A dude wore these to a club I was at. Not easy to notice unless you’re looking for them. He was creeping on people showing skin and was a known stalker for one of the dancers in particular.
Fortunately he got kicked out unceremoniously.
asshole perverts will always find ways to ruin things for everyone else, but these glasses just make it way too easy.
Just need to associate ray bans with creeps moving forward. If they are too far away to tell, just assume it’s a fucking weirdo in Meta glasses. Forever associate the brand with creepy weirdos, and maybe they’ll rethink their strategy.
Bro I just want to listen to music without putting something in my ear, not be a pervert. Why do people have to ruin things.
I had and loved boae frames. Unfortunately they are (were?) Quite flimsy and would stop working. But it was all the music, none of the camera meta shir
They know. They consider it a sell-able feature.
Perverts know what perverts want.
They have already had people on them for not stopping scam ads, they get paid by their customers so they don;t care how many of their products are harmed.
since when do we need experts for this? what we need is laws. it’s unbelievable that they’re even allowed to do this shit.
I found this morsel particularly poignant:
"Ironically, Meta expected rights groups to be too busy to step in, given the disastrous geopolitical climate.
“We will launch during a dynamic political environment where many civil society groups that we would expect to attack us would have their resources focused on other concerns,” the document reads, as quoted by the NYT."
Wow, they said the quiet part out loud
Whoever had that idea probably got a promotion and raise.
That’s particularly evil. No matter what their lame rationalizations will be, this is how we know that they created this tech in bad faith, and they intend to use it in bad faith.
Yup. It’s also an admission that they know they are in the wrong and will cause harm to people, but don’t care. A lot of these companies try to pull the “we didn’t consider these concerns; we need to do more research” shit when they get called out on it, but this makes it blatantly obvious that’s bullshit
Who are the morally bankrupt execs who wrote this? I want names.
“if such a dynamic political environment fails to come, the corporation will spur on dynamism by sponsoring alternative dynamic groups from within the country whenever possible” Shock Doctrine at its best
The fact that this is being said so openly.
oh it illustrates the principles of Shock Doctrine as explained by Naomi Klein in her book as have been used over and over by extreme capitalist to impose the wonders of their
ideologicscientific capitalism. But I just made up the whole sentence above
And I used to think the “secret dastardly plan diary” -files scattered around in Resident Evil and the like were silly B-movie stuff that obviously would not be written down in the real world.
But no, they’re assigned in company strategy meetings and politicians just hit their sex slave supplier on Gmail with “Heya yo haave sum tasty kiids to fuck in Cali thiss wekend?”
Gonna make Bluetooth scramblers real popular
And there’s an app called “nearby glasses” that’ll notify us when/where anyone nearby has these meta glasses active.
Also, it will introduce: snitchonomics.
Mass surveillance is here, but what if you could be an annoying little shit in the local community? Introducing: snitchonomics. Go around your neighborhood, discover discrepancies, automate your snitching and become a toadie for the local commissars.
Meta: the Nazis would have loved us.
Just add an arbitrary point system like they give reviewers on Google Maps and people will be beating down the door to do this.
HOA board members are so horny for these right now.
HOA in USA is insane. I just can’t believe they are real.
When I first encountered them, I thought to myself ‘this is the most communist shit I ever heard, how is this popular in the USA?’
and then Trump came along and the answer: oh, because most fucking idiots love either bootlicking or powertripping
Nazis did love us. we’ve always been on the forefront of legalism, detention, and genocide. de toqueville wrote extensively about it
Oh for sure. The Nazis were in awe and inspired by the American white supremacist, because of the truly fucked up things they did to black and brown people.
Reading CRT is exhausting in many ways. How many mass graves have been dug up thus far?
Please reach out to your family and urge them to stop using Facebook (or worse, any form of reels) if they still do. The onus is on the informed now. It’s not enough to just ask the tech barons to stop, we also need to divert their support.
