Meta’s Ray-Ban smart glasses have earned the nickname “pervert glasses” — and a journalist’s firsthand account reveals exactly why. Wearing them didn’t just feel creepy; it made her start thinking like one. I break down the real surveillance threat these glasses pose, Meta’s data exploitation playbook, and what we can actually do about it.

  • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    30 days ago

    Do you think glasses on peoples faces aren’t out in the open?

    And like I mentioned in my other reply, it’s not like we don’t have numerous examples of bodycam footage going missing or “accidentally” being disabled.

    While yes creeps are going to creep, I don’t know banning the idea of the technology entirely is the right way to go about preventing that, especially considering there’d a large amount of potential positive benefits on the contrary.

    For example (again in my other reply) alternate angles/footage in relation to some sort of investigation, or just general everyday nifty stuff like AR HUDs.

    Idk, sometimes it seems like people jump to banning things because a small group of people will misuse it, instead of trying to prevent that misuse, particularly prevelant these days.

    • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      29 days ago

      Idk, sometimes it seems like people jump to banning things because a small group of people will misuse it, instead of trying to prevent that misuse, particularly prevelant these days.

      I think what you’re arguing is really what is peoples’ reasonable expectation to not be recorded in public. In the general sense, people do not have that legal right. I’m allowed to just go outside and record a video on my phone and whoever happens to be in it happens to be in it. Whether its legally codified or not I de facto have the right to do that, and you don’t have the right to tell me to stop (up to the point where I follow someone and it gets to legal harassment).

      So on this point you’re 100% right in terms of how things are.

      Do you think glasses on peoples faces aren’t out in the open? While yes creeps are going to creep, I don’t know banning the idea of the technology entirely is the right way to go about preventing that, especially considering there’d a large amount of potential positive benefits on the contrary.

      I don’t see the inherent societal value in clandestine recording ability being everywhere. I can see that it would have some value sometimes, but this won’t be a few creeps. Adoption of this tech will be led by creeps. That will be the primary use case.

      But I suppose this discussion doesn’t matter since eventually this tech will be so easily accessed that it will become the reality no matter what anybody thinks.

    • Mommy Longarms@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      30 days ago

      The camera is pretty easy to miss, especially if you don’t know what to look for. So yes, it is out in the open, but hidden in plain sight is still hidden.

      • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        30 days ago

        Yeah, is there possibly a way to make it obvious that it is able to be recorded? I’d imagine at some point in the future it’ll be the norm/expected, much like bluetooth headsets were loathed by many back when they first came out and it was hard to tell if someone was talking to you or on a bluetooth call lol (also it usually being corpo asshole types lol).