Meta is reportedly preparing a new version of its smart glasses without a camera, even as the company’s chief technology officer argues that concerns surrounding the devices are being driven by a small number of problematic users.

Andrew Bosworth, Meta’s CTO and head of Reality Labs, addressed the issue during an Ask Me Anything session on Instagram. He argued that most people use the glasses responsibly, comparing their recording capabilities to smartphone cameras while highlighting the devices’ recording indicator and anti-tampering protections.

However, ongoing privacy concerns and reports of ways to bypass those safeguards suggest that the debate around camera-equipped wearables is far from settled.

Meta defends recording safeguards amid privacy concerns

Bosworth pointed to the glasses’ recording light, which is designed to alert people when the device is capturing video. Meta has also introduced measures intended to prevent users from recording when the indicator is covered or tampered with.

According to The Next Web’s report, a software update addressed a loophole that allowed users to begin recording and then cover the light. Meta also disabled cameras on some devices where the indicator had been physically removed.

The company reportedly said the enforcement affected fewer than one in every 1,000 glasses sold. However, The Next Web reported that a $2 sticker could still defeat the recording indicator, raising questions about whether a visible light alone can provide meaningful privacy protection.

The concern extends beyond the number of users behaving improperly. Unlike a smartphone, which typically makes recording more visible to people nearby, smart glasses can capture footage without an obvious change in the wearer’s behaviour.

Camera-free Luna could change Meta’s approach

The Information reportedly claims that Meta is preparing a camera-free version of its glasses, codenamed Luna. The device is expected to feature six microphones and could be unveiled at Meta Connect on September 23, with shipments potentially beginning in October.

Removing the camera would directly address concerns about people being recorded without their knowledge. However, it would also remove one of the most prominent features associated with Meta’s existing smart glasses.

The microphones introduce another privacy consideration. While the camera-related concern would be reduced, users could still question whether the device is listening and how that activity is communicated. Unlike a camera, microphones do not currently have an established public indicator convention.

Privacy scrutiny is also increasing in Europe. Authorities in France, Norway and Germany are examining issues involving camera-equipped wearables, while the European Data Protection Board is preparing a report on the category.

Meta’s upcoming Connect event could therefore provide important details about Luna, including its microphone controls, privacy indicators and intended use cases.

The takeaway: Warnings from AI developers have sparked widespread debate over whether, and how, the technology might cause human extinction. While much of that discussion has centered on rogue AI incidents, events in the Middle East suggest that military action driven by hallucinating AI tools may be the more immediate danger.

Sources connected to the US military recently told CNN that the US nearly moved to intercept a Chinese vessel in the Middle East this spring based on false intel from an AI-assisted report. The report was based on an inaccurate chatbot response that identified the ship as carrying materials for a nuclear weapons program.

Two sources said armed military personnel were preparing to board the vessel, with military planes already in the air, before officials took a closer look at the report and discovered it was at least partially AI-generated.

One source described the intel as completely false, saying it nearly started a war between the two nuclear powers. What was actually on the ship remains unclear.

An analyst had asked an unnamed chatbot to assess intelligence on the ship’s manifest, information that originated with Special Operations Command Pacific. It’s still unclear whether the chatbot was commercial or government-owned.

An official familiar with the US military’s AI deployments told CNN, that a government chatbot would likely have been forked or cloned from a commercial product and augmented with government intelligence. Either way, the analyst also used AI to write an intelligence report based on the erroneous response – one that put the military on high alert.

The incident showcases the US military’s push to accelerate AI adoption amid its war with Iran. In January, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced plans to embrace AI more aggressively and eliminate bureaucratic barriers, warning that falling behind on the technology could cede the initiative to China and other US adversaries. Analysts, meanwhile, reportedly face mounting pressure to disseminate reports faster using AI.

The military has primarily used AI for intelligence analysis, logistics, and targeting. Anthropic’s Claude, for example, was central to the US’s opening strikes in the Iran war, including the one that killed Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. But AI targeting based on outdated information may have also contributed to a strike on a school in Minab that killed 168 people, mostly children – an attack widely blamed on the US that UN-backed experts have flagged as a possible war crime.

