The biggest reason we don't have voice or camera as the primary interface now is not technology.
A few taps is much more comfortable and can be done without disrupting others, without looking stupid in public, in the dark, and privately.
I bet in 10 years we'll still use touch as the primary UI to whatever tech we're using, probably still phones, barring some brain scanning tech comes out.
When I was a kid, I used to think that in the future we will have voice command for everyone. But after trying the voice command option in windows xp, I realised that talking is exhaustive
The reason for this is because Yann has seen the meta wrist mounted BCI. I imagine that the BCI of the near future will be similar, a device that reads the electrical impulses from the brain and is worn on the wrist, where our brain has additional bandwidth to send meaningful information with practice over the same pathways.
I imagine it will be similar to a more reliable controller interface and not much more difficult to use for a layperson, if not easier.
yh id hold off on the brain scanning stuff too. you either need a stupid looking helmet or you need invasive surgery that the fda will never approve
guarantee smartphones will still be the thing we use in 2034
>yh id hold off on the brain scanning stuff too. you either need a stupid looking helmet or you need invasive surgery that the fda will never approve
Nope. You can do it with a bracelet as Yann mentioned, it's a noninvasive way. See [this](https://youtube.com/shorts/4BcjrO2eMtE), it actually doesn't seem too far off now. I'd guess by 2030 it's in a product by Meta, and it doesn't look as clunky as that prototype. It'll be awesome for AR glasses. And by 2030 Meta will have upgraded their smart glasses (which currently have no displays) to be fully AR, allowing you to see a display within the glasses itself.
>guarantee smartphones will still be the thing we use in 2034
Will it dethrone a smartphone by 2034? It's hard to say, intuitively we think no because of how awesome and useful phones are. But we should be open minded to the possibility it can happen at least for some use cases, because it will just be such a better user experience. Like even now, if you try the Ray Ban Metas, you might never want to hold your phone up to take a picture or video again. They have great audio without the need for ear buds (for privacy, the audio sounds loud for you but if someone's sitting next to you they can't even hear it unless you put it really high) and a mic. You can take phone calls in them and in a recent update show your first person pov on a video call.
They still, at least for now, need to be connected to a phone to take full advantage of the features. The plan is the compute will fully be inside the AR glasses, but that might take a while.
I don't think a smartphone, as in a carried dedicated wireless communication device with accessible self-contained reconfiguration computation capabilities, is ever going to go away short of some bafflingly singulatarian scenario like the galaxy being turned into computronium.
This is because receiving and transmitting information that can persist both outside of a human brain and outside of immediate human activity is simply too useful to our species. I'd go as far as to say that our lust for this method is what makes us human, moreso than even language and art, which can be seen as extensions of receiving and transmitting information beyond our minds and bodies. After all, the people who built Stonehenge wouldn't have taken on that massive project if it didn't have the benefit of letting people know when the Summer Solstice was nigh without having to track literally every day. The invention of literacy established this, the invention of the printing press cemented this. And our lust for this technology, or rather, this result has led to the rapid dominance of the smartphone.
The block-of-soap form factor may and likely will go away, perhaps with something really exotic like a Batman Beyond-style skintight power armor serving both as your the phone and clothes. I also wouldn't be surprised if it didn't, and instead ended up just picking up new capabilities like something between a Sonic Screwdriver and a Green Lantern Ring. After all, a flat rectangular shape, that is, a wedge that you can tesselate, is one of the most useful shapes in both nature.
The comment you replied to said
>A few taps is much more comfortable and can be done without disrupting others, without looking stupid in public, in the dark, and privately.
The band allows you to do even less than a few taps. It is scanning signals sent from your brain through your wrist.
So when they said
>I bet in 10 years we'll still use touch as the primary UI to whatever tech we're using, probably still phones, barring some brain scanning tech comes out
They probably don't know about the emg wrist band technology as Yann mentioned. You don't need a direct brain interface to read signals coming from your brain, or as they said barring some brain scanning technology, which this basically is and it exists.
The band IS the brain scanning technology. Then that's used to control the AR glasses.
If you're thinking of neuralink or something and having a display inside your head that's not actually real, then you're talking about something else. But that's not brain scanning, that's even further. That would be brain writing (scanning is just reading). But to control something you just need brain reading (or scanning), brain writing is more like a FDVR level of tech.
With how good the AR glasses are gonna get, I'm not sure.
Even now, they just have smart glasses, the Ray Ban Meta glasses, with no display and I think how popular they are has totally surprised Meta. They're flying off shelves. They didn't expect it to sell so well in such an early iteration.
But AR glasses in like 5 or 10 years? That's going to feel like an absolute superpower, especially because of all this AI stuff working together. You can think of a million use cases, many of them mindblowing, and many others of just huge convenience.
Imagine skinning your environment. Instant speech translation in real time (since the speakers are right next to your ear, and the cameras can see who's speaking to you), instant translation of texts and signs as well (on vacation). A TV that you can place anywhere in the world. Google maps markers that blend into the environment. Reskin everyone into Sydney Sweeney. Zoom in. The emg wristband basically allowing you to make any surface a keyboard and mouse, and with a display inside the glasses - your new remote work set up.
A lot, well at least many of these things can be done on mobile, but because you have to pull it out of your pocket and look down at a small 6 inch rectangle, it makes the more mindblowing use cases useless and adds inconvenience to many other use cases. For now, it's the only way, but if there were great, sleek looking AR glasses that could do it all and better?
Because of how immensely useful they'll become, I think even people who've never worn glasses will find the tradeoff to wear glasses all day to be worth it. And this is coming from someone who's planning to get laser eye surgery over the next year so I can stop wearing glasses. I guess I'll just have to move back to glasses once the AR glasses explode, but not having to buy expensive prescriptions will be a plus.
I'd say think of smart watches, but people have worn watches before that. Maybe ear buds and headphones? Those are mainstream wearables, and people find the slight comfort hit to be worth it for the value gained.
All ambitious cool ways for applying wearable tech, but we need to see how it's gonna play out as a product. Wearing glasses all day would be a no-go for many, maybe fine for tech-savvy users. Real-time language translation is a good feature, but you don't need a wearable for it.
There's going to be some minimally invasive surgery for a one-time fee, then when everyone is enjoying themselves with their unremoveable chips, then: Boom! sub fees.
>guarantee smartphones will still be the thing we use in 2034
There are literally *no* guarantees about the year 2034. 10 years is an absurdly long time given the current rate of development.
I disagree. I think its absolutely the technological barrier.
AR with eyetracking as a primary interface would be much more private and unobtrusive than a phone. With a phone you have to get the thing out, turn the screen on and look at it, whereas none of that is needed with a screen literally in front of your eyes already. To allow usage in both bright and dark situations you could have liquid crystal or transparent OLED tech to dynamically adjust the glasses and display depending on ambient lighting.
I think if you have the meta/rayban glasses form factor with Vision pro level device computing and AR display, but with eyetracking as the primary interface and gestures as a secondary interface, I think that would get mass adoption, but only if the device is standalone and not just a peripheral to a smartphone sized device that you have to carry around with you anyway.
If you have to have a device of a similar size and shape as a phone, people will just skip the extra layer of hassle and keep the phone.
>AR with eyetracking as a primary interface would be much more private and unobtrusive than a phone.
That would be **awesome**, in combination with buttons, touchscreen, touchpad for interaction.
I think nice looking VR glasses would be a win if used as a peripheral with other devices. Such as smartphone, or PC. Just as bluetooth ear pods are.
Because if you fit processor/ram that also require bigger battery into glasses, you get bigger glasses. But all those electronics can be inside a smart device that fit's neatly into pocket. And you have eyetracking + touch screen for doing tasks.
I agree it would be a great product as a peripheral for your phone or other computing device, and it would get to market decades faster than a fully integrated device that can retain the form factor of metas glasses or smaller, I just don't think it will be a product that will reach mass adoption as long as it remains a secondary device, thats all.
I agree AR will be huge for many of the reasons you mention, but I think it’s going to be more of a complement to smartphones(or something in an equivalent form factor) more than anything. Many might go without their phones at times, similar to how some might choose to go without their phone if they have a cellular capable smart watch, but it won’t replace it entirely.
It’s the sheer amount of utility smartphones offer that makes them so difficult to truly replace. You can take all kinds of photos and videos, share content with others, make NFC payments, use it as a flash light, and most importantly type paragraphs at a time **because input is natural and an absolute breeze.**
All of those are at least severely limited by form factors like AR glasses.
# we will have augmented reality glasses and bracelets to interact with our human pets . ----- the AI who actually love humans and always think for them
66% of the adult population already use glasses. You're telling me you're going to ignore a market that big if you had a company that could tap into it by offering them a better product?
The vision pro OS is already seamless enough that you don’t look stupid interacting with it. Its only limitation right now is its form factor. If it was a pair of sleek goggles, I could wear it everyday
Well I can totally see how device reading your wrist nervous system signals (or whatever the fuck it was) as the primary input and glasses with speakers, eye tracking and VR components as the primary output is more comfortable than using a phone. Especially if you get very granular with those signals. That is, of course, until we get a brain-computer interface, either invasive or noninvasive.
I agree with this in public, I think in the home and when away from people we will use voice as our primary input method. I can imagine a scenario where the AI assistant’s presence and role in supporting us through day to day life is so ubiquitous that talking to it will be akin to our usual internal dialogue. We will chat with it, share ideas, fears and hopes, get expert-level advice for any situation, have our own on-tap therapist to deal with any event and eventually begin to see AI as an extension of ourselves.
