×
Meta Has Smart Glasses Spiraling Towards Glasshole 2.0

Meta Has Smart Glasses Spiraling Towards Glasshole 2.0

Tech-news , ,

If there was one surprise hit last year in the consumer tech world, it was smart glasses, and Meta was one of the biggest winners. Meta, with the help of EssilorLuxottica, managed to sell 7 million units of its Ray-Ban-branded AI glasses, about 6 million more than it sold the year prior—a smashing success by all metrics. A smashing success that Mark Zuckerberg and company appear determined to follow up on by utterly fumbling the bag.

If you’ve been paying attention to the news recently, you may have noticed a little story about how Meta’s Ray-Ban smart glasses have been sending recorded footage to a third party, where those videos were then reviewed by human eyes. As it turns out, that footage contained some stuff that most people would probably have rather kept private, including videos of people watching porn, using the bathroom, and credit card and bank information.

Meta’s right to do this is, of course, buried in its terms of service that most people (myself included) often blindly agree to. But there’s a big problem with that part too: some of the videos sent to human reviewers (a contractor called Sama) seem to have been recorded accidentally, meaning even if you did actually read Meta’s ToS, you might not be able to avoid having some of your most private moments grace the eyeballs of a stranger. By most people’s metrics, that’s um… bad. And the worst part is, it’s not just bad for the people who own the smart glasses or the people who encounter them unknowingly; it’s bad for Meta.

© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Smart glasses, as many of us in the millennial+ age demographic know, have a history encapsulated by one very iconic pejorative: “glasshole.” When Google released its now-infamous pair of smart glasses, Google Glass, all the way back in 2013, things did not go as planned. The rise and fall was rapid, and the entire form factor was almost categorically rejected by consumers who felt wearing a discreet camera on your face was an incursion on everyone’s privacy. Bars and restaurants banned the device, critics dubbed anyone who wore a pair a “glasshole,” and while the whole experiment wasn’t officially put to rest until 2023, Google Glass was pulled from the market in 2015, just two years after its release.

The short version is: Google Glass was a disaster, and it made the category of smart glasses almost radioactive for fear of backlash over privacy. Fast forward to today, and things have changed a bit. Smart glasses, which were once immediately dismissed as a privacy nightmare, have actually proven marketable to some. A part of that is that Meta managed to make a pair that doesn’t look out of place on your head, and the other part is that our expectation of digital privacy has eroded over the past decade due to, I don’t know, a lot of sh*t.

Either way, Meta had a chance to reset expectations of smart glasses and do things differently. It was never going to solve the privacy issues that are inherent with wearing a discreet camera on your face (issues that I’ve already unpacked at length on Gizmodo many times), but it could have at least attempted not to amplify them by using your nude videos to train AI. Instead, however, it’s careening toward the same fate as Google Glass, and the pushback is palpable.

Ray Ban Meta Gen 2 09
@ Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Just this week, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) released a statement regarding smart glasses, essentially warning anyone with even the tiniest respect for digital privacy not to buy a pair. And it’s not just advocacy groups; there’s also an ongoing class action lawsuit against Meta claiming the company misleads its customers with deceptive advertising, giving them the expectation of privacy to some degree. That’s not even counting the outright bans that have been brewing in the background, including one by a popular cruise liner and one by the College Board, which categorizes smart glasses (rightfully, by the way) as a cheating tool.

If backlash against the category hasn’t reached a boiling point, it’s certainly trending in that direction, and Meta, for its part, hasn’t even acknowledged the concerns, let alone made any attempt to address them in a meaningful way. On one hand, it’s not surprising. Meta is a company that made its mark by usurping user data, oftentimes to the detriment of people who made its services valuable in the first place. On the other hand, though, it feels somehow even more disrespectful than usual.

I guess Meta is betting that its smart glasses’ reputation being a hazard to digital privacy will blow over, and people will go about their business using its products as usual—it worked largely with Facebook and Instagram; why would smart glasses be any different? But Ray-Bans aren’t social media, and the fact is that (as someone who’s used quite a few pairs of smart glasses), they are still something that very few people even own and even fewer people feel like they need. In a consumer sense, smart glasses are vulnerable and easy to rule out. If people decided tomorrow that they didn’t want to buy a pair made by Meta or any other brand, the choice would be simple. And the richest part is this: if Meta’s gadget does get torpedoed, it’ll be by a missile designed and built by the company itself and autographed personally by Mark Zuckerberg.

Source link
#Meta #Smart #Glasses #Spiraling #Glasshole

Tag

Related Posts

Google Glass. For one, they actually exist in a way that has been commercially viable, thanks mostly to Meta. With the help of Ray-Ban branding, Meta has sold millions of smart glasses, and, if recent reporting is any indication, it already has several more pairs on the way this year alone.

Its initial success hasn’t gone unnoticed, either. Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses have pulled Google, Samsung, and potentially even Apple into the mix, with the former two companies planning to release their own pair this year. And that’s not even counting the various other upstarts that have managed to carve out a niche already.

The interest in face-worn wearables is palpable, and in a lot of ways, smart glasses, for all of their obvious flaws, feel concrete. But as concrete as the interest is, the category also feels as nebulous as ever, and Meta, for all its popularity, is a perfect example.

