this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2026
778 points (97.0% liked)

Technology

85163 readers
3948 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

“Experts in Europe warn that these devices are used to record strangers without their consent, possibly breaching EU law.”

“A small LED light is designed to indicate when recording is taking place, but RTBF's investigators found that tutorials explaining how to conceal the indicator are abundant and easily accessible online.”

Sometimes I have a hard time deciding who I despise more, parasite Mark Zuckerberg or its witless hosts who keep using its products—yes, Zuck's pronoun is it. Ban Ray-Ban, for frick's sake.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GoatSynagogue@lemmy.world -3 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Oppose what, that you can be filmed or photographed without explicit consent when you’re in public?

So if I go to the Eiffel Tower, I have to go and ask the hundreds of other people there if they consent to me taking their photo simply because they’re in my photo? Or if I see a criminal breaking into a house, I have to ask them if I can take their photo/video if I want to report them and hand over my photos/video to the police?

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

creeps.

the same creeps who can't understand what the problem is. creeps filming women and girls without permission or consent.

creeps like you apparently.

[–] GoatSynagogue@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I understand the “problem”, but I understand that if you’re out in public you’re giving up some privacy. This isn’t a hard concept to understand. It’s literally in the name - public. Public is the opposite of private.

Laws exist around where you can and can’t film, and on the streets you can film. What you do with the footage also has laws around it, but a creep walking around taking photos of fully clothed women in public so he can jerk off to it isn’t breaking any laws.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] GoatSynagogue@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

What does that have to do with what I said?

A creep using them to record in a bathroom would be illegal, light bypassed or not.

I’m not sure if you’ve realised, but creeps have been finding ways to film women and girls illegally for as long as there have been ways to film women and girls. That doesn’t make everyone taking photos and videos in public a creep like you pretend it does.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

if you don't understand the enormous implications on what that link means it's a lost discussion mate.

creeps have always been creeps. why give them a better tool with higher resolution and plausible deniability?

god it's like talking to a child

[–] GoatSynagogue@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago

Plausible deniability? How?

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Snapping a photo or video of your family or a landmark for your personal memories that happens to have some other people in the background is a hell of a lot different than sending a constant stream of everyone you're looking at along with location data to Facebook, Google, the government, and whoever the fuck else. I shouldn't have to explain this to you. And yes if you're going to be uploading someones image online I do think you should have their permission.

[–] GoatSynagogue@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That’s not what is being discussed though (streaming video to fb/google/government/etc).

That’s where it would start crossing the line into surveillance, which has strict laws around it.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You think Facebook smart glasses aren't sending the video anywhere? Their entire business model is harvesting data on people.

[–] GoatSynagogue@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)
[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 1 points 6 hours ago

The same way smartphones do, either streaming it or by uploading to whatever cloud "backup" they're connected to. Again, I should not have to explain this to you.

[–] Darkonion@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Perhaps your future camera could automatically fog any individual that you haven't received prior consent from.

And yes, I realise this idea has a number of technological requirements that may not exist yet, or cannot reliably exist ever, and requires the trusting of some authority in a world where noone of that esteem seem to be able to exist.