I have a confession to make – I do not own a smart speaker. Not only that, but I have no intention of getting one.

If I have my way, no Alexa, Google Nest or Apple HomePod will ever be brought into my home. The thought of having a device constantly listening into my conversations, waiting for a “Alexa”, “Hey Siri”, or “Hey Google” to be at my beck and call just feels a step too far. Now, being severely sight impaired, I am acutely aware of the benefits these devices can bring. For example, creating a shopping list or reading an audio book with just a couple of voice commands is immensely  useful.

Like I say, I am aware of the benefits, I just don’t like it when I can be discussing giving the dogs their flea tablet and the next thing I know, I have a well-known brand of chewable treatment showing in my recommended list or I start to get countless Instagram reels for herbal alternatives to the “evil traditional treatments” and, whilst I know these settings can be deactivated, in order to make best use of the accessibility functions this intrusion must be set to allow. I’m sure some of you will be reading this and thinking I’m some kind of tin-foil wearing flat earth conspiracy theorist who thinks they put nano trackers in the COVID-19 vaccine and that the Measles, Mumps and Rubella jab causes autism but far from it. NASA did put man on the moon, adding fluoride to tap water is proven to improve dental health and Elvis is most definitely dead. I just have a problem with Big Tech tracking my data in ways that I disagree with. After all, there are only so many adverts for natural dog food I can scroll past to get back to the talking Goldies attempting to rescue their sunken tennis ball.

We are all entitled to choose the level at which we share our personal information but in this ever-more connected world, it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish between what is acceptable and what is necessary. How many times have you just accepted a privacy policy so you can get on and start to play the new game you’ve downloaded? We all do it, blissfully unaware of how much data is being shared with the developers, the phone network and manufacturer. Now imagine having to relinquish control of your privacy for something that is essential to your life? Whether I’m in a restaurant or boarding a train, quite often random people will see my cane or my dog and ask how much I can see or if I’m blind or “just visually impaired” (as if that is something that can be fixed with a pair of strong glasses). I always pause before answering to assess how much to divulge – If it’s a station assistant then I may tell them how much vision I have so they can assist me better but my stock answer is simply to state that I am registered blind and leave it there. I appreciate people are interested but you wouldn’t ask someone if they are a natural brunette so why is it acceptable to ask for personal medical information about a disabled person just to satisfy some idle curiosity?

You may recall about 10 years ago, Google released their pioneering Google Glass smart glasses, the first-ever wearable tech that enabled the wearer to interact with the world via these glasses which could take images and videos as if through the user’s eyes. Not to say having their email and web searches sent straight to their eye. Due to enormous privacy and public safety concerns these glasses were a complete failure and discontinued after only a few years. It had a brief comeback in 2017 with enterprise versions released specifically for commercial and medical purposes but their retail life was thankfully short-lived and they were finally abandoned in 2023.

But that wasn’t the end for smart glasses and the newest kid on the block is Ray-Ban’s Meta. Now if you thought Google had a flexible approach to privacy, imagine what the parent company of some of the most widely used social media platforms could do. You would hope that lessons have been learned from all the concerns from a decade ago remain but, alas, Meta appear to have done little to address them beside asking buyers to be sympathetic to other people’s privacy.

What has this got to do with sight loss?

One of the biggest challenges people with visual impairments have is when we need the support of a useful pair of eyes when we are on our own. Step in Be My Eyes which has built up a community of volunteers who are available at a moment’s notice to jump on a quick video call and assist in anything from finding the corn flakes in the cereal aisle to helping select the most suitable tie to go with my suit for a job interview. Just recently Be My Eyes has begun to leverage Artificial Intelligence to work alongside and even instead of the humans to assist in some of these areas. In the latest iteration, Be My Eyes / Be My AI has partnered with Meta to make this service available to subscribers via, you guessed it, Ray-Ban Meta. Now in principle this is a good thing and the marketing team at Meta have wasted no time in inviting some of the most high-profile visually impaired influencers and content creators to try these glasses out and share their experiences with the world. This is an ingenious approach as it positions the product as more than simply a fashion accessory, it’s a mobility aid. However, the fact remains that the wearer can get real-time support directly to their eyes whilst accepting that Meta has access to the data being shared between the wearer and the volunteer (or AI) – some of which could be extremely sensitive.

As if this wasn’t enough, the user could be accused of invading peoples’ privacy by surreptitiously recording or filming without their consent or awareness. I did an interview recently with a journalism student from the University of the West of England discussing the benefits of these glasses, especially for Guide Dog owners to record access refusals or dog attacks at the touch of a button. This is a huge benefit but, as I pointed out on the call, a bodycam similar to something worn by a security guard or an action camera like a GoPro can do exactly the same job with better quality and without the same secrecy concerns and, in the case of my GoPro, I can strap it to the dog for some fantastic free-run footage.

Now, I’m not saying these glasses are a bad idea, they’re not. In one device they can do what I do with four – my bone-conduction headphones, my action camera, phone and sunglasses but being brutally honest – each one of these devices has been purpose-built and designed to achieve a particular goal without raising all the safety and security concerns, especially at a time when the checks and balances put in place are being watered down by the very people who’s job it is to protect us. I really do hope these issues can be resolved because I fear that a visually impaired person could become embroiled in a situation not of their making.

Worse than that, someone could easily exploit our vulnerabilities by pretending to be visually impaired them selves. All I hope is, if that happens, they become subject to the same probing questions that many of us have to endure every day.