Does a software feature exist if its code has been deployed to tens of millions of devices but cannot be used yet? According to Meta, the answer is no. The company's executives have spent weeks debating this over NameTag, an in-development face-recognition system for Meta Ray-Ban smart glasses. The confusion has direct implications for enterprise technology buyers evaluating AI products: what constitutes a 'real' feature versus a prototype?
The Code That Existed
On June 4, WIRED reported that Meta had included robust—but inactive—code for NameTag in Meta AI, the companion app for Meta Ray-Ban glasses. The app has been downloaded tens of millions of times. According to WIRED's analysis, code for NameTag appeared in the app as early as January 2025. By May, the core components of a full face-detection-and-matching pipeline were present.
Meta removed the NameTag code from Meta AI the day after WIRED's story, June 5. A researcher who goes by Buchodi reviewed the code at WIRED's request and successfully used the NameTag system to recognize a photograph of philosopher Michel Foucault, famed for his work on surveillance.
Meta's Public Contradictions
Meta's communications team vigorously denied the feature's existence. Andy Stone, Meta's vice president of communications, wrote on X: "Here's a thing: Wired reports Meta didn't answer several questions about how this will work. How could we? The feature doesn't exist!"
Yet just weeks later, Meta CTO Andrew 'Boz' Bosworth described NameTag in detail on the July 8 episode of The Most Interesting Thing in AI. Host Nicholas Thompson asked about NameTag during a segment labeled "What’s true and false about NameTag." Bosworth replied:
"Somebody you met in person with your glasses on who introduced themselves—or you said, 'OK, this is David, remember this person.' Only available to you when you're wearing your glasses—this is a person you’ve met before. Here’s their name. They’re right in front of you … That’s what we call a NameTags feature."
Bosworth later added: "So, it's a thing that, um—I think would be a great feature."
Meta's Clarification
When WIRED pressed Meta on the apparent contradiction, the company stressed the conditional language. Spokesperson Ryan Daniels specifically highlighted the word "would," bolding and underlining it in an email. Daniels told WIRED: "There is no contradiction. Boz says this 'would' be a good feature, particularly to answer the blind and low-vision community members’ calls to help them identify people they’ve already met or want to remember. While we're exploring this, it's not available to consumers today."
To be clear, NameTag existed as of roughly six weeks before WIRED's report. Meta had been building it since early 2025—licensing face-recognition software, assembling a detection-and-matching pipeline, and adding it to tens of millions of phones. Two independent experts confirmed the code was a technically functional face-recognition system.
What This Means for Enterprise Buyers
For enterprise technology decision-makers evaluating AI solutions, the NameTag saga illustrates a critical due diligence lesson: vendor claims about product maturity must be verified against technical reality. A feature can be fully coded and deployed to devices but officially 'not exist' per the vendor. Procurement teams should request access to test environments, review code architecture, and demand clear roadmaps—not just executive statements. The incident also underscores the risks of tying procurement to marketing narratives rather than engineering deliverables.