Meta’s Smart Glasses Are Long Ways From Their ‘Eureka’ Moment Smart glasses have come a long way since the days of Google Glass. For one, they actually exist in a way that has been commercially viable, thanks mostly to Meta. With the help of Ray-Ban branding, Meta has sold millions of smart glasses, and, if recent reporting is any indication, it already has several more pairs on the way this year alone. Its initial success hasn’t gone unnoticed, either. Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses have pulled Google, Samsung, and potentially even Apple into the mix, with the former two companies planning to release their own pair this year. And that’s not even counting the various other upstarts that have managed to carve out a niche already. The interest in face-worn wearables is palpable, and in a lot of ways, smart glasses, for all of their obvious flaws, feel concrete. But as concrete as the interest is, the category also feels as nebulous as ever, and Meta, for all its popularity, is a perfect example. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Take apps, for instance. Meta has made some strides since the launch of the Meta Ray-Ban Display last year to try to add more functionality, but for the most part, it still feels like there’s not a ton to do once they’re on your face. You can get notifications, you can get directions, and you can swipe through Instagram Reels, and sure, it’s novel to be doing those things on a small screen on your face, but they don’t necessarily add up to a game-changing experience. Meta clearly knows that those “core” apps aren’t enough, which is why it recently opened up its developer program for the Meta Ray-Ban Display so that people can make apps that use both the built-in screen as well as the included Neural Band, the wristband you use to control the UI inside the smart glasses. While the apps being built are in early stages and aren’t being made generally available to people who own the smart glasses yet, initial results are… something? There are people making speedometers, apps that control your smart home, and Doom (because, of course). Someone even made the bold choice of making an app that can unlock your car. Again, they’re interesting ideas, but I’m not sure that any of them will have people rushing out to spend 0 on a pair of smart glasses. Meta’s non-display smart glasses face similar issues. While I like the fact that you can use them as an open-ear audio device—they’re great for calling and listening to music while you’re riding a bike or exercising—some of the banner features of Meta’s “AI glasses” feel less-than-useful, and one of them is the AI itself. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Features like computer vision, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to answer questions about the world around you, are somewhat novel, but maybe not altogether useful for most. Don’t get me wrong, I think it could be great for accessibility purposes—people who have vision impairments could use computer vision to parse their surroundings. But for a general audience, the AI part of AI glasses can feel underwhelming, and I’m not the only one who thinks so. “The biggest hurdle to success that I see so far for Meta is the quality of Meta AI and the slow nature of getting third-party apps onboard,” says Anshel Sag, principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy, which follows the consumer tech space closely. “The ways that they enhance my life in their most simple form, as smart glasses, are still pretty much paired to just Meta apps.” Outside of translating a menu or telling you about items in your surroundings, I’ve yet to see lots of practical uses for computer vision, and that’s not even factoring in the bad habit that Meta AI has of getting things wrong, which is a real issue in my experience using the Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses. I get that not every new gadget has to have a purpose right off the bat. Take the Apple Watch, for example, which entered the scene as a frivolous accessory to your iPhone. In many ways, you can write off smart glasses for the same reasons that people wrote off the Apple Watch at first. Yes, it delivers notifications and comes in a wearable form factor, but it mostly duplicates the experience of using your phone. And not only that, it’s utterly dependent on your phone to work, same as Meta’s Ray-Bans and Oakleys. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Those criticisms didn’t hold up forever, though. Eventually, the Apple Watch found health tracking features like heart rate monitoring and crash detection, and now it’s a device unto itself that also acts as an accessory to your iPhone. The thing is, health features aren’t exactly up for grabs anymore, though Meta has tried to introduce nutrition tracking as a feature, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to log what you eat and then gives you AI-powered recommendations. Whether that gets any traction remains to be seen, but I personally don’t envision loads of people lining up to have Meta AI shame them for their diets. So, smart glasses will have to find their own niche, just like the Apple Watch, though whether such a niche really exists is anyone’s guess. It’s not that smart glasses can’t be useful at times—they can—but as it stands, even Meta lacks a “killer app” to drive adoption. Sure, people like recording stuff, but that is an entire can of worms from a privacy perspective, and for as many people that want smart glasses for their recording abilities, there are just as many that hate them for it. Millions of units sold or not, smart glasses like Meta’s still feel like they’re a long way from the proverbial Apple Watch moment—a holy grail that is never guaranteed to arrive. #Metas #Smart #Glasses #Long #Ways #Eureka #MomentMeta,Ray-Ban Meta,smart glasses,The Next Interface,Wearables
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Take apps, for instance. Meta has made some strides since the launch of the Meta Ray-Ban Display last year to try to add more functionality, but for the most part, it still feels like there’s not a ton to do once they’re on your face. You can get notifications, you can get directions, and you can swipe through Instagram Reels, and sure, it’s novel to be doing those things on a small screen on your face, but they don’t necessarily add up to a game-changing experience.

Meta clearly knows that those “core” apps aren’t enough, which is why it recently opened up its developer program for the Meta Ray-Ban Display so that people can make apps that use both the built-in screen as well as the included Neural Band, the wristband you use to control the UI inside the smart glasses.

While the apps being built are in early stages and aren’t being made generally available to people who own the smart glasses yet, initial results are… something? There are people making speedometers, apps that control your smart home, and Doom (because, of course). Someone even made the bold choice of making an app that can unlock your car. Again, they’re interesting ideas, but I’m not sure that any of them will have people rushing out to spend $800 on a pair of smart glasses.

Meta’s non-display smart glasses face similar issues. While I like the fact that you can use them as an open-ear audio device—they’re great for calling and listening to music while you’re riding a bike or exercising—some of the banner features of Meta’s “AI glasses” feel less-than-useful, and one of them is the AI itself.

Ray Ban Meta Gen 2 09
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Features like computer vision, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to answer questions about the world around you, are somewhat novel, but maybe not altogether useful for most. Don’t get me wrong, I think it could be great for accessibility purposes—people who have vision impairments could use computer vision to parse their surroundings. But for a general audience, the AI part of AI glasses can feel underwhelming, and I’m not the only one who thinks so.

“The biggest hurdle to success that I see so far for Meta is the quality of Meta AI and the slow nature of getting third-party apps onboard,” says Anshel Sag, principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy, which follows the consumer tech space closely. “The ways that they enhance my life in their most simple form, as smart glasses, are still pretty much paired to just Meta apps.”

Outside of translating a menu or telling you about items in your surroundings, I’ve yet to see lots of practical uses for computer vision, and that’s not even factoring in the bad habit that Meta AI has of getting things wrong, which is a real issue in my experience using the Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses.

I get that not every new gadget has to have a purpose right off the bat. Take the Apple Watch, for example, which entered the scene as a frivolous accessory to your iPhone. In many ways, you can write off smart glasses for the same reasons that people wrote off the Apple Watch at first. Yes, it delivers notifications and comes in a wearable form factor, but it mostly duplicates the experience of using your phone. And not only that, it’s utterly dependent on your phone to work, same as Meta’s Ray-Bans and Oakleys.

Meta Ray Ban Display neural band
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Those criticisms didn’t hold up forever, though. Eventually, the Apple Watch found health tracking features like heart rate monitoring and crash detection, and now it’s a device unto itself that also acts as an accessory to your iPhone. The thing is, health features aren’t exactly up for grabs anymore, though Meta has tried to introduce nutrition tracking as a feature, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to log what you eat and then gives you AI-powered recommendations. Whether that gets any traction remains to be seen, but I personally don’t envision loads of people lining up to have Meta AI shame them for their diets.

So, smart glasses will have to find their own niche, just like the Apple Watch, though whether such a niche really exists is anyone’s guess. It’s not that smart glasses can’t be useful at times—they can—but as it stands, even Meta lacks a “killer app” to drive adoption. Sure, people like recording stuff, but that is an entire can of worms from a privacy perspective, and for as many people that want smart glasses for their recording abilities, there are just as many that hate them for it.

Millions of units sold or not, smart glasses like Meta’s still feel like they’re a long way from the proverbial Apple Watch moment—a holy grail that is never guaranteed to arrive.