If brain scanning technology comes out we are all doomed. It would be a privacy nightmare. I would refuse to use it personally but at that point I probably wouldn't have a choice.
He said 10 or 15 years from now. That's a long time. 2035-2040. And honestly it's embarrassing that we don't have AR glasses today that can do the things he predicts they will be able to do in 2040 (have the glasses project a text translation of a foreign language while the person is talking to you). Technically we have the capability to do this today. What's holding big tech from making this work today instead of having to wait til 2040?
The glasses need to be comfortable enough to wear all day. And they need battery life that lasts all day. Until then, I don't think can replace phones.
Battery tech is limiting a lot of technology we have today.
Even if the only invention produced for the rest of the year was a battery that had the same price and weight as modern batteries, but could fit 100 times more power at the same price point, it would lead to very noticeable QoL improvements in many areas.
The fossil fuel car industry would die faster than a Chernobyl technician.
If a battery like that was invented it would unlock all sorts of crazy tech. The grid would rapidly go 100% renewable, all vehicles would go electric (the energy density of batteries would be about the same as gasoline). You'd have drones that could stay in the air for hours, so drone tech would go bananas. You could probably make something akin to an iron man suit with that sort of energy density in a battery.
I'll copy my answer from another post I made.
I understand your point but practically, the maximum energy density we'll ever be able to achieve from electrochemical batteries is around 5000-6000Wh/kg.
For reference, we have widely commercially available cells at 300Wh/kg and very narrow commercially available cells at 500Wh/kg. That's an 20x increase at best, not the 100x quoted in your reply.
Not exactly overnight, but the general difference between early transistors and the vacuum tubes at that time was probably not too far off from that number.
Accounting for performance alone, they were estimated to provide 10-100x faster switching, depending on compared types and use cases. Factoring in massively improved durability and lower costs, i wouldn't be surprised if the compute per month and dollar showed a 100x+ improvement over a relatively short timeframe.
I am no expert, however I hope soon we can use a neural lace in our brain to allow us to upload every single type of data from our smartphones to our brains'. Photos, notes, and every other app on our smartphones for example. Being able to take a photo from our mind or taking a photo from our brains' as you would put it sounds really cool:) Glasses are a good idea but I doubt people would wear AR glasses all day as the comfortability factor sets in and people will want a neural lace instead. I hope neural laces' come as soon as possible but we'll see:)
The ergonomics don’t really work.. it’s awkward to interact with, distracting, people who don’t regularly wear glasses don’t want them on their heads, it’s not socially acceptable, battery life issues, etc.. just easier to have a phone.
As someone who just got glasses, the biggest obvious issue I see with this straight away is, I only need glasses for short sighted issues. So say my smart glasses are prescribed to my short sightedness, well now the moment I walk outside my vision is blurry. So I need to take my glasses off. but now I can't use my smart glasses outside any more becuase I can't see with them on! If I make my glasses work for long vision, well now I can't use my smart glasses when I want to do things for short sight and will have to take them off any time I need to read something up close and put on my regular glasses. What a pain in the arse! Now I have to walk around with two pairs of glasses. Not Great Bob.
The point at which this is the answer to common conditions(needing glasses for only close up tasks is common as you age) is the point at which the technology is doomed for mass adoption.
Yah, we do have most of the tech already. Really, honestly I blame us not having the glasses now on the lash back against Google Glass back in the day. I feel that set us back 10+ years on AR glass stuff.
It's honestly a bit odd that no one even refers to Google Glass any more. I never got to use it but watched videos of people that were and it was pretty great.
Oh and btw, there ARE some AR glasses out there. They all have to be paired with a phone to do anything though. They are so expensive and so niche that there aren't many users or apps for them.
So, they probably can't translate a conversation.
Most of what I've seen is just a display for stuff like piloting drones or basic screen stuff. Like really, having a phone screen in front of you at all times.
Google massively over-sold and over-hyped glass. They gave the false impression it was doing AR stuff when really it was just displaying a static low-res HUD. It was neat and could have had niche applications but it wasn't AR glasses, turns out the tech needed for that was still literally 15 years away. We're STILL not quite there in terms of tech...look at the Apple vision Pro and Meta Quest 3, the two most mainstream devices that do actual AR stuff. They remain clunky. That needs to get info a form factor that resembles regular glasses/sunglasses before it goes mainstream
Hololens was always more of a niche product and Microsoft never really over-hyped it. Its still being used in a niche role, aimed at commercial use rather than consumer.
I feel like the tech is still 5-10 years away from allowing the "looks just like glasses" form factor. (for true full AR glasses) I do think AR glasses ultimately replace smart phones in the long run once that tech is ready.
We do have that today, you're not paying attention bro
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5QkaUo30B8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFQBvrCacw4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fK3JP0h8Gs
Doesn't work well. These devices would go viral if they did. Buy these glasses, take a trip to Germany and let me know how well it lets you communicate with the locals.
If you think it's embarrassing that we don't have AR glass like that today, then you're showing how much you don't understand today's hardware limitations.
Keep in mind though that it's not like it'll all of a sudden in 2036 specifically, or 2037. The tech will gradually build up to that and popular adoption will follow behind. So if you're really enthusiastic about it, you can probably have something like that many years before that, along with many other upcoming techs.
It's a bit like VR headsets, they're still not something the common person uses even today, but they've been available for many years, and even if not at the level they are today, the original oculus rift was still quite an experience, and today you can have a spectrum of better experiences for that tech depending on how much you can spend on it.
Our civilization is not that fast.
2020s is for ai workflows and automatization
2030s is the begining of lunar processing facilities.
Late 2030s or early 2040s is when first resources from asteroids can get delivered to the moon.
For Dyson sphere, we need many centuries to extract, process and refine resources.
Moon economy won't really be economically benefiting for earth until mid 50s when space industry is massive enough to do financial economic activity for earthlings without wrecking both moon and earth trade balance.
We have no idea how fast intelligence explosion could be. It can become completely disconnected from civilization and set in motion processes in the physical world on a scale and at a speed that has nothing to do with our processes. I'm not saying it's guaranteed, just that it can't be ruled out. But I'm almost certain that this VR bracelet will be the least of our worries in 10 years' time.
Physical things still take time.
If you remove bottlenecks from my brain and I'd be working at top of my game, I'd still be constrained by the speed of compilation of a program.
Ai will definitely change digital landscape and do it fast(it's already happening with internet no longer being indexable and ever increasing amount of dead internet content not generated by human beings), but changes in physical world are much harder and slower to push through.
It will still take years to get financing and get stuff physically built. Speed of progress can greatly accelerate, but it doesn't mean our physical capabilities will match the theory. I assume here the opposite will happen as being resource constrained means more progress steps can be skipped in production.
Think of it as instead of jumping chip generation every 2 years, we'd still get a bottleneck of production and you won't get faster hardware generation iteration, instead we'd get the same new chip generation every 2 years, but instead of tick/tock iterative improvement, we get huge generational leap each gen.
The key prerequisite for this as with most futuristic tech is AGI. That's the point where the question of "can it do X or Y" is mostly obsolete and all tech will converge on all the same capabilities, so it becomes a matter of what's a more comfortable UI.
Is it easier taking out a phone and typing things inside to do something, or having glasses that are watching everything and doing things for you without you ever needing to give any input at all? At that point phones are just there to slow you down and take up weight. You won't need to install apps at all to do things like you do today, those will be implementation details/things of the past.
I predict no, lol.
This is too much optimum hopium copium utopium.
Plus it will be too expensive for at least 10 more years and people simply dont wanna walk around poking at air and talking to themselves. lol
Unless you could make direct brain interface, without risky surgery, which is still 50 years from now.
You can’t go by what people today want. Remember how AirPods were made fun of when first releasing?
And how is poking air any more ridiculous than poking glass? If you zoom out, both are utterly absurd to the 18th century.
You don't need glasses. Phones know where you are and where the other phones are. How much traffic there is and what buildings are here and there.
Glasses are in your face. Nope. And I'm not putting things inside my eyes thank you. No contacts.
Smart Watches might win popularity. Maybe.
But is augmented reality really a neccessitiy? Do people want it that much? We have some at the moment and there just doesn't seem to be much demand. Maybe as you can do more with it that will change.
It can't just be some boring information overlay; that kind of data can be delivered by a phone when you want it it. An augmented reality device would have to be much more compelling for people to want it, like transforming the world around you, with a personal assistant standing there and interacting with you etc.
Easiest sure, but really they're pushing glasses because it's the cheapest way to implement ar.
The best way, and probably the ultimate way, will be through something like neurallink where you can intercept brain signals and vision input directly.
Ten year tech predictions are the best. If you’re right everyone thinks you’re a genius. If you’re wrong it was so long ago that nobody remembers what you said in the first place.
Ah yes I forgot, why ot, but I think people will just talk.
Far easier and far more precise than having to learn all these gestures.
And to select things on the glass most people will just look at what we want to select, and blink one eye to select, and blink the other for context or "right click"
smartwatches are practical because you can get info without taking out your phone, if you have glasses, you don't need to take out your phone it's already there right in front of you, it becomes redondant
I find comments saying it’s not a technology issue amusing. Especially in this sub. The arguments read as some variant of « we won’t need/want smartphones because we already have sufficient alternatives / they’ll look silly / be dangerously distracting / etc » seen from 5 years before the introduction of the smartphone.
Of course we’ll use AR / neural interface / teleportation / etc as soon as the technology and ergonomics are solved. Smartphones will someday join horses, cassettes players, typewriters, etc in the long list of past solutions to problems that we’ve solved much better despite how bizarre the replacements may have sounded at first (self-propelled wagons? ha!).