US officials told CNN that the Chinese vessel incident isn’t the only time the military has run into AI hallucinations.

A system proxy is a default operating-system proxy configuration that compatible applications can inherit, but it does not force every app on the device through that proxy. Firefox can either use the system proxy or its own browser-specific settings, while Chrome and Microsoft Edge normally inherit system network settings unless an override changes their behavior.

System Proxy vs Browser Proxy at a Glance

The important difference is where the proxy configuration comes from and whether an application actually follows it. A system proxy provides a shared operating-system configuration, while a browser-specific proxy lets a browser use settings that differ from the system defaults.

System proxy vs browser-specific proxy

The useful rule is simple: a proxy setting affects traffic only when the application consults and follows that configuration. The word system describes where the setting is provided, not a guarantee that every application on the computer must use it.

What Is a System Proxy?

A system proxy is a proxy configuration exposed by the operating system for applications and networking libraries that are designed to use the system’s proxy settings.

On Windows 10 and Windows 11, Microsoft exposes proxy controls under Settings → Network & internet → Proxy. Windows supports automatic detection, a setup script, and manual proxy configuration. Microsoft’s current Windows proxy documentation also treats proxy settings associated with a VPN connection separately from the ordinary Windows proxy configuration.

On macOS, Apple’s networking framework exposes the current systemwide internet proxy settings to software that uses those APIs. Apple’s CFNetwork proxy documentation includes system proxy information, proxy exceptions, automatic discovery, and proxy auto-configuration settings.

The important distinction is that the configuration is available at the system level. It does not turn the operating system into a VPN-style tunnel that automatically captures every network connection.

Understanding how proxy servers route traffic makes this distinction easier: proxying depends on which traffic is actually sent through the intermediary.

What Is a Browser Proxy?

A browser proxy is proxy behavior controlled specifically for a browser rather than relying only on the operating system’s default proxy configuration. Browsers do not all implement this in the same way.

Firefox is the clearest example because it exposes its own proxy mode selector. Mozilla currently offers:

• No proxy;
• Auto-detect proxy settings for this network;
• Use system proxy settings;
• Manual proxy configuration; and
• Automatic proxy configuration URL.

These are informational configuration modes, not ranked choices. The appropriate mode depends on how the browser is supposed to reach the network.

Chrome and other Chromium-based browsers normally work differently. Chromium’s network settings documentation states that the Chromium network stack uses system network settings by default, including proxy configuration. Chromium also supports proxy-related overrides, but those are exceptions to the normal inheritance model rather than a Firefox-style everyday proxy selector.

Which Apps Use the Windows System Proxy?

The safest answer is: applications that are designed to inherit or honor the Windows system proxy configuration.

Microsoft Edge is a clear example. Microsoft states that Edge uses system network settings by default, including proxy configuration.

Chromium follows the same general model. A normal Chromium or Chrome session therefore typically inherits the system proxy rather than requiring the same proxy address to be entered separately inside the browser.

That still does not mean every Windows application follows the same route. An application can use its own networking library, direct connection mode, internal proxy configuration, organization-managed settings, or another mechanism that does not inherit the ordinary Windows proxy.

This is why changing the Windows proxy can affect Edge and Chrome while another application continues connecting differently.

Windows VPN proxy settings are separate

Windows adds another source of confusion by allowing a VPN connection to have its own proxy configuration. Microsoft documents that VPN-specific proxy settings are configured separately from the normal Windows proxy.

A system proxy therefore should not be confused with a VPN tunnel. Proxy and VPN coverage differ because a proxy affects traffic that follows its configuration, while a VPN uses its own tunnel and routing policy.

Which Apps Use the macOS System Proxy?

macOS also provides shared proxy settings at the system networking level. Apple’s CFNetwork APIs expose the current systemwide proxy configuration and can resolve which proxy should be used for a given URL.

