“Billionaires could fund cures for cancer — so why are they funding glasses for perverts instead?" asked the protest group Everyone Hates Elon.

  • frazw@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 days ago

    Glasses for perverts huh? My dad was considering glasses like this (not necessarily meta) to help with his macular degeneration. They can read out text in front of them, zoom and useful stuff like that for people with vision problems. But now he won’t even consider it because he’s worried he will be labelled a pervert if he is seen wearing them because apparently no one can conceive of a reason why smart glasses might be about more than spying. So he has chosen going slowly blind over having people shout at him in the street. I don’t really blame him but I am sad for him that a viable aid is now so stigmatised he is afraid to use it.

    That said I do not trust Meta and fully expect them to use the devices for spying and harvesting data even if the wearer does not.

    • lime!@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      9 days ago

      if there were ones that were fully local and only activated their cameras when holding a button or something i think people would be fine with them. but what we get is spy-machines that send everything you see to marky-mark and his goons.

    • ExtremeDullard@piefed.socialOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      9 days ago

      For every person who wants those glasses for legit purposes, there’s a thousand pervs. Facebook shifted two million of them, and I guarantee you those aren’t two million people with vision problems.

      • frazw@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        I’m not just talking about meta glasses. There are others more targeting vision impairment, but they have similar camera-in-glasses issues that attract the pervert label.

        The meta ones were recommended by the macular society, don’t ask me why.

        • frazw@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          And for the record, we are not talking about large commercial products, more niche medical products that are much lower volume and much more expensive.

      • frazw@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Jeez, why the aggression? I dislike meta too, but there are other products that have glasses mounted cameras that do offer zoom and text to speech for macular degeneration that he now won’t consider because people react like you just did to the meta product .

    • bthest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      Those people are saving your dad from:

      • wasting time and money because they don’t work
      • possibly making his condition worse because they are not MD approved prescription glasses
      • being spied on and tracked
      • having his private medical info being sold off to advertisers, insurance, employers, government, etc who will use it against him
      • disappointment because they don’t work
      • frazw@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Well all I can say is the macular society suggested them to him. We approached them about another product designed for vision impairment to find out if they had any experience and they said to try the meta glasses. We didn’t, but I still think if there is a camera based solution that helps him, he now won’t wear it because of the stigma.

        And for the record I’m not in need of any convincing to avoid meta.