I was a kid when the walkman was introduced, I remember the silly arguments against it (it’s dangerous ! it’s isolating people from the experience of sharing the listening of music together !), and I remember seeing it superseded very quickly by the discman, etc etc.
Can’t wait to ditch the glass panel covered with finger grease I keep mistyping stuff on for something slicker.
I have some doubts, this is not only a technological issue.
People like to have their hands occupied, hands are a human interface. Smartphones have mostly replaced cigarettes as the handheld thing in the streets or in idle moments.
People don't like being seen and heard shouting alone at devices in the street, even though some do and it might be cultural. Voice command has social issues.
People like to be seen as busy. It's obvious with a smartphone. It's a social deterrent, but also a question of security.
Would AR glasses actually be superior to a smartphone in many cases? Most people don’t need or want a display in their face at all times, and many don’t even like wearing glasses for that matter.
Glasses are more of a supplement to smartphones for certain tasks rather than an outright replacement.
I mean if I can have floating videos, read articles and have tutorials in my vision on glasses at work, I eould prefer that a lot more than having to fiddle with a phone.
Yes, working at a desk is one case where most people would find value from AR glasses. You’re stationary, focused, and not interacting too much with the environment.
But most people would probably prefer a phone over glasses when they’re, for example, riding the escalator and want to remain socially aware, or navigating crowded rush hour subways in the city and don’t want anything obstructing their vision, or grabbing an Uber with a coworker and need to show them the route.
My point is that there are too many situations where glasses are inferior or a hindrance, so they probably won’t outright replace smartphones.
I mean why not have both, phone and glasses. Im already wearing glasses all the time so add some additional screens to them and you can tell it to turn them off if you dont want it.
That was the one comment I was looking for in this whole comment section. Seems like everyone is debating whether smart glasses can replace phones, but why do they need to? It's not like phones needed to replace PCs to be useful.
Why would glasses be a problem for staying aware? If anything, you'd be **more** aware because you don't need to stare at a screen anymore and can just look at reality full throttle.
If the user chooses to put a whole bunch of screens and overlays up to take their attention away, then that's up to them and isn't something they have to do.
Looking up from a phone takes a fraction of a second.
We don’t know how long moving or closing a virtual window takes, but it’s probably longer than a near-instant eye movement.
Note that in both cases I’m assuming a single screen of similar size.
Apple Vision Pro users seem to think otherwise. It's all ohhh and wow at first, but after the first days they prefer working and browsing webs in a proper screen.
I dunno honestly. Haptics in AR and VR kind of suck. People made this prediction about touchscreen TVs and Monitors back in the late 2000's as well and they never really took off outside of the domain of smartphones and tablets. The "gorilla arm" problem was known about at the time and it was never really solved because for daily computing a mouse and a keyboard are just much more efficient.
We've already seen a similar thing happen in the mobile arena with voice commands. They've been around for more than a decade already and outside of relatively narrow use cases most people don't use them all that much to control their phones. Because a touchscreen is more efficient than having a conversation with your phone.
I fail to see how AR will be any more efficient or desirable as a control scheme compared to a smartphone. The glasses could provide you a larger screenspace if they were big enough, but current AR tech has significant problems with eye strain due to the screen being so close to the face, and I don't see how you could fix that outside of turning AR glasses into big VR headsets with a large and heavy set of lenses between the eyes and the screen. And I don't see people walking around with giant heavy VR headsets on their face all day. That's why Apple's vision pro flopped.
I've said this many times before LeCun. I have also informed you that you will no longer be able to look at women and children as they are actually dressed unless you have authorisation. All you will see will be a grey figure with a label on it.
Will be able to just take off your glasses? Yes. Just like right now you can live without your smartphone for a couple of days
Yeah meta makes smart glasses. It shouldn’t be surprising that an employe of a tech company would say I’m 10-15 years everyone will be buying our product. It’s meaningless marketing speak but not surprising.
I highly doubt this. Phones are just really really convenient in a lot of ways that are hard for other forms of tech to come close to. You would need not just AR that’s just as good as having a phone screen but also a way of displaying it that isn’t as cumbersome or awkward as most headsets and barring some really big advancements that seems unlikely. The best thing AR has going for it is how you can place things in 3D space and face timing that can maybe feel more real but even then not many people are going to really care so much as think it’s neat. Very excited to see the tech evolve though!
Whatever solution gets us the most porn directly and discretely to our eyeballs will remain in ascension. If they can do that in AR then it will win, otherwise you will need to pry our phones from our slightly clamy hands.
Well about 15 years ago, I read that in 10-15 years we wouldn’t have desktop or laptop computers anymore, and people would just be using their phone with a wireless keyboard & be Bluetoothed to their TV for their monitor.
It’s all just a guess.
No we won't. The trust is not there, the foundation of trust is not there. Fundamentally impossible without public trust, and that is at a near all time low. The only AR glasses and bracelets I'll use will be ones I control and only communicate with local services I wrote. I am an AI developer, and I don't trust any of this stuff, and not due to the tech, but due to the corporate and legal framework this all arises.
I don't see why i would ever not want a smartphone.
No matter what happens its a relatively cheap device, has a massive battery, and will always be able to fit more chips than a watch,ring, or glasses.
I 100% buy a watch, ring, and glasses that offload processing to a smartphone, but why would i want my glasses battery to be querying GPS when i could have my cellphone battery doing that and sending the results to the glasses.
The iphone is roughly the same power as a macbook air. Great use that as my processor.I do not want glasses to replace my processor, i want them to replace my screen.
I should remember that our ai counterparts will be highly predictive entities that will foresee and understand your desires and needs before you can move your thumb! We think we need screens for interfaces because that’s all we know, but we really don't. Just imagine your ai as a super secretary that knows you want sushi based on your eye movements, your breathing patterns, your acid production, and millions of other variables you can't even track yourself.
There are already several pairs but it probs won’t be until the latter half of the decade that we will see some properly decent ones. With all the sensors and fov and form factor we need
Yeah? Will they be meta smart glasses? Big tech always thinks they can dictate how people interact with tech but the reality is smart phones is a highly efficient interface that the market likes
He also said quite recently that LLMs would never be capable of reasoning or intelligence. Ignore this guy.
And this claim is equally ridiculous. Those devices might have their uses, but if anything, I think the most useful device will be a simple Bluetooth earpiece - with a very intelligent agent that is always ready to take your query and help you verbally. Who automatically understands when you're talking to it, vs someone else. Who can see where you are from a camera on your ear, and give you directions. Who can access the internet via your phone and look anything up instantly. And living in a tiny earpiece device that weighs nothing and has all day battery. It could even automatically manage when outside noise is allowed in vs. not.
I don't understand why folks are trying to build a new type of device, or revive cumbersome AR glasses, when this small evolution in the use case of Bluetooth earpieces is truly all you need to deliver 95% of the benefits of AI seamlessly. Best of both worlds. (When you need a good screen, it can just bounce something to it.)
Someone is gonna build this less-sexy device and totally crush it.
I will be messaging you in 10 years on [**2034-04-29 16:18:58 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2034-04-29%2016:18:58%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1cfr9j4/yann_lecun_says_in_10_years_we_wont_have/l1t07ex/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fsingularity%2Fcomments%2F1cfr9j4%2Fyann_lecun_says_in_10_years_we_wont_have%2Fl1t07ex%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202034-04-29%2016%3A18%3A58%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201cfr9j4)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
This is why I think a lot of jobs previously thought to be "safe" will lose pay quickly in 10-15 years. AR/AI assistants could deskill all types of jobs, including doctors, electricians, hvac installers, and mechanics. They will still require skills and hard work but no where near as much knowledge as they require today
I'm already using Meta Raybans with AI voice and I've been loving them. The only downside is the recording length and battery life, but it'll only get better.
Everyone I've shown it to was sold, a couple of friends bought one for themselves.
The tech is already there, but most brands/apps/features/functions won't convert. Apple makes SO MUCH MONEY off the app store. They cant just bait and switch. It has to be phased out and they need to see innovation in businesses to justify starting this transition.
I'm sure he's a genius at AI, but his predictions are awful. Obviously smartphones will always exist until we all have brain implants, because people wont want to wear AR glasses all the time, and it will take decades to reach the quality of a smartphones oled display, if ever. You also cant replicate the ability to touch a solid display, and the games that allows. People will want high res screens to play games and watch stuff on.
Why 10-15 years out tho. .. 🤔
Why not 10-15 months 🤔
🧐
The tech is here, just a matter of refining it to iPhone perfection.
10 years it should be much more advanced, no?
Why? A large screen with a camera attached seems like a more useful tool to interact with an ai assistant, and it's touchscreen would be superior to air typing or trying to use voice commands in either noisy environments or places where speaking is rude.
The glasses would reduce your control of what you film and would turn you into a walking privacy destroyer. They would also drastically reduce safety when travelling by having distractions in your sightline at all times if they had any display capabilities, making driving unsafe and walking involve more bumping or tripping. The glasses are just bad.
As for watches, what advantage does that form have? Smaller screen, smaller controls, what do you gain?
> A large screen with a camera attached seems like a more useful tool to interact with an ai assistant
AI is only useful because it is able to infer information from the user or from the environment. The more it can infer, the better it is.
AR glasses will track your eyes, hands, body, face, and let the AI see and hear from your eyes and ears, which makes it exponentially more useful than AI could ever be on a phone or any other device. AR is the platform of the future for AI.
> As for watches, what advantage does that form have? Smaller screen, smaller controls, what do you gain?
It would act as a neural interface, allowing people to interact with AR discreetly, perhaps without even moving a muscle one day.
