Engineer creates ad block for the real world with augmented reality glasses
Business model & platform control
- Discussion of a likely arms race: users paying to block ads vs ad-tech paying to become unblockable.
- Comparisons to browser ad-blockers: one “unbribable” blocker can win, but hardware platforms (e.g., tightly controlled ecosystems) might restrict such tools for profit.
- Skepticism about buying glasses that block only “some” ads; counterpoint that people already buy devices that block none, so partial blocking could still sell.
- Some refuse to buy if it relies on Google’s AI, seeing irony and risk in using a major ad company to block ads.
Technical feasibility & UX
- Many find the red box overlays uglier and more intrusive than the ads; suggestions include desaturating, freezing motion, or doing generative inpainting to blend ads into the scene.
- Debate over whether real-time, scene-correct AI fill is currently too computationally heavy, with proposals to precompute masks for common locations.
- Explanation that most current AR is additive (can only overlay), while true blocking needs XR/passthrough or fine-grained electrochromic layers. Even then, optics/focus issues can make “black bars” appear as blurry blobs.
History and prior art
- Multiple references to earlier “mediated reality” and wearable computing work decades ago that already demonstrated ad recognition and blocking, albeit with bulky hardware and remote compute.
- Some frame the new system as late to the idea but timely in execution now that hardware and ML have caught up.
Billboards, regulation, and externalities
- Strong resentment toward bright, animated billboards, including boats and drones used as mobile ads.
- Examples of cities or regions that banned or strictly regulated billboards are praised for preserving vistas.
- Framing billboards as a classic “tragedy of the commons” where governments failed to protect shared space, forcing individuals toward expensive tech fixes like AR ad-block.
AR, privacy, and dystopian scenarios
- Fears that commercial AR will not block ads but replace physical ads with targeted ones, possibly forcing attention (e.g., blanking everything but the ad until you look at it).
- Concerns about pervasive tracking: AR that knows everywhere you go and everything you look at.
- Worries about people being constantly captured, analyzed, or recorded by others’ glasses in sensitive places; analogies to Street View face-blurring.
- Speculation about copyright/trademark being used to remove real-world objects from view (e.g., buildings), enforced via DRM-like AR filters.
Manipulating reality & social/ethical issues
- References to “They Live,” “Black Mirror,” and similar stories to illustrate how easily AR could rewrite perception—blocking people, altering their appearance, or turning out-groups into “monsters.”
- Some foresee filters that erase or transform certain demographics, further eroding shared reality.
- Debate around altering a partner’s appearance (e.g., replacing a girlfriend’s face) via AR: analogies to makeup vs. objections that it’s disrespectful and non-consensual when done on the receiver side.
- Broader worry that AR may deepen tribalism, letting people literally not see those they dislike.
Is AR even desirable?
- Several commenters doubt mainstream appetite for always-on AR outside work and entertainment, citing social awkwardness, privacy fears, and “digital drug” dynamics already seen with smartphones.
- Others propose concrete useful cases: navigation HUDs, industrial/technical overlays, snowboarding terrain visualization, name-tags in social settings—if implemented locally, privately, and in lightweight hardware.
- Some note this project as one of the few AR use cases that feels immediately appealing: a countercultural tool to push back against surveillance advertising and visual clutter.