Sounds about right. If you know someone who uses these smart glasses, it's important not to tolerate them whatsoever. Don't speak with them, interact with them. I wouldn't even recommend being in their presence.
Great! Now do people with smart TVs and people with smart phones
Aren’t there already posts and articles on how to ensure that TVs don’t farm information from us?
Friends in industry who are analyzing consumer smart TV sensor data at scale tell me otherwise.
If you insist on the glasses, wear a fake GoPro.
I went to the beach, jet skiing. One of the guys had Meta glasses.
I liked the footage.
So did the Meta's LLM training model as well as the contractor across the globe reviewing your footage.
The danger with creep glasses is that many people don't know what they are, they can be used with the LED disabled so they're perfect for filming people without their knowledge, and "these are prescription glasses" has a good chance of working. In a place with a "no recording devices" policy, "could you put that gopro away" has wide social acceptance/support, "take those glasses off" less so.
I don't think ostracizing users of Meta Glasses (or Google Glass before that) is the answer.
But I get the problems of hidden cameras.
Just because you don’t notice it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.
However, this is still a different thing than smart glasses which can further be segmented into who designed the smart glasses.
Smart glasses, however, are always aimed at whatever the wearer is looking at. They may or may not be recording (note the reports of people hiding the LED indicators), and at a fair distance could easily be mistaken for a normal pair.
The general populace is much more likely to notice the former recording rather than the latter.
On a separate note, (and this is a genuine question) are you by any chance aware the term Non-consensual intimate imagery / NCII?
I am beginning to suspect that the average HN goer isn’t aware of the scope and scale of the Trust and Safety problem.
The issue is when you go from fantasy to actually enacting it, which is usually when you earn the epithet of “Creep”.
Also, why make a throwaway for this line? I take it you haven’t heard of NCII?
Can tell you that my urge to take photos/record drastically dips around other people. Particularly if it were meant for any sort of commercial exploitation. Stephenson called people wired for max indiscriminate data collection/processing "gargoyles". Personally I prefer glassholes.
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/the-borg-of...
That way we can figure out what it is that’s confusing or unclear and then see it you find it has any moral moral significance.
No, i don't think I've heard about NCII before, and Trust and Safety sounds like some corporate PR whitewashing term to me.
2> NCII: Years ago, I was scoping reddit to identify content that was harmful from an Indian perspective. By far the largest category was NCII. This could range from morphed images, to intimate images reshared, to images from their socials reshared in thirst communities. This included images of underage children.
Removing NCII is rough. First the victim has to be willing to come forward and get over the shame. Then they have to deal with a near impossible system and get someone to help. The more conservative the nation, the less likely the support networks will be forgiving or helpful. Finally, once the data is out there, it’s going to be reflected across multiple sites which are in international jurisdictions.
This is one of the situations where, I fear, your life is simply hosed.
Korea is another country which has a severe problem with NCII, and I believe they even instituted laws against deepfaked porn.
>PR whitewashing: Heh. Well thats the division that deals with online safety, fraud, content moderation, policy and the rest. I believe eBay was the first firm to use that term when they were handling fraud.
Security cameras afaik usually don't record audio, but all phones can. And they don't even need to be pointed in any specific direction.
It's the camera of their smartphone.
Not sure if it's ON though.
There's also nothing stopping us from stigmatizing the use of smartphones in public. Even a slight discouragement of it would be progress. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.
And the people who act annoyed because you are disturbing their film set as if they are James Cameron are the funniest.
is this a Western/American thing about no shame regarding one's body in public places in the presence of other people, be it male or female?
I can never imagine this happening in my country.
I mean it's a locker room... it's a space meant for changing clothes and showering.
i'd never step out to a place where a stranger could see me, without a towel or wet shorts covering my private bits.