If I’m being honest?
I’d trust it only if it earns that trust by being extremely boring.

Screenless wearables make sense in theory:

• no screen = less distraction

• less UI = less power drain

• background sensing feels more “ambient”

But the moment a device sees and I can’t occasionally sanity-check what it thinks it saw, my trust drops fast.

For me, the key isn’t the screen — it’s feedback on demand.

I don’t need:

• constant visuals

• live camera feeds

• AR overlays

I do need:

• a quick way to ask, “What did you just notice?”

• lightweight confirmation (audio, haptic, phone summary later)

Without that, it feels like:

“Something is watching, deciding, and acting… quietly.”

And that’s unsettling, even if privacy is technically handled.

So yeah — screenless can be a smart way to save power and attention,
but only if users still have a way to peek behind the curtain when they want.

If it’s:

• silent when nothing matters

• explainable when something does

I’m in.

If it’s a black box that just nudges me without context?
Hard pass.

So would you actually be okay wearing something that “sees” everything but never shows you what it saw?
No screen, no feed — just vibes and nudges?

I’d be okay with it only if I can check in when I want.

Not a live feed, not constant visuals — just a way to ask,
“Hey, what made you nudge me just now?”

If I can’t ever sanity-check its reasoning, it stops feeling helpful and starts feeling creepy.
Screenless is fine.
Explain-less is not.

If it stays quiet most of the time and can explain itself on demand,
I’d wear that every day.