#Metas #Smart #Glasses #Long #Ways #Eureka #MomentMeta,Ray-Ban Meta,smart glasses,The Next Interface,Wearables">Meta’s Smart Glasses Are Long Ways From Their ‘Eureka’ Moment Smart glasses have come a long way since the days of Google Glass. For one, they actually exist in a way that has been commercially viable, thanks mostly to Meta. With the help of Ray-Ban branding, Meta has sold millions of smart glasses, and, if recent reporting is any indication, it already has several more pairs on the way this year alone. Its initial success hasn’t gone unnoticed, either. Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses have pulled Google, Samsung, and potentially even Apple into the mix, with the former two companies planning to release their own pair this year. And that’s not even counting the various other upstarts that have managed to carve out a niche already. The interest in face-worn wearables is palpable, and in a lot of ways, smart glasses, for all of their obvious flaws, feel concrete. But as concrete as the interest is, the category also feels as nebulous as ever, and Meta, for all its popularity, is a perfect example. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Take apps, for instance. Meta has made some strides since the launch of the Meta Ray-Ban Display last year to try to add more functionality, but for the most part, it still feels like there’s not a ton to do once they’re on your face. You can get notifications, you can get directions, and you can swipe through Instagram Reels, and sure, it’s novel to be doing those things on a small screen on your face, but they don’t necessarily add up to a game-changing experience. Meta clearly knows that those “core” apps aren’t enough, which is why it recently opened up its developer program for the Meta Ray-Ban Display so that people can make apps that use both the built-in screen as well as the included Neural Band, the wristband you use to control the UI inside the smart glasses. While the apps being built are in early stages and aren’t being made generally available to people who own the smart glasses yet, initial results are… something? There are people making speedometers, apps that control your smart home, and Doom (because, of course). Someone even made the bold choice of making an app that can unlock your car. Again, they’re interesting ideas, but I’m not sure that any of them will have people rushing out to spend 0 on a pair of smart glasses. Meta’s non-display smart glasses face similar issues. While I like the fact that you can use them as an open-ear audio device—they’re great for calling and listening to music while you’re riding a bike or exercising—some of the banner features of Meta’s “AI glasses” feel less-than-useful, and one of them is the AI itself. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Features like computer vision, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to answer questions about the world around you, are somewhat novel, but maybe not altogether useful for most. Don’t get me wrong, I think it could be great for accessibility purposes—people who have vision impairments could use computer vision to parse their surroundings. But for a general audience, the AI part of AI glasses can feel underwhelming, and I’m not the only one who thinks so. “The biggest hurdle to success that I see so far for Meta is the quality of Meta AI and the slow nature of getting third-party apps onboard,” says Anshel Sag, principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy, which follows the consumer tech space closely. “The ways that they enhance my life in their most simple form, as smart glasses, are still pretty much paired to just Meta apps.” Outside of translating a menu or telling you about items in your surroundings, I’ve yet to see lots of practical uses for computer vision, and that’s not even factoring in the bad habit that Meta AI has of getting things wrong, which is a real issue in my experience using the Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses. I get that not every new gadget has to have a purpose right off the bat. Take the Apple Watch, for example, which entered the scene as a frivolous accessory to your iPhone. In many ways, you can write off smart glasses for the same reasons that people wrote off the Apple Watch at first. Yes, it delivers notifications and comes in a wearable form factor, but it mostly duplicates the experience of using your phone. And not only that, it’s utterly dependent on your phone to work, same as Meta’s Ray-Bans and Oakleys. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Those criticisms didn’t hold up forever, though. Eventually, the Apple Watch found health tracking features like heart rate monitoring and crash detection, and now it’s a device unto itself that also acts as an accessory to your iPhone. The thing is, health features aren’t exactly up for grabs anymore, though Meta has tried to introduce nutrition tracking as a feature, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to log what you eat and then gives you AI-powered recommendations. Whether that gets any traction remains to be seen, but I personally don’t envision loads of people lining up to have Meta AI shame them for their diets. So, smart glasses will have to find their own niche, just like the Apple Watch, though whether such a niche really exists is anyone’s guess. It’s not that smart glasses can’t be useful at times—they can—but as it stands, even Meta lacks a “killer app” to drive adoption. Sure, people like recording stuff, but that is an entire can of worms from a privacy perspective, and for as many people that want smart glasses for their recording abilities, there are just as many that hate them for it. Millions of units sold or not, smart glasses like Meta’s still feel like they’re a long way from the proverbial Apple Watch moment—a holy grail that is never guaranteed to arrive. #Metas #Smart #Glasses #Long #Ways #Eureka #MomentMeta,Ray-Ban Meta,smart glasses,The Next Interface,Wearables

. For one, they actually exist in a way that has been commercially viable, thanks mostly to Meta. With the help of Ray-Ban branding, Meta has sold millions of smart glasses, and, if recent reporting is any indication, it already has several more pairs on the way this year alone.

Its initial success hasn’t gone unnoticed, either. Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses have pulled Google, Samsung, and potentially even Apple into the mix, with the former two companies planning to release their own pair this year. And that’s not even counting the various other upstarts that have managed to carve out a niche already.

The interest in face-worn wearables is palpable, and in a lot of ways, smart glasses, for all of their obvious flaws, feel concrete. But as concrete as the interest is, the category also feels as nebulous as ever, and Meta, for all its popularity, is a perfect example.

