{"id":5738,"date":"2026-08-19T21:49:07","date_gmt":"2026-08-19T21:49:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/silvybrand.com\/?p=5738"},"modified":"2026-08-19T21:49:07","modified_gmt":"2026-08-19T21:49:07","slug":"optimizer-wearable-future-google-ai","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/silvybrand.com\/?p=5738","title":{"rendered":"The wearable future is stuck in weird, experimental, existential limbo"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n<\/p>\n

\n
\n

This is <\/em>Optimizer<\/a>, a weekly newsletter sent from <\/em>Verge senior reviewer<\/em> Victoria Song<\/em><\/a> that dissects and discusses the latest gizmos and potions that swear they\u2019re going to change your life. Opt in for <\/em>Optimizer here<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

For the past week, I\u2019ve been testing the Google Pixel Watch 5<\/a>. In many ways, it\u2019s a typical, modern smartwatch. In others, it feels like one part of a wearable future that\u2019s increasingly in flux. Everyone I\u2019ve spoken to in wearable tech has roughly the same goal \u2014 soon, your tracker of choice will feature a helpful AI coach, \u201ccheck engine\u201d alerts that preventively flag hard-to-detect health conditions, and personalized health recommendations based on your<\/em> lived experiences and needs.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

That\u2019s certainly what\u2019s being pitched. But so far, it seems like most companies don\u2019t know how exactly we\u2019re going to get there.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

AI coaches? Even the best ones are too chatty, fixate on one random detail you shared during setup, and require a ton of hand-holding. \u201cCheck engine\u201d alerts can be useful and have been documented as saving lives. They can also spark health anxiety<\/a> and the regulatory quagmire<\/a> can be expensive to navigate. Personalized health holds great promise, but requires so<\/em> much of your private data while also being subject to AI\u2019s myriad shortcomings<\/a>. Even now, most people think of wearable devices as fancy step trackers.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\u201cHistorically, wearables have been very focused on hardcore health enthusiasts,\u201d Rishi Chandra, Google\u2019s vice president of health and home, tells me at a roundtable of tech reporters in New York ahead of Made by Google. Usually, tech companies like to keep mum on future ideas and plans. But recently, Google seems eager to lay out its particular vision.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\u201cThere\u2019s a huge market of people who are not thinking about their health every day. Today, wearable penetration is about 30 percent \u2014 70 percent of the population has no notion of wearables,\u201d Chandra adds.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\"Waraich<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Waraich says Google views \u201cglanceble\u201d interactions as lasting roughly seven seconds.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

In other words, wearable tech is still in its early days with a lot of untapped potential. The smartwatch is not the end-all, be-all. The fact that wearables can also capture a vast array of personal data compounds that. That\u2019s one reason why, during last year\u2019s Made by Google event, Chandra and Sandeep Waraich, Google\u2019s senior director of wearables, told me that the future of AI gadgets won\u2019t just be a single device<\/a>. It\u2019ll be an entire ecosystem of diverse accessories.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Since that chat, I\u2019ve already seen several signs supporting Google\u2019s multi-wearable ecosystem thesis. Multiple companies have pivoted to AI glasses (or as Google calls it, \u201cintelligent eyewear\u201d). But we\u2019ve also seen other<\/em> wearable form factors start gaining steam. See: the horde of screenless Whoop dupes and smart rings<\/a>. In the AI sphere, some wearable makers are eschewing the health tracking aspect altogether. Some smart jewelry startups like Vocci, Taya<\/a>, and Sandbar<\/a> envision rings and pendants as a way to record and transcribe your thoughts using AI.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

These are not<\/em> proven ideas. That there are so many different approaches is a pretty big indication that the entire industry is in the process of throwing wearable spaghetti at a wall, desperately hoping that something<\/em> will stick and be the next smartphone. It\u2019s enough to make a senior wearable reviewer excited \u2014 because yay! Weird experimental products \u2014 and also mad \u2014 because no! Weird experimental products that don\u2019t work as advertised! Still, there\u2019s a nugget of truth in this new search for new wearable form factors and use cases.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\u201cWearables are a great conduit for presence. And it goes both ways. As AI reaches you in a respectful way, and as you want to interact with it, these interactions will become more frequent, but also quicker and glanceable,\u201d says Waraich, noting that Google views seven seconds as its current benchmark for any one wrist-based interaction. The question now is figuring out the ideal surface for each specific technological task. For example: What device should you use to check your calendar? Your phone, tablet, or laptop? Or, with the addition of the Proactive Assistance feature on the Pixel Watch 5, should it be your smartwatch?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\"A<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

A Google or Fitbit smart ring is not on the table right now.<\/em><\/figcaption>Photo: Amelia Holowaty Krales \/ The Verge<\/cite><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

