this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2026
662 points (97.7% liked)

Technology

85108 readers
4768 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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FE80@lemmy.world 9 points 6 hours ago (3 children)

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

Isn't this all public cameras?

[–] BastingChemina@slrpnk.net 2 points 24 minutes ago

Recording camera in public sources are subject to the EU law. You can't install then without authorization and their use is reglemented.

I don't know if it's there case in all the EU but for example in France people need to be informed by a sign of a camera is recording the area, they can't record the entrance of private houses ...

[–] GreenShimada@lemmy.world 15 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Except that these cameras easily go anywhere, they aren't just outside on the street.

Spas? Pools? Gyms Locker rooms? Find a nice spot sitting on a bench near a women's dressing room at the mall that peeks in a bit? Set your glasses at your side and record while you look ahead at your phone, not freaking anyone out. They're pervert enablers just as much as Grok is a CSAM machine if you pay for it.

[–] Reginald_T_Biter@lemmy.world 2 points 29 minutes ago

Thats already illegal we don't need more laws for that, just enforcement.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 5 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I think the difference that most people overlook, is that she doesn't know. It's a "hidden" camera. If they were holding up a phone or dslr, people would know to get out of the shot if they didn't want to be filmed. Plus, it's Europe, they're probably better about privacy.

[–] Godric@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

Except the camera outside every shop and on every streetcorner, yeah!

[–] FLP22012005@lemmy.world 5 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, and many of those are illegal as well. Many home cameras (as part of video doorbells) are pointed at public streets, and they are usually illegal as well.

See for example: https://www.autoriteitpersoonsgegevens.nl/en/themes/camera-surveillance/camera-surveillance-at-organisations/rules-for-camera-surveillance-for-organisations

[–] snugglesthefalse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 33 minutes ago

Most countries don't have laws against recording public areas though, and generally as long as it's not for commercial use even the ones that do haven't set a precedent against it. The problem is when people are being recorded in compromising situations and in those cases it's usually illegal.

[–] codapine@lemmy.zip 5 points 4 hours ago

I see what you're driving at, but CCTV cameras are recording 24/7 on the offchance that the footage is needed, just in case, by a body who is often regulated and monitored. Whereas the concern with the glasses is that they are operated by an otherwise anonymous individual and the recording is more likely to be targeted rather than a broadly cast net.

The very reason the first camera phones had to be re-engineered to add mandatory shutter sounds to them.

[–] Sir_Premiumhengst@lemmy.world 5 points 5 hours ago

Sie haben mich ins Gesicht gefilmt!

[–] GhostFace@lemmy.today 3 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

People keep bringing up that companies do it but at least companies want to exploit everyone equally in profitable ways. Companies aren't human beings.

It's a lot different compared to being preyed upon by another person who might want to harm you emotionally or physically.

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I still find it interesting that people defend companies filming us the whole time. I'd be a lot happier if the response was "Yes, both are shitty. Let's get rid of both".

[–] GhostFace@lemmy.today 1 points 26 minutes ago

Both are shitty and we should get rid of both but I feel far more threatened by normal people. Does that make you feel any better?

[–] stellargmite@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

I’m not convinced the distinction is necessary. It’s also wrong to say they don't discriminate in who they choose to exploit for profit . Many many examples of double standards occurring in different regions by the same corporation. Behaving in one way in the global north, then the opposite in the global South for example. Exploitation of labour for one. Yeh the name of the game is profit at all costs including human if they get away with it. But the scale compared to what an individual bad actor can achieve (though real and scary for sure) is not worth comparing. Companies ARE made up of human beings. Hiding behind incorporations and limited liabilities does not always shelter corporate bad actors in regions with proper regulation. Yeh plenty to be cynical about but still, dont give these blood thirsty profit seekers any free pass on their behavior.

[–] GutterRat42@lemmy.world 7 points 8 hours ago

Who could have seen this coming? Who?

[–] shirro@aussie.zone 8 points 9 hours ago

The worst thing about vulture capital targeting young manipulable tech bros for their get rich schemes is that has created a self perpetuating mono culture of spoiled rich grifters with stunted emotional maturity that never progressed beyond teenage boy. The have been allowed to dominate everything and are shaping the rage baited, meme ridden, dumbarse, ignorant dystopia. Lets just pull the plug on them and stop giving them money. Then they will all fuck off back to their mum's basement to play video games and jerk off to their ai.

[–] RoddyStiggs@lemmy.blahaj.zone 43 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I'm being filmed without my consent by corporations everywhere I go

[–] ironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Yes but they have the right

[–] FLP22012005@lemmy.world 4 points 3 hours ago

In Europe, they often don't. Enforcement is difficult though.

[–] Earthman_Jim@lemmy.zip 26 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

The world has gone to shit because capitalism created a world where Mark Zuckerberg's dreams come true.

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 11 points 11 hours ago (7 children)

If only people had said "no thanks, I'm good" when Fakebook rolled out. Of course something else equally as shitty would have probably taken its place.

[–] mangobanana@discuss.online 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

But you know, back then it was "supposed" to about making connections with friends and family. Although the true original were just to meet college aged chicks

[–] osanna@lemmy.vg 6 points 6 hours ago

it was to rate college aged chicks.

[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 11 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

If only people would just stop fucking using it. It's still a choice to use it.

[–] tektite@slrpnk.net 4 points 7 hours ago

I quit facebook about 15 years ago. I still have people trying to share facebook links with me or suggesting I make a fake account for whatever bullshit reason they think I need one. Even reasonable and well-educated people in my life don't seem to understand the purpose of not having facebook is not having fucking facebook.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] switcheroo@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

It'll only be a matter of time before some gross troglodyte makes an app for the glasses that will use AI to simulate what everyone would look like naked.

You know that will happen.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] billwashere@lemmy.world 43 points 15 hours ago (28 children)

I understand how creepy this is but why is this any different than the 1000s of cameras on poles literally everywhere these days. Neither of these should be acceptable

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 18 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

The cameras on poles can't see literally everywhere, and can't physically follow you around.

And the cameras on poles have (at least in theory) regulations and laws governing how their footage can (and cannot) be used.

MetaCreepSpecs don't have any such restrictions.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 8 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

The cameras on poles are meant for public spaces and security. Meta glasses are for whatever the fuck the wearer will intend the recordings for for private use.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (26 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›