Meta’s Smart Glasses Are Long Ways From Their ‘Eureka’ Moment Smart glasses have come a long way since the days of Google Glass. For one, they actually exist in a way that has been commercially viable, thanks mostly to Meta. With the help of Ray-Ban branding, Meta has sold millions of smart glasses, and, if recent reporting is any indication, it already has several more pairs on the way this year alone. Its initial success hasn’t gone unnoticed, either. Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses have pulled Google, Samsung, and potentially even Apple into the mix, with the former two companies planning to release their own pair this year. And that’s not even counting the various other upstarts that have managed to carve out a niche already. The interest in face-worn wearables is palpable, and in a lot of ways, smart glasses, for all of their obvious flaws, feel concrete. But as concrete as the interest is, the category also feels as nebulous as ever, and Meta, for all its popularity, is a perfect example. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Take apps, for instance. Meta has made some strides since the launch of the Meta Ray-Ban Display last year to try to add more functionality, but for the most part, it still feels like there’s not a ton to do once they’re on your face. You can get notifications, you can get directions, and you can swipe through Instagram Reels, and sure, it’s novel to be doing those things on a small screen on your face, but they don’t necessarily add up to a game-changing experience. Meta clearly knows that those “core” apps aren’t enough, which is why it recently opened up its developer program for the Meta Ray-Ban Display so that people can make apps that use both the built-in screen as well as the included Neural Band, the wristband you use to control the UI inside the smart glasses. While the apps being built are in early stages and aren’t being made generally available to people who own the smart glasses yet, initial results are… something? There are people making speedometers, apps that control your smart home, and Doom (because, of course). Someone even made the bold choice of making an app that can unlock your car. Again, they’re interesting ideas, but I’m not sure that any of them will have people rushing out to spend 0 on a pair of smart glasses. Meta’s non-display smart glasses face similar issues. While I like the fact that you can use them as an open-ear audio device—they’re great for calling and listening to music while you’re riding a bike or exercising—some of the banner features of Meta’s “AI glasses” feel less-than-useful, and one of them is the AI itself. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Features like computer vision, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to answer questions about the world around you, are somewhat novel, but maybe not altogether useful for most. Don’t get me wrong, I think it could be great for accessibility purposes—people who have vision impairments could use computer vision to parse their surroundings. But for a general audience, the AI part of AI glasses can feel underwhelming, and I’m not the only one who thinks so. “The biggest hurdle to success that I see so far for Meta is the quality of Meta AI and the slow nature of getting third-party apps onboard,” says Anshel Sag, principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy, which follows the consumer tech space closely. “The ways that they enhance my life in their most simple form, as smart glasses, are still pretty much paired to just Meta apps.” Outside of translating a menu or telling you about items in your surroundings, I’ve yet to see lots of practical uses for computer vision, and that’s not even factoring in the bad habit that Meta AI has of getting things wrong, which is a real issue in my experience using the Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses. I get that not every new gadget has to have a purpose right off the bat. Take the Apple Watch, for example, which entered the scene as a frivolous accessory to your iPhone. In many ways, you can write off smart glasses for the same reasons that people wrote off the Apple Watch at first. Yes, it delivers notifications and comes in a wearable form factor, but it mostly duplicates the experience of using your phone. And not only that, it’s utterly dependent on your phone to work, same as Meta’s Ray-Bans and Oakleys. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Those criticisms didn’t hold up forever, though. Eventually, the Apple Watch found health tracking features like heart rate monitoring and crash detection, and now it’s a device unto itself that also acts as an accessory to your iPhone. The thing is, health features aren’t exactly up for grabs anymore, though Meta has tried to introduce nutrition tracking as a feature, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to log what you eat and then gives you AI-powered recommendations. Whether that gets any traction remains to be seen, but I personally don’t envision loads of people lining up to have Meta AI shame them for their diets. So, smart glasses will have to find their own niche, just like the Apple Watch, though whether such a niche really exists is anyone’s guess. It’s not that smart glasses can’t be useful at times—they can—but as it stands, even Meta lacks a “killer app” to drive adoption. Sure, people like recording stuff, but that is an entire can of worms from a privacy perspective, and for as many people that want smart glasses for their recording abilities, there are just as many that hate them for it. Millions of units sold or not, smart glasses like Meta’s still feel like they’re a long way from the proverbial Apple Watch moment—a holy grail that is never guaranteed to arrive. #Metas #Smart #Glasses #Long #Ways #Eureka #MomentMeta,Ray-Ban Meta,smart glasses,The Next Interface,Wearables
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Take apps, for instance. Meta has made some strides since the launch of the Meta Ray-Ban Display last year to try to add more functionality, but for the most part, it still feels like there’s not a ton to do once they’re on your face. You can get notifications, you can get directions, and you can swipe through Instagram Reels, and sure, it’s novel to be doing those things on a small screen on your face, but they don’t necessarily add up to a game-changing experience.

Meta clearly knows that those “core” apps aren’t enough, which is why it recently opened up its developer program for the Meta Ray-Ban Display so that people can make apps that use both the built-in screen as well as the included Neural Band, the wristband you use to control the UI inside the smart glasses.

While the apps being built are in early stages and aren’t being made generally available to people who own the smart glasses yet, initial results are… something? There are people making speedometers, apps that control your smart home, and Doom (because, of course). Someone even made the bold choice of making an app that can unlock your car. Again, they’re interesting ideas, but I’m not sure that any of them will have people rushing out to spend $800 on a pair of smart glasses.

Meta’s non-display smart glasses face similar issues. While I like the fact that you can use them as an open-ear audio device—they’re great for calling and listening to music while you’re riding a bike or exercising—some of the banner features of Meta’s “AI glasses” feel less-than-useful, and one of them is the AI itself.

Ray Ban Meta Gen 2 09
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Features like computer vision, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to answer questions about the world around you, are somewhat novel, but maybe not altogether useful for most. Don’t get me wrong, I think it could be great for accessibility purposes—people who have vision impairments could use computer vision to parse their surroundings. But for a general audience, the AI part of AI glasses can feel underwhelming, and I’m not the only one who thinks so.

“The biggest hurdle to success that I see so far for Meta is the quality of Meta AI and the slow nature of getting third-party apps onboard,” says Anshel Sag, principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy, which follows the consumer tech space closely. “The ways that they enhance my life in their most simple form, as smart glasses, are still pretty much paired to just Meta apps.”

Outside of translating a menu or telling you about items in your surroundings, I’ve yet to see lots of practical uses for computer vision, and that’s not even factoring in the bad habit that Meta AI has of getting things wrong, which is a real issue in my experience using the Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses.

I get that not every new gadget has to have a purpose right off the bat. Take the Apple Watch, for example, which entered the scene as a frivolous accessory to your iPhone. In many ways, you can write off smart glasses for the same reasons that people wrote off the Apple Watch at first. Yes, it delivers notifications and comes in a wearable form factor, but it mostly duplicates the experience of using your phone. And not only that, it’s utterly dependent on your phone to work, same as Meta’s Ray-Bans and Oakleys.

Meta Ray Ban Display neural band
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Those criticisms didn’t hold up forever, though. Eventually, the Apple Watch found health tracking features like heart rate monitoring and crash detection, and now it’s a device unto itself that also acts as an accessory to your iPhone. The thing is, health features aren’t exactly up for grabs anymore, though Meta has tried to introduce nutrition tracking as a feature, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to log what you eat and then gives you AI-powered recommendations. Whether that gets any traction remains to be seen, but I personally don’t envision loads of people lining up to have Meta AI shame them for their diets.

So, smart glasses will have to find their own niche, just like the Apple Watch, though whether such a niche really exists is anyone’s guess. It’s not that smart glasses can’t be useful at times—they can—but as it stands, even Meta lacks a “killer app” to drive adoption. Sure, people like recording stuff, but that is an entire can of worms from a privacy perspective, and for as many people that want smart glasses for their recording abilities, there are just as many that hate them for it.

Millions of units sold or not, smart glasses like Meta’s still feel like they’re a long way from the proverbial Apple Watch moment—a holy grail that is never guaranteed to arrive.

#Metas #Smart #Glasses #Long #Ways #Eureka #MomentMeta,Ray-Ban Meta,smart glasses,The Next Interface,Wearables">Meta’s Smart Glasses Are Long Ways From Their ‘Eureka’ Moment

Smart glasses have come a long way since the days of Google Glass. For one, they actually exist in a way that has been commercially viable, thanks mostly to Meta. With the help of Ray-Ban branding, Meta has sold millions of smart glasses, and, if recent reporting is any indication, it already has several more pairs on the way this year alone.

Its initial success hasn’t gone unnoticed, either. Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses have pulled Google, Samsung, and potentially even Apple into the mix, with the former two companies planning to release their own pair this year. And that’s not even counting the various other upstarts that have managed to carve out a niche already.