The configuration can contain proxy endpoints, proxy auto-configuration, automatic discovery, exception lists, and a setting that excludes simple hostnames. Apple’s global proxy settings reference documents these values.

The limitation is similar to Windows: “systemwide settings” does not mean that every application is technically forced to use Apple’s CFNetwork proxy resolution. Software that uses its own networking implementation can behave differently.

In practice, changing the macOS proxy can influence applications that rely on the system networking configuration while independently configured software may use another route.

How Chrome and Edge Handle Proxies

Chrome and Edge are useful examples because many users expect every browser to have a Firefox-style independent proxy selector. Chromium-based browsers normally start from the operating system’s network configuration instead.

Chrome and Chromium

The Chromium network stack uses system network settings by default. Its documented proxy-related overrides can specify a custom proxy, a PAC URL, a bypass list, or direct access.

A Chromium session can therefore behave differently from the Windows or macOS system proxy when it is deliberately started or managed with a proxy override. For an ordinary browser session, however, system inheritance is the expected starting point.

Microsoft Edge

Edge also uses system network settings by default, while its supported command-line options can override the proxy mode, custom server, PAC URL, or bypass list.

Managed environments can go further. Microsoft’s current Edge ProxySettings policy can control proxy mode, server, PAC URL, and bypass behavior, so an organization-managed browser may behave differently from an unmanaged browser on the same computer.

These override layers explain why checking only the Windows Settings app is sometimes insufficient when Edge behaves differently from another application.

Localhost can be a special case

Local addresses can create confusing results. Microsoft’s current developer documentation says Chromium-based browsers such as Edge and Chrome bypass system proxy settings for localhost URLs by default.

A developer can therefore see ordinary websites using the proxy while a service running on the same computer connects directly. That is expected bypass behavior, not proof that the system proxy is broken.

How Firefox Handles Proxies Differently

Firefox makes proxy inheritance more visible because the browser exposes an explicit connection-mode selector.

Mozilla’s current Firefox connection settings documentation provides these modes:

• No proxy: Firefox does not use a proxy from this connection setting.
• Auto-detect proxy settings for this network: Firefox attempts to discover proxy configuration automatically.
• Use system proxy settings: Firefox uses the proxy configuration provided by the operating system.
• Manual proxy configuration: Firefox uses browser-specific proxy hostnames and ports.
• Automatic proxy configuration URL: Firefox loads proxy-selection rules from a PAC file.

These are informational configuration modes rather than evaluated alternatives.

The practical consequence is that Firefox can behave differently from Chrome on the same machine without either browser being broken. Chrome may inherit the system proxy while Firefox is set to No proxy, a separate manual endpoint, or its own PAC configuration.

Extensions can also control Firefox connections

Mozilla notes that Firefox’s Connection Settings interface can show extensions that control how the browser connects to the internet. An active extension therefore becomes another layer to check when Firefox does not behave like the operating system or another browser.

A comparison of Chrome and Firefox proxy settings should therefore account for system inheritance, Firefox’s explicit modes, extensions, PAC behavior, and browser overrides rather than treating both browsers as identical.

Why One App Uses the Proxy and Another Does Not

When applications behave differently, the cause is often a difference in configuration scope or routing rules rather than evidence that the operating system randomly ignored the proxy.

The application uses its own proxy configuration

Firefox can replace the system proxy with a manual endpoint or PAC URL. Other applications can expose independent network settings as well.

The application is configured for direct access

A browser or application can deliberately avoid the system proxy. Chromium and Edge, for example, support explicit direct or no-proxy overrides.

A bypass rule matches the destination

Proxy bypass rules tell the networking layer to connect directly to selected hosts. Apple documents system proxy exception lists, Firefox provides No Proxy For, and Chromium-based overrides can also define bypass rules.

The result can be completely intentional: one website goes through the proxy while another connects directly.

A PAC file chose a different route

A proxy auto-configuration (PAC) file contains logic that can choose a proxy or a direct connection according to the requested destination. Two websites opened from the same browser can therefore follow different routes even though the PAC configuration is working correctly.

