Meta has always insisted that building the “metaverse” is a long-term play, but a flashy recent demo from Mark Zuckerberg demonstrated just how immediate a policy concern it might become if people really start to inhabit virtual reality at scale. At Meta’s annual Connect conference last week, Zuckerberg strode onstage — wearing a t-shirt bearing the phrase aut Zuck aut nihil (“All Zuck or all nothing”) — to demonstrate the company’s prototype Orion augmented reality glasses. The glasses resemble a strange combination of Buddy Holly, Iris Apfel and semi-opaque drive-in 3D glasses, and functioned, as Zuckerberg demonstrated in a video, exactly how he and the metaverse’s biggest boosters have promised it: cleanly laying virtual elements onto physical reality, controllable with a wrist-bound “neural interface,” with no clunky visor or joysticks required. The only catch: Unlike the Apple Vision Pro or Meta’s previous Quest headsets, you can’t buy them. The device is what Meta is calling a “purposeful product prototype,” meant to whet the appetites for consumers and developers until Meta can figure out a cheaper way to manufacture their high-tech silicon carbide lenses. But while the device might be far from ready for the public, tech-watchers are saying it’s a bright red warning sign that regulators need to prepare themselves for the next wave of omnipresent, data-hoovering smart devices. Policymakers “should start paying real attention” following the Orion demo, Yonatan Raz-Fridman, co-founder and CEO of the gaming company Supersocial, told DFD, citing concerns about privacy, accessibility and safety. The Verge reported that components currently present, but deactivated, in Orion include front-facing cameras, GPS and cellular data — all of which could, absent any legislative or regulatory guardrails, make the glasses a next-generation privacy nightmare. A couple of years ago, regulators actually were starting to think seriously about the implications of more people spending time in the metaverse. Since then, however, AI has largely stolen the tech-regulatory limelight. Metaverse advocates are even starting to clamor for more policy engagement with their technology. In a letter sent today to the European Commission, a group of European metaverse think tanks and trade associations lamented that “the new Commission did not mention its virtual worlds strategy or the significance of XR technologies in its recent mission letters,” and insisted that “As an initial step, virtual worlds should feature in the Commission’s upcoming review fitness check on EU consumer law.” Liz Hyman is president and CEO of the XR (“extended reality”) Association, America’s most prominent virtual reality trade association, which includes Meta, Google and Microsoft among other industry giants. She told DFD in a statement that “as these technologies continue to evolve, so do the challenges” and called for Congress to pass a comprehensive privacy law. (She also noted that the industry “isn’t waiting for policymakers to act,” citing recent privacy announcements from Meta.) The XRA published in September a review of recent regulatory action around the metaverse, which included mentions of what they call “immersive tech” and directions to fund or explore its use within federal agencies in big omnibus bills like the FAA Reauthorization Act and the National Defense Authorization Act. Still, the technology has yet to see anything like the specialized attention given to other futuristic technologies like AI or quantum computing. That might be because VR technology has yet to catch on commercially like AI, or prove as significant as quantum for the pure sciences and cybersecurity. But if regulators need more convincing than a flashy prototype to prove that a society saturated with smart glasses poses massive risks they need to get ahead of, it might have just arrived: 404 Media reported this morning on a pair of student developers at Harvard University who put facial recognition technology into a product you really can buy — Meta’s $300 Ray-Ban smart glasses — to instantly “dox” anyone with a single glance. “Devs will be making crazy stuff with this tech,” said Raz-Fridman, calling it a “perfect example” of the risks run by falling behind on VR technologies. As The New York Times reported last year, Facebook and Google developed similar technology years ago but declined to make it public to avoid the inevitable privacy catastrophe. A Meta spokesperson insisted to 404 Media that the students’ invasive use of facial recognition could have been done with any camera, and noted that it constitutes a violation of the company’s terms of service. But if VR devices become as powerful, easy-to-use, and (relatively) stylish as the Orion prototype, they might end up by far the easiest and most unassuming vehicle for such mischief — leaving the companies with no choice but to team up with regulators and preempt their worst abuses.
| 
