The company argues that it’s for individuals to ensure they don’t ‘actively exploit’ this technology. That won’t keep children safe

It took me a while to realise what the man sitting next to me on the train was doing. He was flicking through pictures of a little girl on his phone; zooming in on some, cropping the images. Hardly unusual, of course, except that on closer inspection the pictures were very clearly of the toddler sitting opposite us, playing with her parents. On a crowded train of people mostly staring obliviously at our own phones, a stranger had been covertly photographing that little girl over and over again. And if it hadn’t been for that very visible phone screen giving him away, he wouldn’t have been caught.

That encounter was a while ago but my memory was jogged last week listening to a clip of Meta’s VP of wearables, Alex Himel, talk fondly to the BBC about using his new smartglasses to film his daughter singing in a talent contest. They let him capture the memory without having to watch her through a screen, he said, freeing him to be “kind of living in the moment, head up and hands free”. So far, so sweet. But what about the risk of creeps potentially using them to film other people’s daughters covertly, heads up and hands free? Meta’s smartglasses have a tiny flashing warning light on the frame to indicate when the wearer is recording, but the technology is still new enough that many people don’t think to look for it. And in the age of AI, stolen images of children matter. Taken in real life or scraped from the internet, they’re the raw material for generating realistic-looking child abuse material of the most extreme and disturbing kind. (If that sounds like a grim but ultimately fairly victimless crime, the Internet Watch Foundation warned in a recent report that AI-generated material risks fuelling sexual interest in children, normalising violence and increasing the risk of real-life offending.)

Gaby Hinsliff is a Guardian columnist

Slimmer, longer lasting and much easier to live with, new Oura sets a very high new bar for health-tracking wearables

Oura’s new Ring 5 is a massive upgrade for smart rings, dramatically shrinking in size and weight to bring them right into line with standard wedding bands and other jewellery. It is finally a smart ring you can genuinely forget you’re wearing.

The Ring 5 is a straight replacement for the popular Ring 4 and costs from £399 (€399/$399/$A649), though it requires a £5.99 (€5.99/$5.99/A$9.99) a month subscription to access anything but basic daily metrics. An Oura is not a cheap proposition.

Finnish-US startup has sold 5.5m rings worldwide since it was founded in 2013 and is valued at $11bn

Stylish Finnish-American smart ring company Oura may be the darling of wearables, adorning the fingers of celebrities and sportspeople, but it is not resting on its laurels as it heads towards an IPO later this year. This week it launched the world’s smallest smart ring, the Ring 5, its latest evolution of the device that defined a whole category.

The Ring 5 is 40% smaller and with longer battery life than the highly popular Ring 4. It also promises to squeeze the health-tracking features of a smartwatch into a less techy piece of jewellery just 2.28mm thick, focused on sleep, stress, readiness and heart health.

Elle Hunt on her month wearing Meta’s smart glasses and the privacy concerns around the technology

According to Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s AI-powered glasses are “personal super intelligence” that “let you stay present in the moment”.

Journalist Elle Hunt reports on her time wearing them for a month. Elle tells Nosheen Iqbal about the highs and lows of the experience, the features that could be transformative for people with vision impairments or hearing loss, and the risks wearable tech poses to our privacy.