impact on privacy and etiquette. As we navigate this new digital landscape, it is essential to strike a balance that respects individual privacy while embracing the potential benefits of innovative devices like the Quest 3. The coming years will undoubtedly shape the future of wearable tech and redefine our expectations of privacy in public spaces.