When can you use “ban” in the same sentence with AI, and it be good for AI? When you’re talking about Meta’s AI for Ray-Ban smart glasses!

See what I did there? 😉

According to The Verge (Meta’s AI for Ray-Ban smart glasses can identify objects and translate languages, written by Wes Davis and available here), Meta is finally going to let people try its splashiest AI features for the Meta Ray-Ban smart glasses, though in an early access test to start.

Tuesday, Meta announced that it’s going to start rolling out its multimodal AI features that can tell you about things Meta’s AI assistant can see and hear through the camera and microphones of the glasses.

Mark Zuckerberg demonstrated the update in an Instagram reel where he asked the glasses to suggest pants that would match a shirt he was holding. It responded by describing the shirt and offering a couple of suggestions for pants that might complement it. He also had the glasses’ AI assistant translate text and show off a couple of image captions.

Zuckerberg revealed the multimodal AI features for Ray-Ban glasses back in September, saying that people would talk to the Meta AI assistant “throughout the day about different questions you have,” suggesting that it could answer questions about what wearers are looking at or where they are.

Whew! Wonder where all that data is going? Adds new meaning to the phrase “you can’t unsee that”! 😀

The AI assistant also accurately described a lit-up, California-shaped wall sculpture in a video from CTO Andrew Bosworth. He explained some of the other features, which include asking the assistant to help caption photos you’ve taken or ask for translation and summarization — all fairly common AI features seen in other products from Microsoft and Google.

The test period for Meta’s AI for Ray-Ban smart glasses will be limited in the US to “a small number of people who opt in,” Bosworth said. Instructions for opting in can be found here.

Looks like the future is so bright for AI, you gotta wear shades! 😎

Also, we’re getting so many fake case citations stories now that they’re almost not newsworthy anymore. This one is a little more newsworthy because it involves Michael Cohen, former lawyer for President Donald Trump. As reported by Law & Crime, Cohen’s attorney submitted a letter motion on Nov. 29 arguing that there were three case examples in 2022 of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirming the “early termination of supervised release.”

Guess what? You guessed it – the cases don’t appear to exist.

That’s what New York District Judge Jesse M. Furman (to whom the request was sent) said. Not only that, but another Cohen lawyer from a different firm who filed her own supporting letter stated in a footnote she “has been unable to verify those citations.”

The other reason I find it noteworthy is the last name of the lawyer who filed the motion with the three apparently nonexistent cases: Schwartz – the same last name as the lawyer who submitted fake case citations in Mata v. Avianca. What are the odds? 😮

After the Second Circuit clerk couldn’t find those cases either, Judge Furman ordered Cohen attorney David M. Schwartz to “provide copies of the three cited decisions to the Court” by Dec. 19, next Tuesday. If the attorney can’t prove those cases exist, Furman said, Schwartz should spend his time instead on explaining why he shouldn’t be sanctioned, how nonexistent cases came to be cited in the motion, and whether Michael Cohen himself was involved in “drafting or reviewing the motion”. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Of course, two “Schwartzes” don’t make a sample size, but it illustrates how common these fake case citations are becoming. But if you’re filing a motion with case citations, make sure those cases actually exist. 😩

So, what do you think? Are you interested in using Meta’s AI for Ray-Ban smart glasses? Or are you concerned about the data privacy aspects? Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Image Copyright © The Verge

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the authors and speakers themselves, and do not necessarily represent the views held by my employer, my partners or my clients. eDiscovery Today is made available solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Today should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.