I’m so happy that no one in my family is into social media at all. But those who I know who are into it, just do not care at all. To a point where I wouldn’t even bring it up
But those who I know who are into it, just do not care at all.
I have friends like that too. Which is why it’s so hard.
It’s not even a fair fight, b/c the big social medias employ psychologists to design their product to be as addictive as possible. So it pits Jane and Fred Doe of Main Street against a team of psychologist PhD who study every possible way to weaponize Jane and Fred’s normal human feelings and emotions. Jane & Fred doesn’t want to quit, so will find ways to rationalize a use of the products.
It’s a big damn problem. It impacts everyone. All of us. Not just the ones who use FB, IG, or X.
Get ahead of the curve and make these illegal.
Or don’t, because we aren’t fragile ninnies unfamiliar with the concept of carrying a microphone & camera everywhere we go & easily carried away by sensational headlines for dumbasses.
The cameras and microphones we carry around are not hidden, and one can tell when one is being recorded by them, ninny.
Nah, not really. When someone is holding their mobile device, we haven’t the slightest clue unless they’re overt & clumsy about it. No indicator light, either. This selective outrage is peak ninny nonsense for dullards who can’t manage a second’s thought & need fellow average brains to point this out.
“Being secretly recorded by smart glasses is the same as being recorded on a smartphone” is a really dumb take.
Yeah, it takes impressive dumbassery to pretend to know whenever a mobile device is recording when we have them everywhere. Dumber still to convince yourself that ain’t relevant to the same principle that no privacy is reasonably expected in public and whatever bullshit they’re fearmongering is already effective reality that they’re conveniently overlooking in defiance of basic sense. Sometimes a comment claiming another is a dumb take is self-indulgence poorly attempting to evade critical examination of their own dumb as fuck take like right there.
ok perv
Cool ad hominem fallacy. Your lack of reason isn’t an argument. Next time try logic instead of failure.
Haha laws aren’t made to benefit the population silly.
The problem with that is, how do we make glasses like these illegal without also making any type of filming in public illegal?
A good start would be for more states to adopt wiretapping laws with two-party consent models. Only 11 states have these on the books currently.
Buy a pair and follow rich and powerful people around with them. That’s how they become illegal.
Introducing House Bill 33-29-5 a.k.a. the ‘save our children from pedophiles with cameras’ bill
Legal summary
- Prohibits filming anyone with a portfolio worth higher than $500,000
- Prohibits owning a camera without a $10,000 camera license
- Legalizes whipping the shit eating worm who took video of me visiting my mistress
lol
You wouldn’t be able to get close enough to them.
How close do you need to get for facial recognition with a device that is designed to vacuum up every face it comes across? After a couple of scandals about who was out where with whom, that’s all it would take.
I kinda think kureta@lemmy.ml is right tho, it’d be hard. People like Zuck, they take private jets from here to there. They don’t fly commercial. They don’t go eat to normal restaurants with the plebs, he has high end privately catered. He don’t do his own shopping. Zuck bought 11 houses around his own mansion, for … privacy!
That goes into an observation. Zuck zealously guards his own privacy. He doesn’t want YOU to have privacy! But HE wants as much privacy as he can get.
Good points. But the plebs happen to serve these folks. Not to mention congressmen/women tend to be a lot easier to follow than billionaires. Also the paparazzi are a crafty folk being handed another tool to be sneaky. We’ll see.
True… paparazzi can get to people sometimes.
Totally with you on the idea, btw. I think the people destroying the privacy of everyone in society should feel that themselves, too. They shouldn’t get to hide behind infinite piles of money to guard their own privacy while they destroy ours.
It would be one thing if we could easily opt out. But we can’t. It’s not MY choice that puts me into this. It’s the choice of some other rando walking down the same sidewalk as me.
Make a series of drones that look like parts of the houses surrounding Zuck’s main home, maybe chimneys, plumbing vents, etc.