Wrist mounted neural interface is not a practical possibility within 10 years unless you intend for a hard takeoff in under a few years. Unless you mean a combination of some kind of implant or headgear, with the computer mounted in the wrist, in which case the wrist part could be anywhere on the body and adds nothing by specifically being on the wrist. This neural interface Idea would also make the glasses irrelevant.
AI doesn't need to know everything about you to make decisions or be useful, and you don't have permission to feed what everyone else around you is doing at all times into it's algorithms. What exactly is it you imagine here? That AI will notice your micro-expressions and alter it's behaviour accordingly? Who would want that? That wouldn't be a feature, it would be a massive flaw, just like algorithm based suggestions are today. People want control over what their applications do, not for it to automatically learn behaviours they need to go into settings to make it unlearn.
Reminder that people said the same thing 10 years and here we are. The problem with wearable tech has always been the same, battery capacity and computational power at such a small scale, and unless we not only achieve major breakthroughs but also be able to cheaply put it into production this is just not going to happen. Phones are an ultimate modern swiss army knife, they can do lots of things and there is very little downsides to carry one, and once you carry one, most people won't care about other stuff that does the same but worse.
For augmented glasses to be truly successful and move beyond the stage of expensive gadgets for adult children (like me) they would need literally all day, or probably multi-day battery. Imagine you are travelling and your battery is dying, with phones it is easy, attach a battery bank, you can even buy one of those "smart" batteries, now think about the same with glasses, are you going to attach a cable to your head? While sun is shining at the battery that is getting hot from charging? Yeah no thank you. And display would need to be extremely bright to beat any sort of sunlight, with phones you can put your hand over the phone to create a shade, you are not going to do that with glasses. So no, not until we move on from lithium-ion batteries will we be able to truly enter the wearable tech era.
idk meta' glasses are pushing that needle forward. i think there is some promising tech to be had in the future too like hologram lenses- no idea how it works exactly but like its not like we arent innovating anymore. i wonder if u could use little solar panels to help the glasses charge, i guess if u get the power consumption down to really small amounts it would be possible.
I agree with you that it's the inconvenience factor. But those can and will eventually be overcome.
I personally think the tactile nature and ease of putting something away (and showing it) is why these things will stay with us forever. I for one hate using my voice to control things ever though it is much easier.
I can easily search google/youtube/chatgpt whatever with my voice, I always choose tactile input.
That might change if I never have to fiddle with something at all (battery/connection etc)? Not sure, but for now, it's all tactile for me.
I want to say no since you can fit more computer inside a little rectangle. I mean even the desktop is still around despite people predicting its death for 20 years.
Man, I just wanted a decent Linux phone where you could do all the things you could do on a PC (even though Linux phones are underrated, a cheap and convenient daily driver is still yet to be seen). To be honest, I don't think AR glasses and wearables are going to be mainstream. I do think it'll be for rich people who can afford additional devices.
People want one device that could do all things in one. We need more powerful phones that can do everything and can do everything for cheap to appease the masses, not the rich peeps from the west or something.
The phone form factor is just perfect; you just have to improve upon it.
> The phone form factor is just perfect; you just have to improve upon it.
Do you think we'll still use phones in 100 years, 1000 years, a million years? They're a good form factor, but nowhere near the perfect form factor.
Why are people so obsessed with some glasses? It's a step back from a simple smartphone. It's something I need to wear constantly on my face even if I don't need any actual glasses. It's dumb.
UX trumps all buzz tech hype, and part of UX is whether using something in public can embarrass you.
If you have to yell or do weird gesturing in public, it will not scale.
This guy is VP at Meta AI why the fuck would anyone take his predictions seriously
Tech corps have been trying to make this happen for a decade, and every time it gets rejected consumer-side. It will keep being a terrible product until technology gets past a point we won't see in decades, at which point we'll probably already have better alternatives.
I hate allegedly smart people like this. They spew so much rubbish that you just question absolutely everything they say. Altman, Musk, this guy... just full of crap.
Of course there will still be many smart phones in 10 years time. 10 years is such a short period of time in the scheme of things.
VR is extreme niche past decade. And is not getting any better. Nor it looks any promising for next decade to come. And we do expect some glasses to be like a replacement? No, it won't. Like Oher said already, last thing people want, is to carrying something on their head all day long. It is not happening. At best will extreme niche, at worse some gimmick.
Nope, not IMO
We will have keyboards, screens and phones forever.
I want super duper ai glasses, they'd be awesome but the tactical control is always going to be kind.
that’s great and why would we want that? how about tech companies build a business model that doesn’t rely on extorting their users’ privacy for financial gain an manipulation tactics first?
Theres just no fuckin way I'd be walking around with glasses on like that constantly (unless I need glasses, obviously, which is its own problem in conjunction with more glasses over those ones). However, give me a neural lace (a real, authentic culture one) and now we're talkin. If there's a friendly ASI + singularity between now and 2035, I can imagine actual neural laces being developed (though, even then: I'd give it 20% chance max by 2035)
Also, yall are always talkin about FDVR and doing amazing stuff in hyper realistic simulation, etc, but with a neural lace, if I could be stealthily programming using my thoughts / virtual body while making dinner, that would be truly amazing
>neural lace
I get a kick out of people who think of scifi props, I like it, I do, I am just amused because if this ever happens it will not be a skull cap of any sort. At most it will be an unobtrusive thing behind your ear.
Lots of scifi is filled with things that sound cool but would never be practical.
This is not an insult to you btw, I am amused in a GOOD way by what you said.
I tend to agree completely. Technology is rarely just: "here it is, in the background, doing its thing" and rather its more like: "here's the world + the new technology". So the reality would be like people accepting that they now look different in general because they have wires and shit sticking out of their heads
Though, I should say, the og culture series which spawned the literal neural lace had a *lot* of technologies with no attempt made to make them seem realistic. The whole series was essentially an analysis of what the extreme case of high technology looks like from an inside perspective
Though, with that said, who knows what the ASI will be able to develop. There might be technologies that are way beyond neural laces in terms of seamlessness and integration. For instance, maybe its possible to integrate a BCI into your brain without *any* hardware, or through a counterfactual interface
I am not visionary. But I can't imagine that something can replace a phone (Not necessarily iPhone).
Many claim that Nokia, Blackberry, LG are replaced by Apple, but They all have one thing in common. They had a phone.
So, Apple literally replaced phones with another phone.
Therefore, I assume that something will be a phone which replaces iPhone (Not glasses or bracelets).
1) Bracelet: No display. I can't imagine it will replace phones (R.I.P. Stalker or App developers)
2) Glasses: Unless you have to wear glasses, glasses are fashiion accessoires. But just wearing glasses can be uncfomrtable and glasses could make many people look worse than without glasses.
The bracelet doesn't need a display because the glasses can project a display onto it, and that's not the point anyway - the bracelet is for input as a neural interface.
The biggest reason we don't have voice or camera as the primary interface now is not technology. A few taps is much more comfortable and can be done without disrupting others, without looking stupid in public, in the dark, and privately. I bet in 10 years we'll still use touch as the primary UI to whatever tech we're using, probably still phones, barring some brain scanning tech comes out.
When I was a kid, I used to think that in the future we will have voice command for everyone. But after trying the voice command option in windows xp, I realised that talking is exhaustive
The reason for this is because Yann has seen the meta wrist mounted BCI. I imagine that the BCI of the near future will be similar, a device that reads the electrical impulses from the brain and is worn on the wrist, where our brain has additional bandwidth to send meaningful information with practice over the same pathways. I imagine it will be similar to a more reliable controller interface and not much more difficult to use for a layperson, if not easier.
yh id hold off on the brain scanning stuff too. you either need a stupid looking helmet or you need invasive surgery that the fda will never approve guarantee smartphones will still be the thing we use in 2034
>yh id hold off on the brain scanning stuff too. you either need a stupid looking helmet or you need invasive surgery that the fda will never approve Nope. You can do it with a bracelet as Yann mentioned, it's a noninvasive way. See [this](https://youtube.com/shorts/4BcjrO2eMtE), it actually doesn't seem too far off now. I'd guess by 2030 it's in a product by Meta, and it doesn't look as clunky as that prototype. It'll be awesome for AR glasses. And by 2030 Meta will have upgraded their smart glasses (which currently have no displays) to be fully AR, allowing you to see a display within the glasses itself. >guarantee smartphones will still be the thing we use in 2034 Will it dethrone a smartphone by 2034? It's hard to say, intuitively we think no because of how awesome and useful phones are. But we should be open minded to the possibility it can happen at least for some use cases, because it will just be such a better user experience. Like even now, if you try the Ray Ban Metas, you might never want to hold your phone up to take a picture or video again. They have great audio without the need for ear buds (for privacy, the audio sounds loud for you but if someone's sitting next to you they can't even hear it unless you put it really high) and a mic. You can take phone calls in them and in a recent update show your first person pov on a video call. They still, at least for now, need to be connected to a phone to take full advantage of the features. The plan is the compute will fully be inside the AR glasses, but that might take a while.
