Privacy

4182 readers

291 users here now

Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Ategon@programming.dev

danielintempesta@programming.dev

289

Woman Goes to Get Brazilian Wax, Alarmed to Notice Waxer Is Wearing Meta’s Video Recording Glasses (futurism.com)

submitted 6 months ago by Blaze@piefed.zip to c/privacy@programming.dev

12 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 13 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 89 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Return of the glassholes.

[–] entwine@programming.dev 12 points 6 months ago (1 children)

As a former glasshole, I'm being retraumatized all over again.

Google Glass did nothing wrong!

[+] eltrain123@lemmy.world 11 points 6 months ago (2 children)

[deleted]

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Their crime was that Glass was useless. The voice recognition barely worked.

[–] YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 3 points 6 months ago

Yeah severely underpowered and overpromised.

[–] entwine@programming.dev 0 points 6 months ago

Nah, nobody gave a shit about privacy back then, just like they don't give a shit about it today. The problem was just that most people "understood" what spy glasses were because they'd seen them in movies, and the media just stoked the flames of controversy because it led to easy clicks.

Walking into a public bathroom with glasses like that on your face seems creepier than walking in with a phone in your hand, even though it's much easier to discretely record with the phone (and in much higher quality).

Although Meta's case is different. If I see someone with those glasses on, I may give the individual the benefit of the doubt and trust that they're not recording me, but I sure as shit am not giving Meta the benefit of the doubt and trusting that they're not going to record without the user's knowledge/consent. They wouldn't let a chance to capture free data pass them by.

[–] Sunshine@piefed.ca 64 points 6 months ago

Cancel the appointment right on the spot and tell them it’s the glasses.

[–] Kissaki@programming.dev 45 points 6 months ago

Baffling that the chain did not immediately respond with "we introduced new rules requiring all our stores not to allow smart glasses or other recording devices in their treatment rooms". Seems so obvious, yet we see nothing like that in the article.

[–] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 41 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Fucking lady still went through with it and I bet money it recorded everything. I bet meta powers them on even if you don't opt in. Just like when our phonrs turn on record even if we don't want them to.

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev -4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I bet meta powers them on even if you don’t opt in

Unlikely - the battery wouldn't last long enough. Also it would be at least a product-ending event if it ever got out. Clearly not worth the risk.

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 14 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Sure, it may not last long enough for a video, but what if it just wanted to click some low-res pictures at some interval?
And then using data from that, decide when to take a high-res one?

[–] cdf12345@lemmy.zip 5 points 6 months ago

It’s just training it’s now AI model for VagId

[–] M137@lemmy.world 9 points 6 months ago

Out of all the ways to secretly record, that has to be one of the dumbest and most conspicuous ones. It's fake nose and glasses from the dollar store level stupid.