The mechanics of proxy auto-configuration matter when routing changes according to the requested destination rather than one fixed proxy endpoint.

A browser extension or policy changed the settings

Firefox can report extensions that control its internet connection, while Edge can receive managed proxy policy from an organization. These layers can legitimately override what a user expects from ordinary system settings.

The destination is intentionally local

localhost and other local addresses can be excluded by proxy rules or browser defaults. A local development service connecting directly while external websites use the proxy can therefore be expected behavior.

This is an informational diagnostic sequence, not a full configuration procedure. Avoid changing multiple layers simultaneously because doing so makes it harder to identify which setting caused the difference.

If multiple applications continue to ignore a proxy unexpectedly, apps that ignore system proxy settings can require deeper investigation into networking libraries, managed configuration, bypass rules, and application-specific proxy support.

System Proxy or Browser Proxy: Which Should You Use?

Use the system proxy when you want applications that support system inheritance to share one operating-system proxy configuration. This avoids duplicating the same settings inside software that already follows the system configuration.

Use browser-specific settings when the browser needs behavior that differs from the operating system. Firefox is the clearest example because it can explicitly inherit the system proxy, use no proxy, use a manual proxy, or load its own PAC configuration.

Neither approach is universally better. The correct configuration depends on which applications should use the proxy and which configuration layers those applications actually support.

Bottom Line

A system proxy is a shared operating-system proxy configuration, not a guarantee that every application on the computer uses the same route. Chrome and Edge normally inherit system network settings, while Firefox can either inherit them or replace them with its own connection configuration.

When one app appears to ignore the proxy, check the application’s networking model, browser settings, PAC rules, bypass list, extension, policy, and destination before assuming that the system proxy itself has failed.

Our current ticket pricing window for TechCrunch Disrupt 2026 ends next Friday, Sept. 25 at 11:59 p.m. PT. After that, prices increase. Save up to $200 when you register before the deadline.

Why Disrupt?

From October 13-15 at San Francisco’s Moscone West, 10,000+ founders, investors, operators, and tech leaders will walk into TechCrunch Disrupt 2026 looking for companies to invest in, products to use, partners to work with, and technologies worth paying attention to.

At Disrupt, you can:

• Learn what’s next from leaders across AI, fintech, robotics, infrastructure, and more.
• Meet the right people through 1:1 meetings, AI-powered matchmaking, and dedicated networking opportunities.
• Find your next opportunity in the Expo Hall, the Startup Battlefield 200, and across the Disrupt community.
• Get practical insights on building, funding, and scaling a company in today’s tech landscape.
• Build connections that move your business forward with founders, investors, operators, partners and potential customers.

Whether you’re building, investing, scaling, or looking for what’s next, Disrupt puts the people and ideas you need in the same room.

October 13–15. Moscone West, San Francisco. Don’t miss out.

1 week. Then prices go up.

Don’t wait until the last minute and pay more for the same three days.

Get your ticket by Sept. 25 at 11:59 p.m. PT and save up to $200.

There are enough Nat King Cole reissues in circulation to fill several record shelves, so another one needs a better reason to exist than an anniversary sticker and 180 grams of vinyl.

Blue Note Records has a considerably stronger case with After Midnight: The Complete Sessions, a new 2LP mono Tone Poet Audiophile Vinyl Series edition arriving November 13, 2026 for $54.98. The expanded release includes all 18 performances from Cole’s four 1956 Capitol sessions, rather than simply reproducing the original 12-track LP.

Joe Harley produced the new edition, Kevin Gray mastered it at Cohearent Audio from the original analog phono reels, and RTI is pressing the records on 180-gram vinyl. The set also includes a deluxe tip-on gatefold jacket and booklet with archival photographs and a new essay by Nat King Cole biographer Will Friedwald.

That is a rather more convincing reason to revisit an album than turquoise vinyl.

Related Reading:

Why Does After Midnight Matter?

By 1956, Nat King Cole had become one of America’s biggest vocal stars, and Capitol was increasingly surrounding him with orchestras and polished arrangements. After Midnight pulled things back toward his jazz roots.