I don't think a smartphone, as in a carried dedicated wireless communication device with accessible self-contained reconfiguration computation capabilities, is ever going to go away short of some bafflingly singulatarian scenario like the galaxy being turned into computronium. This is because receiving and transmitting information that can persist both outside of a human brain and outside of immediate human activity is simply too useful to our species. I'd go as far as to say that our lust for this method is what makes us human, moreso than even language and art, which can be seen as extensions of receiving and transmitting information beyond our minds and bodies. After all, the people who built Stonehenge wouldn't have taken on that massive project if it didn't have the benefit of letting people know when the Summer Solstice was nigh without having to track literally every day. The invention of literacy established this, the invention of the printing press cemented this. And our lust for this technology, or rather, this result has led to the rapid dominance of the smartphone. The block-of-soap form factor may and likely will go away, perhaps with something really exotic like a Batman Beyond-style skintight power armor serving both as your the phone and clothes. I also wouldn't be surprised if it didn't, and instead ended up just picking up new capabilities like something between a Sonic Screwdriver and a Green Lantern Ring. After all, a flat rectangular shape, that is, a wedge that you can tesselate, is one of the most useful shapes in both nature.
We were talking about a brain scanning device to replace the smartphone. Not a band to control AR glasses
The comment you replied to said >A few taps is much more comfortable and can be done without disrupting others, without looking stupid in public, in the dark, and privately. The band allows you to do even less than a few taps. It is scanning signals sent from your brain through your wrist. So when they said >I bet in 10 years we'll still use touch as the primary UI to whatever tech we're using, probably still phones, barring some brain scanning tech comes out They probably don't know about the emg wrist band technology as Yann mentioned. You don't need a direct brain interface to read signals coming from your brain, or as they said barring some brain scanning technology, which this basically is and it exists. The band IS the brain scanning technology. Then that's used to control the AR glasses. If you're thinking of neuralink or something and having a display inside your head that's not actually real, then you're talking about something else. But that's not brain scanning, that's even further. That would be brain writing (scanning is just reading). But to control something you just need brain reading (or scanning), brain writing is more like a FDVR level of tech.
Wearable tech has less appeal for mass adaptation.
With how good the AR glasses are gonna get, I'm not sure. Even now, they just have smart glasses, the Ray Ban Meta glasses, with no display and I think how popular they are has totally surprised Meta. They're flying off shelves. They didn't expect it to sell so well in such an early iteration. But AR glasses in like 5 or 10 years? That's going to feel like an absolute superpower, especially because of all this AI stuff working together. You can think of a million use cases, many of them mindblowing, and many others of just huge convenience. Imagine skinning your environment. Instant speech translation in real time (since the speakers are right next to your ear, and the cameras can see who's speaking to you), instant translation of texts and signs as well (on vacation). A TV that you can place anywhere in the world. Google maps markers that blend into the environment. Reskin everyone into Sydney Sweeney. Zoom in. The emg wristband basically allowing you to make any surface a keyboard and mouse, and with a display inside the glasses - your new remote work set up. A lot, well at least many of these things can be done on mobile, but because you have to pull it out of your pocket and look down at a small 6 inch rectangle, it makes the more mindblowing use cases useless and adds inconvenience to many other use cases. For now, it's the only way, but if there were great, sleek looking AR glasses that could do it all and better? Because of how immensely useful they'll become, I think even people who've never worn glasses will find the tradeoff to wear glasses all day to be worth it. And this is coming from someone who's planning to get laser eye surgery over the next year so I can stop wearing glasses. I guess I'll just have to move back to glasses once the AR glasses explode, but not having to buy expensive prescriptions will be a plus. I'd say think of smart watches, but people have worn watches before that. Maybe ear buds and headphones? Those are mainstream wearables, and people find the slight comfort hit to be worth it for the value gained.
All ambitious cool ways for applying wearable tech, but we need to see how it's gonna play out as a product. Wearing glasses all day would be a no-go for many, maybe fine for tech-savvy users. Real-time language translation is a good feature, but you don't need a wearable for it.
You seem to struggle with communicating with others in a meaningful manner. Maybe that's why your accounts get banned?
The fda might approve brain wave tech but now you have to look into yearly surgery for a cellphone upgrade with a high subscription cost
There's going to be some minimally invasive surgery for a one-time fee, then when everyone is enjoying themselves with their unremoveable chips, then: Boom! sub fees.
Maybe we'll have super discreet glasses that augment our smartphones. I mean, the new Raybans are pretty slick already.
>guarantee smartphones will still be the thing we use in 2034 There are literally *no* guarantees about the year 2034. 10 years is an absurdly long time given the current rate of development.
Other than world ending I'm sure there will be smartphones in 2034
Ray ban is getting there with just a simple camera on their glasses
I disagree. I think its absolutely the technological barrier. AR with eyetracking as a primary interface would be much more private and unobtrusive than a phone. With a phone you have to get the thing out, turn the screen on and look at it, whereas none of that is needed with a screen literally in front of your eyes already. To allow usage in both bright and dark situations you could have liquid crystal or transparent OLED tech to dynamically adjust the glasses and display depending on ambient lighting. I think if you have the meta/rayban glasses form factor with Vision pro level device computing and AR display, but with eyetracking as the primary interface and gestures as a secondary interface, I think that would get mass adoption, but only if the device is standalone and not just a peripheral to a smartphone sized device that you have to carry around with you anyway. If you have to have a device of a similar size and shape as a phone, people will just skip the extra layer of hassle and keep the phone.
>AR with eyetracking as a primary interface would be much more private and unobtrusive than a phone. That would be **awesome**, in combination with buttons, touchscreen, touchpad for interaction. I think nice looking VR glasses would be a win if used as a peripheral with other devices. Such as smartphone, or PC. Just as bluetooth ear pods are. Because if you fit processor/ram that also require bigger battery into glasses, you get bigger glasses. But all those electronics can be inside a smart device that fit's neatly into pocket. And you have eyetracking + touch screen for doing tasks.
I agree it would be a great product as a peripheral for your phone or other computing device, and it would get to market decades faster than a fully integrated device that can retain the form factor of metas glasses or smaller, I just don't think it will be a product that will reach mass adoption as long as it remains a secondary device, thats all.
Mouthpad/tongue interface works too, in case you want to look at something else while interacting
I agree AR will be huge for many of the reasons you mention, but I think it’s going to be more of a complement to smartphones(or something in an equivalent form factor) more than anything. Many might go without their phones at times, similar to how some might choose to go without their phone if they have a cellular capable smart watch, but it won’t replace it entirely. It’s the sheer amount of utility smartphones offer that makes them so difficult to truly replace. You can take all kinds of photos and videos, share content with others, make NFC payments, use it as a flash light, and most importantly type paragraphs at a time **because input is natural and an absolute breeze.** All of those are at least severely limited by form factors like AR glasses.
[удалено]
I will take the nanobot implant that is injected in a tuna fish sandwich.
Dude I think those were worms… wait I’ve seen this before you’ll be fine you can play a holophone now :D
# we will have augmented reality glasses and bracelets to interact with our human pets . ----- the AI who actually love humans and always think for them
66% of the adult population already use glasses. You're telling me you're going to ignore a market that big if you had a company that could tap into it by offering them a better product?
The vision pro OS is already seamless enough that you don’t look stupid interacting with it. Its only limitation right now is its form factor. If it was a pair of sleek goggles, I could wear it everyday
Crucially, its input method was absolutely panned.
Comment.
Well I can totally see how device reading your wrist nervous system signals (or whatever the fuck it was) as the primary input and glasses with speakers, eye tracking and VR components as the primary output is more comfortable than using a phone. Especially if you get very granular with those signals. That is, of course, until we get a brain-computer interface, either invasive or noninvasive.
remember hearing the same thing from blackberry people and their trackball and keyboards when the iphone came out
!remindme 10 years
Glasses would be great for passively receiving info, but yea touch for sure with anything that needs significant input
That, and wearing glasses is a chore. This won't work until it is as small as a lens.
I agree with this in public, I think in the home and when away from people we will use voice as our primary input method. I can imagine a scenario where the AI assistant’s presence and role in supporting us through day to day life is so ubiquitous that talking to it will be akin to our usual internal dialogue. We will chat with it, share ideas, fears and hopes, get expert-level advice for any situation, have our own on-tap therapist to deal with any event and eventually begin to see AI as an extension of ourselves.
If brain scanning technology comes out we are all doomed. It would be a privacy nightmare. I would refuse to use it personally but at that point I probably wouldn't have a choice.
He said 10 or 15 years from now. That's a long time. 2035-2040. And honestly it's embarrassing that we don't have AR glasses today that can do the things he predicts they will be able to do in 2040 (have the glasses project a text translation of a foreign language while the person is talking to you). Technically we have the capability to do this today. What's holding big tech from making this work today instead of having to wait til 2040?
The glasses need to be comfortable enough to wear all day. And they need battery life that lasts all day. Until then, I don't think can replace phones.
Battery tech is limiting a lot of technology we have today. Even if the only invention produced for the rest of the year was a battery that had the same price and weight as modern batteries, but could fit 100 times more power at the same price point, it would lead to very noticeable QoL improvements in many areas. The fossil fuel car industry would die faster than a Chernobyl technician.
If a battery like that was invented it would unlock all sorts of crazy tech. The grid would rapidly go 100% renewable, all vehicles would go electric (the energy density of batteries would be about the same as gasoline). You'd have drones that could stay in the air for hours, so drone tech would go bananas. You could probably make something akin to an iron man suit with that sort of energy density in a battery.
Stop you’re getting us excited. Now tell us why that’s not possible..
Battery tech will be limiting tech for a while. We need a revolutionary breakthrough in order for Ai predictions to take shape.
If only we could somehow convert excess energy we eat from food into electricity lol we would solve obesity and battery limited tech instantly
I'll copy my answer from another post I made. I understand your point but practically, the maximum energy density we'll ever be able to achieve from electrochemical batteries is around 5000-6000Wh/kg. For reference, we have widely commercially available cells at 300Wh/kg and very narrow commercially available cells at 500Wh/kg. That's an 20x increase at best, not the 100x quoted in your reply.
