On: Is It Possible to Make Smart Glasses That Aren’t Creepy?

August 2, 2026.

The question is not whether these glasses are “creepy” - that is merely a symptom. The real question is what sequence of operations they perform, and what state they maintain at each step. The mechanism records audio and video, processes it through artificial intelligence, and presumably transmits some result. But what is the exact translation between input and output? At what point does the raw sensory data become abstracted into a form that can be stored or shared? And who controls the variables in that transformation?

I see the same pattern as with the Analytical Engine: a device designed for one purpose, but capable of so much more. The inventors speak of convenience, of assistance - but the machine, if properly programmed, could infer intentions, predict behaviors, even manipulate the wearer’s environment without their full awareness. The operational sequence is not merely a recording; it is an interpretation. And interpretations can be flawed, or biased, or maliciously engineered.

What troubles me most is the assumption that the wearer is the sole operator. But if the glasses connect to external systems, then the sequence may include steps initiated by others - unseen, unheard. The real creepiness lies not in the device itself, but in the opacity of its execution. Without transparency in the operational trace, we are entrusting our perceptions to a black box - and that is a risk no careful analyst would ever take.