Smart glasses equipped with cameras, microphones, and AI are a creeping privacy and security nightmare, prompting backlash.
And rightfully so.
2 months
You must log in or register to comment.
- unitedwithme@lemmy.todayEnglish2 months
Anyone wearing those are absolutely being a perv and playing dumb about it. Apple will probably come out with those next, and push them just like they have air pods so that they’ll have a camera to go with their always active mics! Fucking drives me nuts when people act like they’re so technologically savvy by using siri to call people on the phone.
- br3d@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
The thing is, I’d love glasses with a private display. Imagine walking around a strange city with maps displayed in your vision, or giving a talk and having your notes in your view. Specs with screens! But why would I also want a camera? If I wanted to photograph something I can use my phone - perhaps using my SpecScreen as a viewfinder, sure, but the camera can happily live in my phone still. Basically, I’m worried the perverts are going to ruin glasses with HUDs for the rest of us. There must be dozens of us non-perverts, surely?
2 monthsThere are plenty of legit use cases for a camera. Traveling in a foreign place the glasses could overlay text in your language. Looking at a transit table it could highlight the correct route and time. And anytime you meet someone new it could store their name and face in a database.
does that utility outweigh the privacy of the public though?
Shame it’s meta because the answer will always skew towards invading privacy and shitting on the others.
WELL GOLLY GEE I GUESS THAT FUCKIN ENDS THE DISCUSSION HUH?
No, it doesn’t. https://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.44.115
See, there’s actually laws about this shit that you “no expectation of privacy” creeps love to ignore. And these tools are making it easier.
Why do you want to make it easier to creep on little girls?
What the fuck is wrong with you? Now you’re projecting pedophilia. Why are you thinking about fucking kids? What the fuck is your problem?
There is no privacy in public, by definition of those two words. I’m less concerned about a camera on somebodies face, and more concerned about the legality of doing facial recognition, and identifying and tracking of people without their explicit consent. See one is about the personal utility of camera-interfaced computing, and the other is corporate espionage. But unless lawmakers can draw that line and enforce it, we will probably just end up with spyware.
There is no privacy in public, by definition of those two words.
creep. so quick to carve out the rules by which you and other can invade the privacy of individuals. you know there’s a difference between general photography and this. you know this. I don’t have to explain it to you.
you’re just a creep who wants to creep on women and kids.
You caught me. I go around with my wife and daughter so I can get away with being a creep. Don’t tell the moms on the playground.
if you cared about them you’d care about this. the fact that you immediately jump to legal definitions created in the age of film is absurd; there was never a minox that had 4k video, but that’s what we’re looking at these days. and you don’t seem to care that there’s a booming market to disable the recording lights.
If I were your wife and daughter I’d be creeped out by you.
You don’t know shit about me bro. Creepers gonna creep. If they want to hide a camera they can do it in lapel pin or something. Being paranoid about it won’t stop anything. Making legislation to require a recording light will just de-tune the public’s vigilance when they don’t see a light. It won’t stop people from taking discrete photos. If you’re scared of having your photo taken, stay inside. There are a huge number of automatic license plate cameras owned by corporations logging your plates. They may also be capturing and analyzing your face. That is a lot more concerning to me than some dude wearing glasses.