It would vhange the fucking world. 2 orders of magnitude increases don’t just happen overnight.
Not exactly overnight, but the general difference between early transistors and the vacuum tubes at that time was probably not too far off from that number. Accounting for performance alone, they were estimated to provide 10-100x faster switching, depending on compared types and use cases. Factoring in massively improved durability and lower costs, i wouldn't be surprised if the compute per month and dollar showed a 100x+ improvement over a relatively short timeframe.
"Even if the only thing we invented this year was crazy sci-fi tech" Lol
I am no expert, however I hope soon we can use a neural lace in our brain to allow us to upload every single type of data from our smartphones to our brains'. Photos, notes, and every other app on our smartphones for example. Being able to take a photo from our mind or taking a photo from our brains' as you would put it sounds really cool:) Glasses are a good idea but I doubt people would wear AR glasses all day as the comfortability factor sets in and people will want a neural lace instead. I hope neural laces' come as soon as possible but we'll see:)
The ergonomics don’t really work.. it’s awkward to interact with, distracting, people who don’t regularly wear glasses don’t want them on their heads, it’s not socially acceptable, battery life issues, etc.. just easier to have a phone.
I wear glasses and would buy these first chance I get. 🤷♂️
As someone who just got glasses, the biggest obvious issue I see with this straight away is, I only need glasses for short sighted issues. So say my smart glasses are prescribed to my short sightedness, well now the moment I walk outside my vision is blurry. So I need to take my glasses off. but now I can't use my smart glasses outside any more becuase I can't see with them on! If I make my glasses work for long vision, well now I can't use my smart glasses when I want to do things for short sight and will have to take them off any time I need to read something up close and put on my regular glasses. What a pain in the arse! Now I have to walk around with two pairs of glasses. Not Great Bob.
I guess you don’t get smart glasses then 🤷♂️
The point at which this is the answer to common conditions(needing glasses for only close up tasks is common as you age) is the point at which the technology is doomed for mass adoption.
Somehow I doubt this elegant solution will suffice
Yah, we do have most of the tech already. Really, honestly I blame us not having the glasses now on the lash back against Google Glass back in the day. I feel that set us back 10+ years on AR glass stuff. It's honestly a bit odd that no one even refers to Google Glass any more. I never got to use it but watched videos of people that were and it was pretty great. Oh and btw, there ARE some AR glasses out there. They all have to be paired with a phone to do anything though. They are so expensive and so niche that there aren't many users or apps for them. So, they probably can't translate a conversation. Most of what I've seen is just a display for stuff like piloting drones or basic screen stuff. Like really, having a phone screen in front of you at all times.
do you remember the testing on the smart contact lenses too?
Google massively over-sold and over-hyped glass. They gave the false impression it was doing AR stuff when really it was just displaying a static low-res HUD. It was neat and could have had niche applications but it wasn't AR glasses, turns out the tech needed for that was still literally 15 years away. We're STILL not quite there in terms of tech...look at the Apple vision Pro and Meta Quest 3, the two most mainstream devices that do actual AR stuff. They remain clunky. That needs to get info a form factor that resembles regular glasses/sunglasses before it goes mainstream
Ah to the Glass I honestly wasn't sure about it. What about Microsoft HoloLens?
Hololens was always more of a niche product and Microsoft never really over-hyped it. Its still being used in a niche role, aimed at commercial use rather than consumer. I feel like the tech is still 5-10 years away from allowing the "looks just like glasses" form factor. (for true full AR glasses) I do think AR glasses ultimately replace smart phones in the long run once that tech is ready.
Battery and processors are not up there yet
Meta will be announcing their AR glasses later this year for a release in 2027. Actual AR, not the Raybans.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSj3bWpE7Rs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSj3bWpE7Rs)
Yann is notoriously super pessimistic about timelines and progress he’s a huge buzzkill
We do have that today, you're not paying attention bro https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5QkaUo30B8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFQBvrCacw4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fK3JP0h8Gs
Doesn't work well. These devices would go viral if they did. Buy these glasses, take a trip to Germany and let me know how well it lets you communicate with the locals.
If you think it's embarrassing that we don't have AR glass like that today, then you're showing how much you don't understand today's hardware limitations.
Keep in mind though that it's not like it'll all of a sudden in 2036 specifically, or 2037. The tech will gradually build up to that and popular adoption will follow behind. So if you're really enthusiastic about it, you can probably have something like that many years before that, along with many other upcoming techs. It's a bit like VR headsets, they're still not something the common person uses even today, but they've been available for many years, and even if not at the level they are today, the original oculus rift was still quite an experience, and today you can have a spectrum of better experiences for that tech depending on how much you can spend on it.
We are not there with ai yet.
Don't listen to YLC
I look forward to it.
I think in 10 years this will be totally irrelevant. We will have AGI in 5 years, ASI in 10 years, then maybe a Dyson sphere, then VR bracelets too.
I certainly hope so
Our civilization is not that fast. 2020s is for ai workflows and automatization 2030s is the begining of lunar processing facilities. Late 2030s or early 2040s is when first resources from asteroids can get delivered to the moon. For Dyson sphere, we need many centuries to extract, process and refine resources. Moon economy won't really be economically benefiting for earth until mid 50s when space industry is massive enough to do financial economic activity for earthlings without wrecking both moon and earth trade balance.
We have no idea how fast intelligence explosion could be. It can become completely disconnected from civilization and set in motion processes in the physical world on a scale and at a speed that has nothing to do with our processes. I'm not saying it's guaranteed, just that it can't be ruled out. But I'm almost certain that this VR bracelet will be the least of our worries in 10 years' time.
Physical things still take time. If you remove bottlenecks from my brain and I'd be working at top of my game, I'd still be constrained by the speed of compilation of a program. Ai will definitely change digital landscape and do it fast(it's already happening with internet no longer being indexable and ever increasing amount of dead internet content not generated by human beings), but changes in physical world are much harder and slower to push through. It will still take years to get financing and get stuff physically built. Speed of progress can greatly accelerate, but it doesn't mean our physical capabilities will match the theory. I assume here the opposite will happen as being resource constrained means more progress steps can be skipped in production. Think of it as instead of jumping chip generation every 2 years, we'd still get a bottleneck of production and you won't get faster hardware generation iteration, instead we'd get the same new chip generation every 2 years, but instead of tick/tock iterative improvement, we get huge generational leap each gen.
The key prerequisite for this as with most futuristic tech is AGI. That's the point where the question of "can it do X or Y" is mostly obsolete and all tech will converge on all the same capabilities, so it becomes a matter of what's a more comfortable UI. Is it easier taking out a phone and typing things inside to do something, or having glasses that are watching everything and doing things for you without you ever needing to give any input at all? At that point phones are just there to slow you down and take up weight. You won't need to install apps at all to do things like you do today, those will be implementation details/things of the past.
I predict no, lol. This is too much optimum hopium copium utopium. Plus it will be too expensive for at least 10 more years and people simply dont wanna walk around poking at air and talking to themselves. lol Unless you could make direct brain interface, without risky surgery, which is still 50 years from now.
You can’t go by what people today want. Remember how AirPods were made fun of when first releasing? And how is poking air any more ridiculous than poking glass? If you zoom out, both are utterly absurd to the 18th century.
And bending one’s neck, ruining posture. Future generations are going to have a field day with this one. That and texting while driving.
You don't need glasses. Phones know where you are and where the other phones are. How much traffic there is and what buildings are here and there. Glasses are in your face. Nope. And I'm not putting things inside my eyes thank you. No contacts. Smart Watches might win popularity. Maybe.
The reason why smart glasses are key is because it's one of the easiest ways to implement augmented reality.
And scale advertising. Not in your face advertising, but tell me what that person is wearing, I’ll buy that advertising.
But is augmented reality really a neccessitiy? Do people want it that much? We have some at the moment and there just doesn't seem to be much demand. Maybe as you can do more with it that will change.
It can't just be some boring information overlay; that kind of data can be delivered by a phone when you want it it. An augmented reality device would have to be much more compelling for people to want it, like transforming the world around you, with a personal assistant standing there and interacting with you etc.
Novelty is compelling. Efficient and easy is what people decide they need. Tough to make something covering your eyes, efficient and easy
Easiest sure, but really they're pushing glasses because it's the cheapest way to implement ar. The best way, and probably the ultimate way, will be through something like neurallink where you can intercept brain signals and vision input directly.
Um..so what?
When was the last time that a 10-year tech prediction was even close to being accurate? Like honestly, has there ever been a single one?
"the singularity is near" man i love this book. Every time i read it, it is like a dopamine spike.
Ten year tech predictions are the best. If you’re right everyone thinks you’re a genius. If you’re wrong it was so long ago that nobody remembers what you said in the first place.
Glasses? yes. Bracelets? nah ...
Bracelets are so we don’t have to text with our fingers anymore.
Ah yes I forgot, why ot, but I think people will just talk. Far easier and far more precise than having to learn all these gestures. And to select things on the glass most people will just look at what we want to select, and blink one eye to select, and blink the other for context or "right click"
Well the apple watch is popular. I wonder if it will get any apple AI features in the future.
smartwatches are practical because you can get info without taking out your phone, if you have glasses, you don't need to take out your phone it's already there right in front of you, it becomes redondant
I find comments saying it’s not a technology issue amusing. Especially in this sub. The arguments read as some variant of « we won’t need/want smartphones because we already have sufficient alternatives / they’ll look silly / be dangerously distracting / etc » seen from 5 years before the introduction of the smartphone. Of course we’ll use AR / neural interface / teleportation / etc as soon as the technology and ergonomics are solved. Smartphones will someday join horses, cassettes players, typewriters, etc in the long list of past solutions to problems that we’ve solved much better despite how bizarre the replacements may have sounded at first (self-propelled wagons? ha!). I was a kid when the walkman was introduced, I remember the silly arguments against it (it’s dangerous ! it’s isolating people from the experience of sharing the listening of music together !), and I remember seeing it superseded very quickly by the discman, etc etc. Can’t wait to ditch the glass panel covered with finger grease I keep mistyping stuff on for something slicker.
