Smart glasses equipped with cameras, microphones, and AI are a creeping privacy and security nightmare, prompting backlash.
And rightfully so.
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?
There 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.
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.
Exactly. Navigating a city isn’t really that hard from a phone, even if you don’t speak the language. You don’t need to be staring at it the whole time if you learn how to just orient yourself on a street grid. Having a HUD for that purpose might be a neat trick, but not at the expense of being constantly recorded.
You have no expectation of privacy in public.
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?
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Maybe antlion already replied to you (because I see two replies below your post but one is removed/deleted) but I didn’t take antlion’s comment as if it outweigh the privacy invasion.
Though, it is a shame that all the cool tech and legit use cases are for nothing because it’s packaged with invasive spyware.
one of the leaked “test” features that everyone hated was the facial recognition…and i get it. lot’s of opertunity for abuse. Shame though as that would be SO usfull to those with prosopagnosia or people like me who have an inability to remember names. It has hurt me profesionaly throughout my life. having the name and a few relivent facts about people pop up would just put me on the same playing field with those who can remember.
A while ago I would have agreed with this whole heartedly.
Now I’m old and grumpy and everything seems like a can / should question where the “should” part is only satisfied if a really significant problem is solved, because the “can” part always requires a trade off that is rarely worth the cost.
Same. I even have a pair that I’m working on setting up as an accessibility device, but i worry that even with the camera looking thing taped, that it’s going to cause issues, especially since I’ll have a visible wire hooked up to a raspberry pi.
EDIT: I forgot to specify that this is a viture luma and not the meta raybans, which i wouldn’t touch with a ten foot pole
How would a view like that work without a camera? It needs to see streets to display the map accurately since GOS could only be accurate within 5meters sometimes.
It doesn’t have to be a full on quest marker HUD overlay, just being able to glance at a mirror of your phone’s map display in your peripheral vision without taking it out of your pocket would be great.
You don’t have the cameras for taking picture but for augmented reality. For example maybe for your maps, it would place arrows in the right spots, or labels to identify landmarks on the landmarks themselves. It might highlight how far ahead the crosswalk is.
Starting to get in the grey area but as someone horrible with names, I want it to tell me who I’m talking to
I’m a pervert and I’m right there with you. I have destroyed three pairs of these so far.
Do you truly believe that those who have sold you your mechanical eyes have resisted the temptation to peek through them? Cameras are all around us, even within us! Your joys, your worries, your life… for them it is all mere spectacle. - Garry the Prophet
I was calling them “stalker” glasses. Everything facebook (meta) does is about stalking humanity. Creepy, creepy weirdos.
Yes. Anyone wantong to hide a camera’s presence probably has a reason.
Because that’s what they are?
Not true! You could be a freelance CIA agent/pizza delivery man and world’s greatest swordsman (despite having never been in a real fight)
Yeah, and won’t someone think about those poor contractors over at Meta? How else are they going to meet their AI circlejerk quota and rank all of that increasingly disturbing novel content if they can’t watch it through their glasses on their train rides to and from the office? Let’s have some compassion here folks!
//end bit
Ugh, just typing that made me nauseous
I was describing a fiction novel from 1993 that every Facebook product is based on.
Glassholes. I remember.
Yeah, we’ve been here before.
article is already a decade too late. I’ve perceived them as pervert glasses for years!
Despite the constant push to normalize creepiness, you were morally correct then and equally morally correct now!
I’d wear them if they didn’t have a camera - the idea of a little screen and the music/phone call capabilities baked into something I have to wear every waking moment anyways actually sounds really nice. I’d probably turn off the display after the novelty wore off, but the audio alone is still worth it to me.
Then why don’t you buy the Bose ones?
Likely because they only do audio.
Don’t think you read last line of their original message?
Bose needs to spend more on advertising, I’m the correct audience but I had no idea they made these.
Tell me if you need my info for finder’s fee?
Creeper peepers
And now with zero indicator light that it’s recording
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/kylie-jenner-meta-glasses-fascist_n_6a565e74e4b0540b8c7b111a
Oh - I love this angle!!!
Spread the word bros! I’ll only call them pervert glasses from now on
I’ve never met a pervert that didn’t embrace that name.
Embarassing it was ever anything besides ‘pervert glasses’
Don’t call them that!
Slandering the innocent perverts of the world by association with Facebook isn’t gonna make 'em quit marketin spookware to assholes who oughta know better. =U
Yeah this problem goes far beyond Eugene and Rusty
Surveillance glasses.
(If “pervert” is too much in a discussion)
Exactly
It was the first thing I thought of when I saw these glasses: 100% perverts are going to buy them.
Perverts and predators. I fully expect to hear about stalking and murder rates going up due to these-- and hopefully the makers will be sued out of fucking existence.
there’s already a booming market for disabling the recording light.
Well, yeah. You wouldn’t allow someone to film at a swimming pool with their phone. Stealth cameras of any form are immediately far more suspicious.
The problem is that influencers are already way ahead of you. Lots of normalizing them for “content creation” when they want to film in public. And if they had a sponsorship in a different video? Coincidence.
A bunch of those influencers are perverts and creeps themselves, though. Not just inherently because they’re using the glasses, but because they post video evidence of themselves creeping on and harassing people in real life.
