Keep the claim precise
Reporting has discussed Meta's exploratory facial-recognition work, including a project described as Name Tag. The careful description is important: this was reported and exploratory, not a universal consumer capability deployed in every pair of smart glasses.
Precision protects the public conversation from hype. It also prevents a different mistake, which is to dismiss the issue until every part of the capability is commercially available and difficult to reverse.
Names are not neutral data
Identifying someone by name can change an encounter even when no further profile is shown. It may reveal that a person is known, make them feel exposed, or lower the threshold for a stranger to start gathering more information.
The impact is not shared evenly. People who already face harassment, discrimination, or unwanted attention can have stronger reasons to avoid systems that make them easier to identify in public.
The debate should happen before normalisation
Facial recognition in an always-worn device raises a question of social permission. What settings should be off limits? What consent would be meaningful? What independent oversight would be needed?
Those questions are easier to answer while a capability is still being discussed. Once a behaviour is normalised, bystanders are often left to adapt to an arrangement they never had a chance to shape.