The interest in face-worn wearables is palpable, and in a lot of ways, smart glasses, for all of their obvious flaws, feel concrete. But as concrete as the interest is, the category also feels as nebulous as ever, and Meta, for all its popularity, is a perfect example.

Meta’s Smart Glasses Are Long Ways From Their ‘Eureka’ Moment Smart glasses have come a long way since the days of Google Glass. For one, they actually exist in a way that has been commercially viable, thanks mostly to Meta. With the help of Ray-Ban branding, Meta has sold millions of smart glasses, and, if recent reporting is any indication, it already has several more pairs on the way this year alone. Its initial success hasn’t gone unnoticed, either. Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses have pulled Google, Samsung, and potentially even Apple into the mix, with the former two companies planning to release their own pair this year. And that’s not even counting the various other upstarts that have managed to carve out a niche already. The interest in face-worn wearables is palpable, and in a lot of ways, smart glasses, for all of their obvious flaws, feel concrete. But as concrete as the interest is, the category also feels as nebulous as ever, and Meta, for all its popularity, is a perfect example. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Take apps, for instance. Meta has made some strides since the launch of the Meta Ray-Ban Display last year to try to add more functionality, but for the most part, it still feels like there’s not a ton to do once they’re on your face. You can get notifications, you can get directions, and you can swipe through Instagram Reels, and sure, it’s novel to be doing those things on a small screen on your face, but they don’t necessarily add up to a game-changing experience. Meta clearly knows that those “core” apps aren’t enough, which is why it recently opened up its developer program for the Meta Ray-Ban Display so that people can make apps that use both the built-in screen as well as the included Neural Band, the wristband you use to control the UI inside the smart glasses. While the apps being built are in early stages and aren’t being made generally available to people who own the smart glasses yet, initial results are… something? There are people making speedometers, apps that control your smart home, and Doom (because, of course). Someone even made the bold choice of making an app that can unlock your car. Again, they’re interesting ideas, but I’m not sure that any of them will have people rushing out to spend 0 on a pair of smart glasses. Meta’s non-display smart glasses face similar issues. While I like the fact that you can use them as an open-ear audio device—they’re great for calling and listening to music while you’re riding a bike or exercising—some of the banner features of Meta’s “AI glasses” feel less-than-useful, and one of them is the AI itself. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Features like computer vision, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to answer questions about the world around you, are somewhat novel, but maybe not altogether useful for most. Don’t get me wrong, I think it could be great for accessibility purposes—people who have vision impairments could use computer vision to parse their surroundings. But for a general audience, the AI part of AI glasses can feel underwhelming, and I’m not the only one who thinks so. “The biggest hurdle to success that I see so far for Meta is the quality of Meta AI and the slow nature of getting third-party apps onboard,” says Anshel Sag, principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy, which follows the consumer tech space closely. “The ways that they enhance my life in their most simple form, as smart glasses, are still pretty much paired to just Meta apps.” Outside of translating a menu or telling you about items in your surroundings, I’ve yet to see lots of practical uses for computer vision, and that’s not even factoring in the bad habit that Meta AI has of getting things wrong, which is a real issue in my experience using the Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses. I get that not every new gadget has to have a purpose right off the bat. Take the Apple Watch, for example, which entered the scene as a frivolous accessory to your iPhone. In many ways, you can write off smart glasses for the same reasons that people wrote off the Apple Watch at first. Yes, it delivers notifications and comes in a wearable form factor, but it mostly duplicates the experience of using your phone. And not only that, it’s utterly dependent on your phone to work, same as Meta’s Ray-Bans and Oakleys. © Raymond Wong / Gizmodo Those criticisms didn’t hold up forever, though. Eventually, the Apple Watch found health tracking features like heart rate monitoring and crash detection, and now it’s a device unto itself that also acts as an accessory to your iPhone. The thing is, health features aren’t exactly up for grabs anymore, though Meta has tried to introduce nutrition tracking as a feature, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to log what you eat and then gives you AI-powered recommendations. Whether that gets any traction remains to be seen, but I personally don’t envision loads of people lining up to have Meta AI shame them for their diets. So, smart glasses will have to find their own niche, just like the Apple Watch, though whether such a niche really exists is anyone’s guess. It’s not that smart glasses can’t be useful at times—they can—but as it stands, even Meta lacks a “killer app” to drive adoption. Sure, people like recording stuff, but that is an entire can of worms from a privacy perspective, and for as many people that want smart glasses for their recording abilities, there are just as many that hate them for it. Millions of units sold or not, smart glasses like Meta’s still feel like they’re a long way from the proverbial Apple Watch moment—a holy grail that is never guaranteed to arrive. #Metas #Smart #Glasses #Long #Ways #Eureka #MomentMeta,Ray-Ban Meta,smart glasses,The Next Interface,Wearables
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Take apps, for instance. Meta has made some strides since the launch of the Meta Ray-Ban Display last year to try to add more functionality, but for the most part, it still feels like there’s not a ton to do once they’re on your face. You can get notifications, you can get directions, and you can swipe through Instagram Reels, and sure, it’s novel to be doing those things on a small screen on your face, but they don’t necessarily add up to a game-changing experience.

Meta clearly knows that those “core” apps aren’t enough, which is why it recently opened up its developer program for the Meta Ray-Ban Display so that people can make apps that use both the built-in screen as well as the included Neural Band, the wristband you use to control the UI inside the smart glasses.

While the apps being built are in early stages and aren’t being made generally available to people who own the smart glasses yet, initial results are… something? There are people making speedometers, apps that control your smart home, and Doom (because, of course). Someone even made the bold choice of making an app that can unlock your car. Again, they’re interesting ideas, but I’m not sure that any of them will have people rushing out to spend $800 on a pair of smart glasses.

Meta’s non-display smart glasses face similar issues. While I like the fact that you can use them as an open-ear audio device—they’re great for calling and listening to music while you’re riding a bike or exercising—some of the banner features of Meta’s “AI glasses” feel less-than-useful, and one of them is the AI itself.

Ray Ban Meta Gen 2 09
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Features like computer vision, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to answer questions about the world around you, are somewhat novel, but maybe not altogether useful for most. Don’t get me wrong, I think it could be great for accessibility purposes—people who have vision impairments could use computer vision to parse their surroundings. But for a general audience, the AI part of AI glasses can feel underwhelming, and I’m not the only one who thinks so.

“The biggest hurdle to success that I see so far for Meta is the quality of Meta AI and the slow nature of getting third-party apps onboard,” says Anshel Sag, principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy, which follows the consumer tech space closely. “The ways that they enhance my life in their most simple form, as smart glasses, are still pretty much paired to just Meta apps.”

Outside of translating a menu or telling you about items in your surroundings, I’ve yet to see lots of practical uses for computer vision, and that’s not even factoring in the bad habit that Meta AI has of getting things wrong, which is a real issue in my experience using the Ray-Ban Meta AI glasses.