Cole worked with guitarist John Collins, bassist Charlie Harris and drummer Lee Young, with guest appearances across the four sessions by trumpeter Harry “Sweets” Edison, alto saxophonist Willie Smith, valve trombonist Juan Tizol and violinist Stuff Smith.

The smaller ensemble matters because Cole was an exceptional jazz pianist long before recordings such as “Unforgettable” transformed him into a mainstream vocal star. After Midnight lets both sides of his musical personality coexist.

Cole still sings, but the piano is not furniture.

The performances of “Sweet Lorraine,” “It’s Only a Paper Moon,” “Caravan,” “Route 66” and “When I Grow Too Old To Dream” are intimate, loose and filled with enough musical interaction to remind listeners that Cole could sit down with elite jazz musicians and more than hold his own.

What Is Different About the Tone Poet Edition?

The original album contained 12 tracks. The forthcoming edition expands that to 18 performances, adding “I Was A Little Too Lonely,” “You Can Depend on Me,” “What Is There To Say,” “Two Loves Have I,” “Candy” and an alternate take of “You’re Looking At Me.”

That makes the “Complete Sessions” label meaningful.

The mastering chain is equally important. Blue Note’s Tone Poet series uses all-analog mastering from original analog sources when available, and Kevin Gray has mastered this edition directly from the original analog phono reels.

Collectors should also note that After Midnight has received excellent audiophile treatment before, including the Analogue Productions 45 RPM edition mastered by Steve Hoffman and Kevin Gray.

Why Is This One Worth Buying?

Because the music deserves it.

After Midnight offers a different perspective on Nat King Cole than the orchestral recordings that made him one of the most recognizable voices of his generation. The arrangements leave room for his piano playing, the guest musicians bring genuine personality to each session, and the repertoire remains remarkably accessible even for listeners who do not own 400 jazz records and argue about matrix numbers before breakfast.

For anyone who does not already own a strong pressing, this looks like one of the more compelling jazz reissues coming this fall.

The expensive jacket is merely a bonus.

Pressing Details

• Price: $54.98
• Release Date: November 13, 2026
• Format: 2LP, 180-gram mono vinyl
• Label: Capitol Records / Blue Note Tone Poet Audiophile Vinyl Series
• Producer: Joe Harley
• Mastering: Kevin Gray at Cohearent Audio
• Pressing: RTI

Where to buy:

Related Reading:

Following the success of the Mix Bluetooth Party Speaker, Danish audio brand SOUNDBOKS has introduced the Rider, which retains some of the Mix’s key features in a smaller, more portable design.

The Rider delivers the same maximum amplifier output as the Mix at up to 72 watts, along with a claimed maximum SPL of 118 dB, up to 35 hours of battery life, and an IP66 rating for protection against dust and water. Its more compact, strap-friendly design is intended to make it easier to carry between locations without giving up the output expected from a larger party speaker.

That is really the problem SOUNDBOKS is trying to solve with the Rider. Many compact Bluetooth speakers are easy to throw into a bag, but their size can limit bass extension and maximum volume when the gathering moves beyond a few people. Traditional party speakers can provide substantially more output, but their larger cabinets and heavier construction make portability more complicated.

The Rider is positioned between those two categories, offering much of the output and durability associated with a party speaker in a form factor designed to be considerably easier to carry.

“Typically, speakers make you trade volume for convenience. We built Rider so you’d never have to choose again,” said Jesper Santon Thomsen, CEO of SOUNDBOKS. “Wherever the moment happens, your sound shows up in full. It’s the smallest speaker we’ve ever made, yet it’s still loud enough to turn an ordinary afternoon into the story everyone tells later. Why plan harder when you can be freer?”  

SOUNDBOKS Rider Key Features

Compact and Lightweight: Measuring 13.8 x 9.4 x 7.9 inches and weighing 6.5 kilograms (14.3 pounds), the SOUNDBOKS Rider is the smallest and lightest Bluetooth party speaker in the company’s lineup. That more compact footprint is intended to make the Rider easier to carry without giving up the output expected from a larger party speaker.

