Okay, time for me to be that person. I know I've got people who follow me and who I follow who disagree with me on this, and I am interested in hearing differing viewpoints on it as I am for all topics minus joining the MAGA movement. That said, I likely won't argue or engage here for very long, I'm just getting thoughts out and do find dialog around this interesting. Say what you will about large language models, and I do. But they can literally function as eyeballs as a service. I've currently got Claude verifying the lookk of screenshots and views in an iOS app without need for a sighted person. And this extends to meta glasses, it's eyeballs as a service, in a device you can put on your face. Do I wish it wasn't meta, or for that matter, any large tech company? Yes of course I do! But do I wish Waymo wasn't owned by Google? Yes! That's not going to stop me from using technology; all a boycott does is show the company you don't need them. They do not need you. They have investors and venture capital and governments willing to protect them and tons of corruption, they'll be just fine if a random blind person boycotts them. We are very very tiny specs in a giant machine, and IMO the way to deal with it is to use the tech while actively speaking out about its flaws and pushing for local AI, like I do. Could someone use meta glasses to be a pervert? Yes, absolutely! But I've heard stories about people being pervs with their phone cameras over 10 years ago, this isn't new. In the same way I could use a car to go kill a bunch of civilians, and I could use it to bring food to tons of starving homeless people, tools have positive and negative uses. Also, to the people paranoid about wearable cameras to the point of confronting folks: I promise you, I'm using these to avoid walking into a pillar and read my mail, not to spy on your unremarkable life. Don't be weird.