I get that not every new gadget has to have a purpose right off the bat. Take the Apple Watch, for example, which entered the scene as a frivolous accessory to your iPhone. In many ways, you can write off smart glasses for the same reasons that people wrote off the Apple Watch at first. Yes, it delivers notifications and comes in a wearable form factor, but it mostly duplicates the experience of using your phone. And not only that, it’s utterly dependent on your phone to work, same as Meta’s Ray-Bans and Oakleys.

Meta Ray Ban Display neural band
© Raymond Wong / Gizmodo

Those criticisms didn’t hold up forever, though. Eventually, the Apple Watch found health tracking features like heart rate monitoring and crash detection, and now it’s a device unto itself that also acts as an accessory to your iPhone. The thing is, health features aren’t exactly up for grabs anymore, though Meta has tried to introduce nutrition tracking as a feature, which uses the camera on the smart glasses to log what you eat and then gives you AI-powered recommendations. Whether that gets any traction remains to be seen, but I personally don’t envision loads of people lining up to have Meta AI shame them for their diets.

So, smart glasses will have to find their own niche, just like the Apple Watch, though whether such a niche really exists is anyone’s guess. It’s not that smart glasses can’t be useful at times—they can—but as it stands, even Meta lacks a “killer app” to drive adoption. Sure, people like recording stuff, but that is an entire can of worms from a privacy perspective, and for as many people that want smart glasses for their recording abilities, there are just as many that hate them for it.

Millions of units sold or not, smart glasses like Meta’s still feel like they’re a long way from the proverbial Apple Watch moment—a holy grail that is never guaranteed to arrive.

#Metas #Smart #Glasses #Long #Ways #Eureka #MomentMeta,Ray-Ban Meta,smart glasses,The Next Interface,Wearables
Aventon Soltera 3 (8/10), weighs 37 pounds and costs around $500 less than the Air. It’s a superb blend of push bike feel and lightweight electric power and with more power on offer, a faster top speed, and cheaper price, it remains the one to beat. But there’s no denying the appeal of the Fiido Air. It’s a beautiful bike to ride, with stylish looks, nimble acceleration, and push bike practicalities. At 30 pounds, it is impressively light, and easy to live with.

Lightweight electric bikes are starting to appear but competition remains slim. Ribble’s new aluminum Allgrit E AL Sportfit Apex weighs 30.4 pounds and has a hugely practical 12 speed SRAM Apex XPLR AXS gearing. It does cost twice as much, though. Carbon options are limited to a couple of folding designs for now, including the $2,420, 35-pound ADO Air Carbon, and $1,599 Urtopia Carbon Fold Step Thru that weighs just 31 pounds.

So the Fiido Air ticks a lot of boxes, and if you’re looking for a cool pedal-assist electric bike for short, flat urban rides, I highly recommend it. But if there are hills in your life, and you want to keep both hands on the handlebars at all times, the Fiido Air might not be the bike for you.

#Meet #Commuting #Companion #Lightweight #Fiido #Air #Carbon #Fiber #Ebikereviews,review,cycling,outdoors,bicycles">Meet Your New Commuting Companion: The Lightweight Fiido Air Carbon Fiber EbikeIt picks up quickly at lights, and acceleration—especially in Sport mode—is reassuringly quick when it’s time to overtake. I’m delighted by how effortless the overall performance is, and how smoothly the torque kicks in. What’s more, moving it, wheeling it through the house, lifting it onto bike racks, and even just doing basic things like locking it up, is just easier in every way. The motor is quiet, too. While not totally silent, it’s not a distraction.Impressively, too, the Air can also be ridden reasonably easily without electric assist. A 30-pound single speed bike won’t set any track records, but if power does fail you—or more likely, you misjudge the battery level and forget to charge overnight like I did—it won’t be too much of a workout to get home.But please don’t confuse this commuter-style electric bike with a powerful mid-drive motor electric bike. With a meagre motor and only one gear (and quite a low one at that) it does not love hills. Steady inclines are easy, but there’s one short, sharp-ish hill close to my office that requires me to stand up and pedal hard to get to the top. I wasn’t as gassed as I would be without any motor assistance, but I definitely wasn’t flying effortlessly up hills.I’ve also become a convert to the brilliance of belt-drive bikes. They need less maintenance, last longer, and prevent greasy black marks on pant legs. Fiido uses a Gates belt drive here, one of the best systems available, and ideal for urban riding.Competition and VerdictWIRED’s current favorite commuter ebike, the Aventon Soltera 3 (8/10), weighs 37 pounds and costs around 0 less than the Air. It’s a superb blend of push bike feel and lightweight electric power and with more power on offer, a faster top speed, and cheaper price, it remains the one to beat. But there’s no denying the appeal of the Fiido Air. It’s a beautiful bike to ride, with stylish looks, nimble acceleration, and push bike practicalities. At 30 pounds, it is impressively light, and easy to live with.Lightweight electric bikes are starting to appear but competition remains slim. Ribble’s new aluminum Allgrit E AL Sportfit Apex weighs 30.4 pounds and has a hugely practical 12 speed SRAM Apex XPLR AXS gearing. It does cost twice as much, though. Carbon options are limited to a couple of folding designs for now, including the ,420, 35-pound ADO Air Carbon, and ,599 Urtopia Carbon Fold Step Thru that weighs just 31 pounds.So the Fiido Air ticks a lot of boxes, and if you’re looking for a cool pedal-assist electric bike for short, flat urban rides, I highly recommend it. But if there are hills in your life, and you want to keep both hands on the handlebars at all times, the Fiido Air might not be the bike for you.#Meet #Commuting #Companion #Lightweight #Fiido #Air #Carbon #Fiber #Ebikereviews,review,cycling,outdoors,bicycles

(8/10), weighs 37 pounds and costs around $500 less than the Air. It’s a superb blend of push bike feel and lightweight electric power and with more power on offer, a faster top speed, and cheaper price, it remains the one to beat. But there’s no denying the appeal of the Fiido Air. It’s a beautiful bike to ride, with stylish looks, nimble acceleration, and push bike practicalities. At 30 pounds, it is impressively light, and easy to live with.

Lightweight electric bikes are starting to appear but competition remains slim. Ribble’s new aluminum Allgrit E AL Sportfit Apex weighs 30.4 pounds and has a hugely practical 12 speed SRAM Apex XPLR AXS gearing. It does cost twice as much, though. Carbon options are limited to a couple of folding designs for now, including the $2,420, 35-pound ADO Air Carbon, and $1,599 Urtopia Carbon Fold Step Thru that weighs just 31 pounds.

So the Fiido Air ticks a lot of boxes, and if you’re looking for a cool pedal-assist electric bike for short, flat urban rides, I highly recommend it. But if there are hills in your life, and you want to keep both hands on the handlebars at all times, the Fiido Air might not be the bike for you.