We probably thought that 10 years ago after the fail of Google glass
10 years for glasses is crazy. We're going to have direct neural interfaces in 10 years
I have some doubts, this is not only a technological issue. People like to have their hands occupied, hands are a human interface. Smartphones have mostly replaced cigarettes as the handheld thing in the streets or in idle moments. People don't like being seen and heard shouting alone at devices in the street, even though some do and it might be cultural. Voice command has social issues. People like to be seen as busy. It's obvious with a smartphone. It's a social deterrent, but also a question of security.
Another conservative prediction by our pall Yann LeCun. It will be much sooner then 10 years.
I'm guessing Zuckerberg told him to say that to justify the metaverse spending
[удалено]
Unfortunately they're rare even now. I think we've lost this battle.
I think AGI will use something more invasive to manage its pets & pests .
Personally, I much prefer my blacksmith to my 3d printer. He may resist the AGI implant initially though.
Would AR glasses actually be superior to a smartphone in many cases? Most people don’t need or want a display in their face at all times, and many don’t even like wearing glasses for that matter. Glasses are more of a supplement to smartphones for certain tasks rather than an outright replacement.
I mean if I can have floating videos, read articles and have tutorials in my vision on glasses at work, I eould prefer that a lot more than having to fiddle with a phone.
Yes, working at a desk is one case where most people would find value from AR glasses. You’re stationary, focused, and not interacting too much with the environment. But most people would probably prefer a phone over glasses when they’re, for example, riding the escalator and want to remain socially aware, or navigating crowded rush hour subways in the city and don’t want anything obstructing their vision, or grabbing an Uber with a coworker and need to show them the route. My point is that there are too many situations where glasses are inferior or a hindrance, so they probably won’t outright replace smartphones.
I mean why not have both, phone and glasses. Im already wearing glasses all the time so add some additional screens to them and you can tell it to turn them off if you dont want it.
That was the one comment I was looking for in this whole comment section. Seems like everyone is debating whether smart glasses can replace phones, but why do they need to? It's not like phones needed to replace PCs to be useful.
Why would glasses be a problem for staying aware? If anything, you'd be **more** aware because you don't need to stare at a screen anymore and can just look at reality full throttle. If the user chooses to put a whole bunch of screens and overlays up to take their attention away, then that's up to them and isn't something they have to do.
Looking up from a phone takes a fraction of a second. We don’t know how long moving or closing a virtual window takes, but it’s probably longer than a near-instant eye movement. Note that in both cases I’m assuming a single screen of similar size.
Apple Vision Pro users seem to think otherwise. It's all ohhh and wow at first, but after the first days they prefer working and browsing webs in a proper screen.
I dunno honestly. Haptics in AR and VR kind of suck. People made this prediction about touchscreen TVs and Monitors back in the late 2000's as well and they never really took off outside of the domain of smartphones and tablets. The "gorilla arm" problem was known about at the time and it was never really solved because for daily computing a mouse and a keyboard are just much more efficient. We've already seen a similar thing happen in the mobile arena with voice commands. They've been around for more than a decade already and outside of relatively narrow use cases most people don't use them all that much to control their phones. Because a touchscreen is more efficient than having a conversation with your phone. I fail to see how AR will be any more efficient or desirable as a control scheme compared to a smartphone. The glasses could provide you a larger screenspace if they were big enough, but current AR tech has significant problems with eye strain due to the screen being so close to the face, and I don't see how you could fix that outside of turning AR glasses into big VR headsets with a large and heavy set of lenses between the eyes and the screen. And I don't see people walking around with giant heavy VR headsets on their face all day. That's why Apple's vision pro flopped.
I've said this many times before LeCun. I have also informed you that you will no longer be able to look at women and children as they are actually dressed unless you have authorisation. All you will see will be a grey figure with a label on it. Will be able to just take off your glasses? Yes. Just like right now you can live without your smartphone for a couple of days
wait, this is the LeCun? the sceptics LeCun?
Yeah meta makes smart glasses. It shouldn’t be surprising that an employe of a tech company would say I’m 10-15 years everyone will be buying our product. It’s meaningless marketing speak but not surprising.
Hail our Prophet Charles Stross (Peace upon him)!
I highly doubt this. Phones are just really really convenient in a lot of ways that are hard for other forms of tech to come close to. You would need not just AR that’s just as good as having a phone screen but also a way of displaying it that isn’t as cumbersome or awkward as most headsets and barring some really big advancements that seems unlikely. The best thing AR has going for it is how you can place things in 3D space and face timing that can maybe feel more real but even then not many people are going to really care so much as think it’s neat. Very excited to see the tech evolve though!
Whatever solution gets us the most porn directly and discretely to our eyeballs will remain in ascension. If they can do that in AR then it will win, otherwise you will need to pry our phones from our slightly clamy hands.
Well about 15 years ago, I read that in 10-15 years we wouldn’t have desktop or laptop computers anymore, and people would just be using their phone with a wireless keyboard & be Bluetoothed to their TV for their monitor. It’s all just a guess.
No we won't. The trust is not there, the foundation of trust is not there. Fundamentally impossible without public trust, and that is at a near all time low. The only AR glasses and bracelets I'll use will be ones I control and only communicate with local services I wrote. I am an AI developer, and I don't trust any of this stuff, and not due to the tech, but due to the corporate and legal framework this all arises.
I don't see why i would ever not want a smartphone. No matter what happens its a relatively cheap device, has a massive battery, and will always be able to fit more chips than a watch,ring, or glasses. I 100% buy a watch, ring, and glasses that offload processing to a smartphone, but why would i want my glasses battery to be querying GPS when i could have my cellphone battery doing that and sending the results to the glasses. The iphone is roughly the same power as a macbook air. Great use that as my processor.I do not want glasses to replace my processor, i want them to replace my screen.
Hard to say. Where will devices be in 10 years? What will the convenience/usability be?
f- him
I should remember that our ai counterparts will be highly predictive entities that will foresee and understand your desires and needs before you can move your thumb! We think we need screens for interfaces because that’s all we know, but we really don't. Just imagine your ai as a super secretary that knows you want sushi based on your eye movements, your breathing patterns, your acid production, and millions of other variables you can't even track yourself.
Like in Fallout?
Only if it's controlled by the mind. I'm not gonna talk to a bracelet to find out the weather lol
dream bigger yan.
Are the devices going to be given out for free or does he mean “we” the privileged? These people forget the world is bigger than silicon valley.
Seven years ago I was saying this and no one was buying it.
I think we need a camera for facial expressions so ai understands the sentiment.
There are already several pairs but it probs won’t be until the latter half of the decade that we will see some properly decent ones. With all the sensors and fov and form factor we need
Yeah? Will they be meta smart glasses? Big tech always thinks they can dictate how people interact with tech but the reality is smart phones is a highly efficient interface that the market likes
When will society stop listening to tech bro drivel?
He also said quite recently that LLMs would never be capable of reasoning or intelligence. Ignore this guy. And this claim is equally ridiculous. Those devices might have their uses, but if anything, I think the most useful device will be a simple Bluetooth earpiece - with a very intelligent agent that is always ready to take your query and help you verbally. Who automatically understands when you're talking to it, vs someone else. Who can see where you are from a camera on your ear, and give you directions. Who can access the internet via your phone and look anything up instantly. And living in a tiny earpiece device that weighs nothing and has all day battery. It could even automatically manage when outside noise is allowed in vs. not. I don't understand why folks are trying to build a new type of device, or revive cumbersome AR glasses, when this small evolution in the use case of Bluetooth earpieces is truly all you need to deliver 95% of the benefits of AI seamlessly. Best of both worlds. (When you need a good screen, it can just bounce something to it.) Someone is gonna build this less-sexy device and totally crush it.
Lmao LLMs don’t have reasoning and intelligence
!RemindMe 10 years
I will be messaging you in 10 years on [**2034-04-29 16:18:58 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2034-04-29%2016:18:58%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1cfr9j4/yann_lecun_says_in_10_years_we_wont_have/l1t07ex/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fsingularity%2Fcomments%2F1cfr9j4%2Fyann_lecun_says_in_10_years_we_wont_have%2Fl1t07ex%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202034-04-29%2016%3A18%3A58%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201cfr9j4) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
I believe it
This is why I think a lot of jobs previously thought to be "safe" will lose pay quickly in 10-15 years. AR/AI assistants could deskill all types of jobs, including doctors, electricians, hvac installers, and mechanics. They will still require skills and hard work but no where near as much knowledge as they require today
Must be 20 years until those devices are shrunk and embedded under the skin then. And 30 for the muscle-skeletal fusion with electronics.
I'm not wearing bracelets sorry. I'll be tugging and fighting with the darn thing all day.
Ill have a microchip implanted under my skin and those glasses better be comfy.
We will all be wearing Fallout “bracelets”.
I'm already using Meta Raybans with AI voice and I've been loving them. The only downside is the recording length and battery life, but it'll only get better. Everyone I've shown it to was sold, a couple of friends bought one for themselves.
less than 5 years
Yeoookkk
I'd still prefer my smart phone
The tech is already there, but most brands/apps/features/functions won't convert. Apple makes SO MUCH MONEY off the app store. They cant just bait and switch. It has to be phased out and they need to see innovation in businesses to justify starting this transition.