Even using a private jet, a flight plan has to be registered. Musk removed an account from Twitter for posting his “private” flight information. Same thing can be done to Zuck.
I think hidden cameras are already illegal in some places, no?
Like you can’t film in a bathroom, so wouldn’t they be required to take these glasses off before walking in?
Just expand that so no secret cameras can be used, or.cameras disguised as every day objects like pens and glasses.
I think the best start would be to make it illegal to collect and retain data that would make devices like this useful.
Not like meta has a long history of ignoring obvious, enormous problems theyre causing that experts keep pleading with them to take seriously. Like in Myanmar. Where it has killed an enormous number of people and the death toll keeps rising.
I’m sure they’ll do something this time
Like in Myanmar
It was horrific, what hapened there with Facebook. Viral rumors would spread, the Rohingya were putting sterilization pills into the food supply. People would believe it. Then they would torture or kill those the rumors were about. They would burn down their businesses and homes. There were mass scale murder and rape, whole viliages burned. Because Facebook had displaced local news. What was on Facebook became the reality for so many people. It became an anti-Rohingya echo chamber, the hate would feed on itself.
I think this effect is playing out in western democracies today. Slower, because the US, Canada, or Europe altogether, are much larger than Myanmar. The big ship turns slower than the small. But the same dynamics are here. Viral social media posts make their own twisted “reality”. It’s not just Facebook, neither. It’s lots of others too.
I don’t know how to stop it.
I don’t know how to stop it.
- Get off social media
- Explain why whenever possible.
Yes, and telling people that are addicted to things engineered to be especially addictive to just stop and telling them why they should is an actually effective strategy…
It’s a little more effective than being sarcastic on an internet forum.
Sure… but the hard part is convincing 2 or 3 billion of my closest friends. Esp when faced with systems designed by teams of psychologits, to be highly addictive.
Well your reach is actually a lot greater than you think. I can’t find it right now but a recent study suggested your IRL influence is roughly 1-3 million people, friend of a friend of a friend of a friend type stuff. Behaviours course through networks of people you don’t even know. A The most powerful thing you can do as a single human being is to log off.
slapping a spy device from their face is self defense, not a crime
Meta: “That’s the point!”
so like, i think the tech is cool. i can’t really think of a good use case for it though. that’s the thing.
Accessibility: live captions & transcripts. Sharing whatever you see in high stakes situations, eg, police interactions. Seems pretty obvious.
There’s a couple of people on SM I follow who use them.
There’s a street photographer called Bleg who always explains to people that he is using them to record the interaction.
Another is a guy that feeds several cat colonies on his mail route (first class whiskers) so he can use both hands to stroke and feed the cats.
Another is a guy called AsamaPOV that visits small family run restaurants in Japan and like the first guy, always explains and asks permission.
They’re examples of nice people but the scope for abuse is so wide
How do they ask permission without filming them first though? With such a device, I’d assume it is always recording and sending data to Meta servers.
I’m not sure how it’s working but if it was saving to your phone then uploading instantly to FB, it would be caining TF out of the users data allowance!
Just did a little digging and it does but you can use them without a data connection so you could avoid uploading any footage to them
I would like it to replace clunky GoPro camera to capture outdoor sports adventures.
See that’s a good use. I’m thinking of getting a “dashcam” style gopro or other camera9 for my bike (I might be able to get a free low end one through a law firm I consult with from time to time. I like free and at 15mph you aren’t that blurry. Or maybe you are but for free I can try it and use it elsewhere like a chump if it sucks)
9
When google glass first debuted, I was thinking how much easier my job could be if I could have the faces of the people authorized to enter in that device to make admission easier (there were over 300 faces to remember that didn’t have to use their issued ID due to position), as in, when a person approaches if they were in my “PRIVATE ON DEVICE” database their access card would display on my screen. Never got one, thankfully. This new tech would be great for this except I doubt that there would be an offline mode, so I see no use case for this unless you want to assist in the tracking of people for Meta.