#Meet #Commuting #Companion #Lightweight #Fiido #Air #Carbon #Fiber #Ebikereviews,review,cycling,outdoors,bicycles">Meet Your New Commuting Companion: The Lightweight Fiido Air Carbon Fiber Ebike

It picks up quickly at lights, and acceleration—especially in Sport mode—is reassuringly quick when it’s time to overtake. I’m delighted by how effortless the overall performance is, and how smoothly the torque kicks in. What’s more, moving it, wheeling it through the house, lifting it onto bike racks, and even just doing basic things like locking it up, is just easier in every way. The motor is quiet, too. While not totally silent, it’s not a distraction.

Impressively, too, the Air can also be ridden reasonably easily without electric assist. A 30-pound single speed bike won’t set any track records, but if power does fail you—or more likely, you misjudge the battery level and forget to charge overnight like I did—it won’t be too much of a workout to get home.

But please don’t confuse this commuter-style electric bike with a powerful mid-drive motor electric bike. With a meagre motor and only one gear (and quite a low one at that) it does not love hills. Steady inclines are easy, but there’s one short, sharp-ish hill close to my office that requires me to stand up and pedal hard to get to the top. I wasn’t as gassed as I would be without any motor assistance, but I definitely wasn’t flying effortlessly up hills.

I’ve also become a convert to the brilliance of belt-drive bikes. They need less maintenance, last longer, and prevent greasy black marks on pant legs. Fiido uses a Gates belt drive here, one of the best systems available, and ideal for urban riding.

Competition and Verdict

WIRED’s current favorite commuter ebike, the Aventon Soltera 3 (8/10), weighs 37 pounds and costs around $500 less than the Air. It’s a superb blend of push bike feel and lightweight electric power and with more power on offer, a faster top speed, and cheaper price, it remains the one to beat. But there’s no denying the appeal of the Fiido Air. It’s a beautiful bike to ride, with stylish looks, nimble acceleration, and push bike practicalities. At 30 pounds, it is impressively light, and easy to live with.

Lightweight electric bikes are starting to appear but competition remains slim. Ribble’s new aluminum Allgrit E AL Sportfit Apex weighs 30.4 pounds and has a hugely practical 12 speed SRAM Apex XPLR AXS gearing. It does cost twice as much, though. Carbon options are limited to a couple of folding designs for now, including the $2,420, 35-pound ADO Air Carbon, and $1,599 Urtopia Carbon Fold Step Thru that weighs just 31 pounds.

So the Fiido Air ticks a lot of boxes, and if you’re looking for a cool pedal-assist electric bike for short, flat urban rides, I highly recommend it. But if there are hills in your life, and you want to keep both hands on the handlebars at all times, the Fiido Air might not be the bike for you.

#Meet #Commuting #Companion #Lightweight #Fiido #Air #Carbon #Fiber #Ebikereviews,review,cycling,outdoors,bicycles

TL;DR: Live stream South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup for free on ITVX. Access this free streaming platform from anywhere in the world with ExpressVPN.

The 2026 FIFA World Cup is kicking off with a number of really interesting matchups, including South Korea vs. Czechia.

Group A is difficult to predict, with Mexico and South Africa also vying for a spot in the knockout rounds. There’s not much to separate these sides on paper, so every team will be desperate to start with a positive result.

If you want to watch South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup from anywhere in the world, we have all the information you need.

When is South Korea vs. Czechia?

South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup kicks off at 10 p.m. ET on June 11. This fixture takes place at the Akron Stadium.

How to watch South Korea vs. Czechia for free

South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup is available to live stream for free on ITVX.

ITVX is geo-restricted to the UK, but anyone can access this free streaming platform with a VPN. These tools can hide your real IP address (digital location) and connect you to a secure server in the UK, meaning you can unblock ITVX to live stream the 2026 World Cup for free from anywhere in the world.

Live stream South Korea vs. Czechia for free by following these simple steps:

  1. Subscribe to a streaming-friendly VPN (like ExpressVPN)

  2. Download the app to your device of choice (the best VPNs have apps for Windows, Mac, iOS, Android, Linux, and more)

  3. Open up the app and connect to a server in the UK

  4. Visit ITVX

  5. Watch South Korea vs. Czechia for free from anywhere in the world

$12.95 only at ExpressVPN (with money-back guarantee)

The best VPNs for streaming are not free, but most do offer free-trials or money-back guarantees. By leveraging these offers, you can access free live streams of the 2026 World Cup without actually spending anything. This obviously isn’t a long-term solution, but it does give you enough time to stream South Korea vs. Czechia (plus more World Cup fixtures) before recovering your investment.

If you want to retain permanent access to the best free streaming services from around the world, you’ll need a subscription. Fortunately, the best VPN for streaming live sport is on sale for a limited time.

What is the best VPN for ITVX?

ExpressVPN is the best choice for bypassing geo-restrictions to stream live sport on ITVX, for a number of reasons:

  • Servers in 105 countries including the UK

  • Easy-to-use app available on all major devices including iPhone, Android, Windows, Mac, and more

  • Strict no-logging policy so your data is secure

  • Fast connection speeds free from throttling

  • Up to 10 simultaneous connections

  • 30-day money-back guarantee

A two-year subscription to ExpressVPN is on sale for $68.40 and includes an extra four months for free — 81% off for a limited time. This plan includes a year of free unlimited cloud backup and a generous 30-day money-back guarantee. Alternatively, you can get a one-month plan for just $12.99 (with money-back guarantee).

Live stream South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup for free with ExpressVPN.

#South #Korea #Czechia #livestream #watch #World #Cup #free">South Korea vs. Czechia 2026 livestream: How to watch World Cup for free TL;DR: Live stream South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup for free on ITVX. Access this free streaming platform from anywhere in the world with ExpressVPN.The 2026 FIFA World Cup is kicking off with a number of really interesting matchups, including South Korea vs. Czechia. Group A is difficult to predict, with Mexico and South Africa also vying for a spot in the knockout rounds. There’s not much to separate these sides on paper, so every team will be desperate to start with a positive result. If you want to watch South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup from anywhere in the world, we have all the information you need.When is South Korea vs. Czechia?South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup kicks off at 10 p.m. ET on June 11. This fixture takes place at the Akron Stadium.How to watch South Korea vs. Czechia for freeSouth Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup is available to live stream for free on ITVX. Mashable Top Stories ITVX is geo-restricted to the UK, but anyone can access this free streaming platform with a VPN. These tools can hide your real IP address (digital location) and connect you to a secure server in the UK, meaning you can unblock ITVX to live stream the 2026 World Cup for free from anywhere in the world.Live stream South Korea vs. Czechia for free by following these simple steps:Subscribe to a streaming-friendly VPN (like ExpressVPN)Download the app to your device of choice (the best VPNs have apps for Windows, Mac, iOS, Android, Linux, and more)Open up the app and connect to a server in the UKVisit ITVXWatch South Korea vs. Czechia for free from anywhere in the world .95 only at ExpressVPN (with money-back guarantee) The best VPNs for streaming are not free, but most do offer free-trials or money-back guarantees. By leveraging these offers, you can access free live streams of the 2026 World Cup without actually spending anything. This obviously isn’t a long-term solution, but it does give you enough time to stream South Korea vs. Czechia (plus more World Cup fixtures) before recovering your investment.If you want to retain permanent access to the best free streaming services from around the world, you’ll need a subscription. Fortunately, the best VPN for streaming live sport is on sale for a limited time.What is the best VPN for ITVX?ExpressVPN is the best choice for bypassing geo-restrictions to stream live sport on ITVX, for a number of reasons:Servers in 105 countries including the UKEasy-to-use app available on all major devices including iPhone, Android, Windows, Mac, and moreStrict no-logging policy so your data is secureFast connection speeds free from throttlingUp to 10 simultaneous connections30-day money-back guaranteeA two-year subscription to ExpressVPN is on sale for .40 and includes an extra four months for free — 81% off for a limited time. This plan includes a year of free unlimited cloud backup and a generous 30-day money-back guarantee. Alternatively, you can get a one-month plan for just .99 (with money-back guarantee).Live stream South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup for free with ExpressVPN. #South #Korea #Czechia #livestream #watch #World #Cup #free

