Hiding in plain sight: why the industry needs to talk about AI glasses
AI-powered smart glasses are already being banned from restaurants, theatres and private members' clubs over privacy concerns. Paul Harvey asks whether conference organisers should be thinking about them too.
Imagine you've spent months planning a high-profile client conference.
Your keynote is about to unveil a new product roadmap. Your afternoon roundtable is being held under Chatham House Rules. Senior executives are having frank conversations over tea and coffee. Exhibitors are demonstrating products that haven't yet reached the market.
Now imagine every delegate in the room could be wearing what appears to be an ordinary pair of glasses capable of discreetly recording everything they see and hear.
That future isn't coming - it's already here.
Meta's AI-powered smart glasses have become one of the most talked-about pieces of consumer tech this year. While marketed as a hands-free way to take photos, record video, translate languages and interact with AI, they've also prompted a growing backlash from people concerned about privacy. They've acquired the nickname 'pervert glasses' on social media for that very reason.
Accordingly, restaurants, theatres, pubs and private members' clubs across the UK have begun banning the glasses altogether, arguing that customers and staff have a reasonable expectation not to be recorded without their knowledge.
The question for our industry is this: are business events ready?
We often worry about smartphones distracting delegates, and ask people to silence their devices, put them away at certain points, and refrain from taking photographs.
Smart glasses are a step change in that conversation.
A smartphone is visible. If someone holds it up to record, everyone in the room knows what's happening. A pair of glasses? Not so much.
Even with indicator lights designed to show when recording is taking place, would most delegates notice? And crucially, would they feel comfortable speaking openly if they weren't sure?
Built on trust
Business events are built on trust. We ask delegates to network with strangers, encourage audiences to ask challenging questions, and organise all kinds of events where confidentiality isn't just desirable, it's essential.
Many conference sessions operate under Chatham House rules precisely because participants are more willing to share honest opinions when they know those opinions won't be attributed outside the room.
What happens when every attendee has the potential to covertly record proceedings? The event still happens, but the openness that made it valuable begins to disappear.
Of course, there are positive applications too.
For international delegates, AI-powered glasses offering live translation could transform accessibility. Hands-free note-taking could help attendees stay engaged rather than typing throughout a keynote. Event professionals might use wearable AI to navigate unfamiliar venues, retrieve schedules or capture content more naturally.
Like most new technologies, the glasses themselves aren't inherently good or bad. It's how they're used that matters.
Detailed policies
Many organisers have detailed policies covering photography, filming, social media, drones and even the use of generative AI during conferences. Where do these glasses fit in?
There’s a good chance they don't need to, as there’s every possibility the technology won't achieve mainstream adoption. Especially if the 'pervert glasses' moniker sticks.
But there’s also the chance that these devices will become so commonplace that event organisers will have little choice but to develop clear policies on when they're appropriate and when they're not.
Do exhibitors want visitors wearing recording glasses onto their stands? Should confidential sessions prohibit them? Should organisers ask delegates to declare wearable recording devices during registration? Should venues themselves take a position?
These questions may become impossible to avoid over the next couple of years.
And before we rush to embrace the opportunities of wearable AI, we should probably decide where the boundaries lie.