According to Chandra and Waraich, Google has had deep internal discussions about the pros and cons of various wearable form factors. Smart rings, for instance, are something that Google consistently gets asked about but won\u2019t be pursuing in the short term.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\u201cTo be clear, we\u2019re not closing the door on [smart rings],\u201d Chandra says. \u201cBut our belief right now is that there\u2019s so much headroom on a wrist-worn wearable \u2026 I think the Fitbit Air is going to have far bigger expansion opportunities given how simple and easy it is for everyone to use it.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Okay, so Google just introduced the minimalist Fitbit Air and for now is passing on smart rings. Perhaps then the next step is an \u201cUltra\u201d Pixel Watch as Samsung and Apple have done. Not so. When I ask, Waraich explains the current Pixel Watch is where Google sees its premium offerings. Chandra adds that the company is wary of spreading itself too thin.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Google certainly has a hypothesis of what wearable tech ought to be. It\u2019s placing its bets through product launches and software updates, watching carefully to see how we \u2014 the wearable lab rats \u2014 react to specific ideas. The experiment continues.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Another wearable debate: whether it makes sense to add in microphones just because you can. For example, putting mics in something like the Fitbit Air so that it can also double as your AI memory \u2014 something akin to Amazon\u2019s Bee<\/a> device.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\u201cAt this point, it\u2019s not a technology issue. It\u2019s a user-sentiment, privacy issue. If you [add] a mic, it\u2019s not just that it\u2019s learning from you. It\u2019s learning from the environment. So I think we\u2019re being cautious about how to push that in the right way,\u201d Chandra says, noting it\u2019d have been easy for Google to stuff microphones into the Fitbit Air but the actual problem is whether doing so would add any customer value. \u201cI don\u2019t know yet if we have, as a tech industry, have figured out the right balancing act there.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Having tested several AI wearables, my answer is a resounding hell no<\/em>. As I\u2019ve written on the site, this type of AI wearable tech often makes me feel like a spy<\/a>. Similarly, I\u2019ll simply point to the defunct Amazon Halo trackers<\/a>, which not only tracked your emotions based on the tone<\/em> of your voice but also created highly cursed, self-esteem-obliterating 3D models of your body to estimate fat percentages. Just because AI wearables can<\/em> track new things doesn\u2019t mean they should<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\"The<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

The Fitbit Air and other wrist-worn wearables, Google says, have more runway than other form factors. <\/em><\/figcaption>Photo: Amelia Holowaty Krales \/ The Verge<\/cite><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

This problem also plagues smart glasses, as seen with the recent privacy backlash toward Meta\u2019s \u201cpervert glasses.\u201d Some of that is Meta\u2019s penchant for sticking its foot in it. Some of that, Google argues, is perhaps a matter of time and place. Perhaps, Chandra notes, people are more amenable to ambient computing \u2014 where your devices are always listening \u2014 inside the home instead of outside of it.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Even so, Google is committed to experimenting. What if, Waraich posited, the camera in smart glasses simply acted as a sensor without<\/em> recording? As in, the glasses see what you see and can answer questions about your environment, but nothing gets recorded for posterity. In theory, this might mean the ability to automatically log your food without ever having to take a picture. A blind person might be able to ask an AI questions about their surroundings, and passersby wouldn\u2019t have to worry that a photo of them exists in someone else\u2019s camera roll.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

To that, I say: Love the concept, good luck communicating how that\u2019s different to the masses.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

This is part of the existential problem facing my beat. How can any AI wearable be versatile enough to account for every individual\u2019s privacy preferences and health journey? It\u2019s easy enough to differentiate the hardware. Casual users? You get a Fitbit Air or Oura Ring. Tech nerds tired of their phones? Depending on your phone, I\u2019ll point you to a Pixel Watch or Apple Watch. Oh, you\u2019re entering an Ironman? I already know you\u2019re wondering which flavor of Garmin or Coros suits you best.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

But the software experience is a whole \u2019nother beast. Right now you can pick from multiple wearable form factors, but they all pretty much give you the same cluttered app and whap you over the head with data fatigue. That\u2019s hardly a recipe for personalized health. I\u2019ve shared over the course<\/a> of<\/a> several<\/a> Optimizers<\/em><\/a> that my current health journey relates to fixing my borked metabolism. That requires one set of advice. A cancer patient would need something wholly different. So would a hypochondriac or a young college athlete. Maybe you like a drill-sergeant-type coach. Or, if you\u2019re like me, that type of tough love would make you want to throw up your hands. It\u2019s already hard enough for people<\/em> to learn how to be wise and judicious about their health, to accept limits and practice compassion without veering into overindulgence. How the hell<\/em> can any one LLM achieve that wisdom? How can we expect one cluttered, unified software experience to meet the needs of an infinite number of individual needs?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\"AI<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

AI is often seen as the key to data context and personalized health. It\u2019s defintely a work in progress.<\/em><\/figcaption>Photo: Amelia Holowaty Krales \/ The Verge<\/cite><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

I asked both Chandra and Waraich this. Both were optimistic that AI will one day get there, but it isn\u2019t there currently. They acknowledged that this is a yearslong journey that will require lots and lots of work. That there are a lot of societal and cultural questions that\u2019ll have to be debated internally and externally. After a decade, my wearable bullshit radar is strong, and since Wear OS 3, Google has genuinely welcomed a good wearable grilling whenever I (or other reporters) have offered frank feedback. I can\u2019t say the same for every<\/em> gadgetmaker on my beat.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

I also can\u2019t tell whether Google\u2019s making all the right wearable bets with the Pixel Watch 5, Fitbit Air, or its AI coach. Maybe it\u2019s a whiff to pass on smart rings. I still think I need to see more proof that an AI hardware ecosystem of diverse accessories is the ultimate move. I\u2019ll give Google credit for being so candid about the multiple layers of privacy, culture, design, and tech logistics that go into the current era of wearable gadgets. That said, whenever I zoom out, I can\u2019t help but feel like I\u2019m caught in the proverbial hamster wheel. Testing each new smartwatch, smart ring, or smart glasses, I keep running toward this vaguely defined, AI-powered wearable future. I just don\u2019t feel any closer to reaching it.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Follow topics and authors<\/strong> from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.<\/span><\/p>\n