ITVX. Access this free streaming platform from anywhere in the world with ExpressVPN.

The 2026 FIFA World Cup is kicking off with a number of really interesting matchups, including South Korea vs. Czechia.

Group A is difficult to predict, with Mexico and South Africa also vying for a spot in the knockout rounds. There’s not much to separate these sides on paper, so every team will be desperate to start with a positive result.

If you want to watch South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup from anywhere in the world, we have all the information you need.

When is South Korea vs. Czechia?

South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup kicks off at 10 p.m. ET on June 11. This fixture takes place at the Akron Stadium.

How to watch South Korea vs. Czechia for free

South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup is available to live stream for free on ITVX.

ITVX is geo-restricted to the UK, but anyone can access this free streaming platform with a VPN. These tools can hide your real IP address (digital location) and connect you to a secure server in the UK, meaning you can unblock ITVX to live stream the 2026 World Cup for free from anywhere in the world.

Live stream South Korea vs. Czechia for free by following these simple steps:

  1. Subscribe to a streaming-friendly VPN (like ExpressVPN)

  2. Download the app to your device of choice (the best VPNs have apps for Windows, Mac, iOS, Android, Linux, and more)

  3. Open up the app and connect to a server in the UK

  4. Visit ITVX

  5. Watch South Korea vs. Czechia for free from anywhere in the world

$12.95 only at ExpressVPN (with money-back guarantee)

The best VPNs for streaming are not free, but most do offer free-trials or money-back guarantees. By leveraging these offers, you can access free live streams of the 2026 World Cup without actually spending anything. This obviously isn’t a long-term solution, but it does give you enough time to stream South Korea vs. Czechia (plus more World Cup fixtures) before recovering your investment.

If you want to retain permanent access to the best free streaming services from around the world, you’ll need a subscription. Fortunately, the best VPN for streaming live sport is on sale for a limited time.

What is the best VPN for ITVX?

ExpressVPN is the best choice for bypassing geo-restrictions to stream live sport on ITVX, for a number of reasons:

  • Servers in 105 countries including the UK

  • Easy-to-use app available on all major devices including iPhone, Android, Windows, Mac, and more

  • Strict no-logging policy so your data is secure

  • Fast connection speeds free from throttling

  • Up to 10 simultaneous connections

  • 30-day money-back guarantee

A two-year subscription to ExpressVPN is on sale for $68.40 and includes an extra four months for free — 81% off for a limited time. This plan includes a year of free unlimited cloud backup and a generous 30-day money-back guarantee. Alternatively, you can get a one-month plan for just $12.99 (with money-back guarantee).

Live stream South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup for free with ExpressVPN.

#South #Korea #Czechia #livestream #watch #World #Cup #free">South Korea vs. Czechia 2026 livestream: How to watch World Cup for free

TL;DR: Live stream South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup for free on ITVX. Access this free streaming platform from anywhere in the world with ExpressVPN.

The 2026 FIFA World Cup is kicking off with a number of really interesting matchups, including South Korea vs. Czechia.

Group A is difficult to predict, with Mexico and South Africa also vying for a spot in the knockout rounds. There’s not much to separate these sides on paper, so every team will be desperate to start with a positive result.

If you want to watch South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup from anywhere in the world, we have all the information you need.

When is South Korea vs. Czechia?

South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup kicks off at 10 p.m. ET on June 11. This fixture takes place at the Akron Stadium.

How to watch South Korea vs. Czechia for free

South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup is available to live stream for free on ITVX.

ITVX is geo-restricted to the UK, but anyone can access this free streaming platform with a VPN. These tools can hide your real IP address (digital location) and connect you to a secure server in the UK, meaning you can unblock ITVX to live stream the 2026 World Cup for free from anywhere in the world.

Live stream South Korea vs. Czechia for free by following these simple steps:

  1. Subscribe to a streaming-friendly VPN (like ExpressVPN)

  2. Download the app to your device of choice (the best VPNs have apps for Windows, Mac, iOS, Android, Linux, and more)

  3. Open up the app and connect to a server in the UK

  4. Visit ITVX

  5. Watch South Korea vs. Czechia for free from anywhere in the world

$12.95 only at ExpressVPN (with money-back guarantee)

The best VPNs for streaming are not free, but most do offer free-trials or money-back guarantees. By leveraging these offers, you can access free live streams of the 2026 World Cup without actually spending anything. This obviously isn’t a long-term solution, but it does give you enough time to stream South Korea vs. Czechia (plus more World Cup fixtures) before recovering your investment.

If you want to retain permanent access to the best free streaming services from around the world, you’ll need a subscription. Fortunately, the best VPN for streaming live sport is on sale for a limited time.

What is the best VPN for ITVX?

ExpressVPN is the best choice for bypassing geo-restrictions to stream live sport on ITVX, for a number of reasons:

  • Servers in 105 countries including the UK

  • Easy-to-use app available on all major devices including iPhone, Android, Windows, Mac, and more

  • Strict no-logging policy so your data is secure

  • Fast connection speeds free from throttling

  • Up to 10 simultaneous connections

  • 30-day money-back guarantee

A two-year subscription to ExpressVPN is on sale for $68.40 and includes an extra four months for free — 81% off for a limited time. This plan includes a year of free unlimited cloud backup and a generous 30-day money-back guarantee. Alternatively, you can get a one-month plan for just $12.99 (with money-back guarantee).

Live stream South Korea vs. Czechia in the 2026 FIFA World Cup for free with ExpressVPN.

#South #Korea #Czechia #livestream #watch #World #Cup #free

Post Comment