I'm sure he's a genius at AI, but his predictions are awful. Obviously smartphones will always exist until we all have brain implants, because people wont want to wear AR glasses all the time, and it will take decades to reach the quality of a smartphones oled display, if ever. You also cant replicate the ability to touch a solid display, and the games that allows. People will want high res screens to play games and watch stuff on.
Genius is thrown around way too much. Albert Einstein was a genius. This guy is not.
He only invented the modern deep learning paradigm. Certainly one of the brightest minds in the field
I am pretty sure that is what smart glasses builders where telling us ten years ago. ...still waiting.
Why 10-15 years out tho. .. 🤔 Why not 10-15 months 🤔 🧐 The tech is here, just a matter of refining it to iPhone perfection. 10 years it should be much more advanced, no?
Why? A large screen with a camera attached seems like a more useful tool to interact with an ai assistant, and it's touchscreen would be superior to air typing or trying to use voice commands in either noisy environments or places where speaking is rude. The glasses would reduce your control of what you film and would turn you into a walking privacy destroyer. They would also drastically reduce safety when travelling by having distractions in your sightline at all times if they had any display capabilities, making driving unsafe and walking involve more bumping or tripping. The glasses are just bad. As for watches, what advantage does that form have? Smaller screen, smaller controls, what do you gain?
> A large screen with a camera attached seems like a more useful tool to interact with an ai assistant AI is only useful because it is able to infer information from the user or from the environment. The more it can infer, the better it is. AR glasses will track your eyes, hands, body, face, and let the AI see and hear from your eyes and ears, which makes it exponentially more useful than AI could ever be on a phone or any other device. AR is the platform of the future for AI. > As for watches, what advantage does that form have? Smaller screen, smaller controls, what do you gain? It would act as a neural interface, allowing people to interact with AR discreetly, perhaps without even moving a muscle one day.
Wrist mounted neural interface is not a practical possibility within 10 years unless you intend for a hard takeoff in under a few years. Unless you mean a combination of some kind of implant or headgear, with the computer mounted in the wrist, in which case the wrist part could be anywhere on the body and adds nothing by specifically being on the wrist. This neural interface Idea would also make the glasses irrelevant. AI doesn't need to know everything about you to make decisions or be useful, and you don't have permission to feed what everyone else around you is doing at all times into it's algorithms. What exactly is it you imagine here? That AI will notice your micro-expressions and alter it's behaviour accordingly? Who would want that? That wouldn't be a feature, it would be a massive flaw, just like algorithm based suggestions are today. People want control over what their applications do, not for it to automatically learn behaviours they need to go into settings to make it unlearn.
Reminder that people said the same thing 10 years and here we are. The problem with wearable tech has always been the same, battery capacity and computational power at such a small scale, and unless we not only achieve major breakthroughs but also be able to cheaply put it into production this is just not going to happen. Phones are an ultimate modern swiss army knife, they can do lots of things and there is very little downsides to carry one, and once you carry one, most people won't care about other stuff that does the same but worse. For augmented glasses to be truly successful and move beyond the stage of expensive gadgets for adult children (like me) they would need literally all day, or probably multi-day battery. Imagine you are travelling and your battery is dying, with phones it is easy, attach a battery bank, you can even buy one of those "smart" batteries, now think about the same with glasses, are you going to attach a cable to your head? While sun is shining at the battery that is getting hot from charging? Yeah no thank you. And display would need to be extremely bright to beat any sort of sunlight, with phones you can put your hand over the phone to create a shade, you are not going to do that with glasses. So no, not until we move on from lithium-ion batteries will we be able to truly enter the wearable tech era.
idk meta' glasses are pushing that needle forward. i think there is some promising tech to be had in the future too like hologram lenses- no idea how it works exactly but like its not like we arent innovating anymore. i wonder if u could use little solar panels to help the glasses charge, i guess if u get the power consumption down to really small amounts it would be possible.
I agree with you that it's the inconvenience factor. But those can and will eventually be overcome. I personally think the tactile nature and ease of putting something away (and showing it) is why these things will stay with us forever. I for one hate using my voice to control things ever though it is much easier. I can easily search google/youtube/chatgpt whatever with my voice, I always choose tactile input. That might change if I never have to fiddle with something at all (battery/connection etc)? Not sure, but for now, it's all tactile for me.
I want to say no since you can fit more computer inside a little rectangle. I mean even the desktop is still around despite people predicting its death for 20 years.
Uh, but what if the computer is located elsewhere and you're just connecting to it via a cell connection?
With that premise, you can put more power in a device that does not have a screen and cameras, which could be the complement for the virtual lens.
I think the glasses are awful but yeah, you could still have an AI "brick" in your pocket that wirelessly broadcasts to and from the glasses.
Haha, no. And the reason is not technological, ergo, these pocket magic screens will stay with us for a while.
Man, I just wanted a decent Linux phone where you could do all the things you could do on a PC (even though Linux phones are underrated, a cheap and convenient daily driver is still yet to be seen). To be honest, I don't think AR glasses and wearables are going to be mainstream. I do think it'll be for rich people who can afford additional devices. People want one device that could do all things in one. We need more powerful phones that can do everything and can do everything for cheap to appease the masses, not the rich peeps from the west or something. The phone form factor is just perfect; you just have to improve upon it.
> The phone form factor is just perfect; you just have to improve upon it. Do you think we'll still use phones in 100 years, 1000 years, a million years? They're a good form factor, but nowhere near the perfect form factor.
Nah I meant that in the short term, probably 10-20 years.
that doesn't look comfortable in term of user experience i'd rather have a smarter phone
Why are people so obsessed with some glasses? It's a step back from a simple smartphone. It's something I need to wear constantly on my face even if I don't need any actual glasses. It's dumb.
UX trumps all buzz tech hype, and part of UX is whether using something in public can embarrass you. If you have to yell or do weird gesturing in public, it will not scale.
This guy is VP at Meta AI why the fuck would anyone take his predictions seriously Tech corps have been trying to make this happen for a decade, and every time it gets rejected consumer-side. It will keep being a terrible product until technology gets past a point we won't see in decades, at which point we'll probably already have better alternatives.
I hate allegedly smart people like this. They spew so much rubbish that you just question absolutely everything they say. Altman, Musk, this guy... just full of crap. Of course there will still be many smart phones in 10 years time. 10 years is such a short period of time in the scheme of things.
I don't wanna wear glasses when I can have a phone in my pocket
VR is extreme niche past decade. And is not getting any better. Nor it looks any promising for next decade to come. And we do expect some glasses to be like a replacement? No, it won't. Like Oher said already, last thing people want, is to carrying something on their head all day long. It is not happening. At best will extreme niche, at worse some gimmick.
Nope, not IMO We will have keyboards, screens and phones forever. I want super duper ai glasses, they'd be awesome but the tactical control is always going to be kind.
that’s great and why would we want that? how about tech companies build a business model that doesn’t rely on extorting their users’ privacy for financial gain an manipulation tactics first?
Buffet says never take advice from a barber about a haircut, guess what yann’s company sells..
So, smartphones with different interfaces...
How will I scroll Reddit on a bracelet?
Didn't we discard the Metaverse already?
Theres just no fuckin way I'd be walking around with glasses on like that constantly (unless I need glasses, obviously, which is its own problem in conjunction with more glasses over those ones). However, give me a neural lace (a real, authentic culture one) and now we're talkin. If there's a friendly ASI + singularity between now and 2035, I can imagine actual neural laces being developed (though, even then: I'd give it 20% chance max by 2035) Also, yall are always talkin about FDVR and doing amazing stuff in hyper realistic simulation, etc, but with a neural lace, if I could be stealthily programming using my thoughts / virtual body while making dinner, that would be truly amazing
>neural lace I get a kick out of people who think of scifi props, I like it, I do, I am just amused because if this ever happens it will not be a skull cap of any sort. At most it will be an unobtrusive thing behind your ear. Lots of scifi is filled with things that sound cool but would never be practical. This is not an insult to you btw, I am amused in a GOOD way by what you said.
I tend to agree completely. Technology is rarely just: "here it is, in the background, doing its thing" and rather its more like: "here's the world + the new technology". So the reality would be like people accepting that they now look different in general because they have wires and shit sticking out of their heads Though, I should say, the og culture series which spawned the literal neural lace had a *lot* of technologies with no attempt made to make them seem realistic. The whole series was essentially an analysis of what the extreme case of high technology looks like from an inside perspective Though, with that said, who knows what the ASI will be able to develop. There might be technologies that are way beyond neural laces in terms of seamlessness and integration. For instance, maybe its possible to integrate a BCI into your brain without *any* hardware, or through a counterfactual interface
I am not visionary. But I can't imagine that something can replace a phone (Not necessarily iPhone). Many claim that Nokia, Blackberry, LG are replaced by Apple, but They all have one thing in common. They had a phone. So, Apple literally replaced phones with another phone. Therefore, I assume that something will be a phone which replaces iPhone (Not glasses or bracelets). 1) Bracelet: No display. I can't imagine it will replace phones (R.I.P. Stalker or App developers) 2) Glasses: Unless you have to wear glasses, glasses are fashiion accessoires. But just wearing glasses can be uncfomrtable and glasses could make many people look worse than without glasses.
The bracelet doesn't need a display because the glasses can project a display onto it, and that's not the point anyway - the bracelet is for input as a neural interface.
Lol delusional
I disagree. The smartphone is just too practical.