Durable Design: Rounded ball corners and an impact-resistant PC/ABS cabinet are designed to withstand bumps, transport, and typical outdoor use without requiring overly careful handling. The Rider also carries an IP66 rating for water and dust resistance, along with a steel grille and SOUNDBOKS’ signature shock-resistant ball corners for additional protection.

Room-Filling Sound: The Rider uses two Texas Instruments Class D amplifiers to drive an 8-inch woofer and 1.2-inch tweeter, with a claimed maximum output of 118 dB SPL. The speaker has a specified frequency range of 40 Hz to 20 kHz and incorporates SOUNDBOKS Adaptive Bass Enhancer DSP to manage low-frequency performance. And because this is SOUNDBOKS, the volume control naturally goes all the way to 11.

Companion App and Control Panel: The SOUNDBOKS APP provides control over EQ adjustments, sound profiles, and speaker locking, allowing users to manage settings from a mobile device (smartphone, tablet). The Rider also provides a control panel with a volume knob and auxiliary input. 

Up to 35-Hour Swappable Battery: Battery life is rated at up to 35 hours at mid-volume and approximately 8 hours at maximum output. The removable battery can be swapped out when depleted, while additional battery packs are available separately for extended use. The battery can be recharged via USB-C, with SOUNDBOKS claiming a full recharge in approximately two hours when using its optional charger.

Handle and Strap: The SOUNDBOKS Rider includes an integrated carry handle and is compatible with the optional Strap 2.0. Combined with its 14.3-pound weight and compact dimensions, those options make the Rider considerably easier to carry than a traditional party speaker.

Comparison

The Bottom Line 

SOUNDBOKS is not trying to win the feature-count war with the Rider. Its strongest argument is the combination of a claimed 118 dB maximum output, a 14.3-pound cabinet, IP66 durability, and a swappable battery rated for up to 35 hours at mid-volume. At $599, it is the entry-level model in the current SOUNDBOKS lineup, but there is nothing particularly entry-level about the price.

That portability comes with some meaningful compromises. Unlike the SOUNDBOKS Mix and SOUNDBOKS 4, the Rider does not support SKAA-powered TeamUp for linking multiple speakers. There is also no Pro Panel, dedicated microphone or guitar input, included microphone, or built-in light show. The optional Strap 2.0 and SOUNDBOKS fast charger also cost extra. What you do get is a 3.5mm auxiliary input, app-based EQ and sound profiles, and the same removable battery concept used by the larger models.

Competition at this price is substantial. The $549.95 JBL Boombox 4 weighs just 12.8 pounds and adds IP68 protection, Auracast, and a user-replaceable battery, while the $419.95 JBL PartyBox On-The-Go 2 Plus weighs roughly the same as the Rider and adds a wireless microphone, karaoke features, a light show, and Auracast support. The $649 Sony ULT Tower 7 offers considerably more party-oriented functionality, although at roughly 50 pounds it belongs in a very different portability class.

We have also covered the $349 Tronsmart Halo 300, $499.99 TCL TP300K, and $399.99 Hisense Party Thunder Pro, all of which underscore just how crowded this category has become.

The Rider therefore makes the most sense for someone who wants a genuinely portable, rugged speaker that can get very loud without hauling around 30 to 50 pounds of hardware. Buyers looking for karaoke, synchronized lighting, microphone and instrument connectivity, or expandable multi-speaker systems will find more features elsewhere. SOUNDBOKS is betting that some people would rather carry 14 pounds of speaker than a rolling karaoke machine with its own light show. That might be the Rider’s most compelling feature.

Price & Availability

Related Reading:

Quordle was one of the original Wordle alternatives and is still going strong now more than 1,500 games later. It offers a genuine challenge, though, so read on if you need some Quordle hints today — or scroll down further for the answers.

Enjoy playing word games? You can also check out my NYT Connections today and NYT Strands today pages for hints and answers for those puzzles, while Marc’s Wordle today column covers the original viral word game.