• entwine@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

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

      Google Glass did nothing wrong!

      • eltrain123@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        Their crime was being 13 years early. They had a post-privacy business model in an environment where people still had a choice.

        • entwine@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 days 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.

  • Kissaki@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    4 days 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
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      4 days ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        4 days ago

        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?

  • M137@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 days 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.