• Smoogs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 hours ago

    imagine being someone who just escaped a very violent situation and they need to stay safe and off the internet

    then this shit happens

  • arc99@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    It’s not just that people are “perverts”, it’s that they’re wearing a camera on their face constantly filming people who have a reasonable expectation to privacy. Even in public most countries would protect that expectation in a lot of cases.

    So unless somebody wants to be violently assaulted and their glasses ripped and smashed off their face, then it might be best to not buy them at all, or only wear them in private.

  • korazail@lemmy.myserv.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    1 day ago

    The real issue in my mind is privacy and autonomy. I want to be able to walk around without the expectation that I’m recorded. I’m male and don’t have the same the impact from the creep-factor, and absolutely get it, but the implications are larger than dudes looking at women.

    Big difference from a “I am in public and can be recorded” to a “I am in public and I should expect to be recorded”. Another big step to "that recording is on a mega-corp server and can be viewed, reviewed, used as training data, cross-referenced, and otherwise processed without my consent because the person recording me consented; I really think this is the the crux, as I can have a tacit approval to be recorded by walking to a store, but I haven’t given any approval for my likeness, my position, my emotions, etc to be recorded by walking down a street. A TV show using unsuspecting public will get people to sign waivers granting limited rights to their footage afterwards, or blur faces – or did – before retaining and publishing.

    I walk into a grocery store and I can expect that they have a CCTV (note the CLOSED CIRCUIT part) system to be able to review what happened in the case of a robbery or whatever. The tech of my childhood meant that the store had a stack of VHS tapes, or maybe DVD/HD/SSD that rotated and could hold (lets way exaggerate) a decade of footage. A decade after I left the store, there was no record I was there – maybe a receipt if I used a card, but I don’t actually know the PCI retention requirements. With cheap storage and 3rd-party cloud-hosted camera systems, the business no longer owns the records of my presence, and has only a data retention ‘agreement’ with the provider. I didn’t agree to my footage being used for any purpose other than the one implicit for safety/loss-prevention by visiting the store. Any use beyond that should be unreasonable search and seizure, but it’s not being done by the government, so isn’t illegal or something I could sue over.

    Very similar situation to Flock/generic-ALPR-esq cameras. The trend used to be that unless you were somehow a person-of-note that you had effective anonymity in public: It took resources to monitor an individual’s movements, facial expressions, actions, etc. It no longer does, and so all this is effectively captured and stored in perpetuity. The real problem is that it’s everywhere. Good luck finding a grocery store that doesn’t have some cloud-provider surveillance. Good luck finding a gas station that doesn’t. Good luck even driving to a specific store that isn’t recording you constantly because you pass several cameras on the way and some are specifically designed to track your movements.

    Bringing it home to the current topic of ‘smart’ glasses. I haven’t consented to being recorded by random person walking down the street with Meta’s camera on their face. Meta has no ethical rights to my “content”, regardless of whether the owner of the glasses has agreed to give Meta a license to their video as part of setting up the glasses. Ethical vs Legal, but we can keep pushing back.

    I know I’m preaching to the choir here, but this shit is pervasive and won’t stop until we force it.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 day ago

    Being accidentally recorded in the background of someone’s photo or video is one thing, and it happens all the time, that is fine

    But we all know it doesn’t end there.

    These glasses allow secret recording

    Of your children at the playground

    Of your wife and children at the beach

    Of your wife and you at a nude beach

    Then all the videos will be picked up by Facebook and fed into their AI. your kids, your family, you, will forcibly be used for AI proposes, you will also be identified, your locations will be stored with it and sold to the highest bidder. Your facial expressions will be determined, what you all were wearing, what you were doing. All of it will be not used but abused to hell and back

    If I see such glasses making a recording of me and or my family that will be the end of those glasses

  • hOrni@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    2 days ago

    “There are a lot of times where it’s not appropriate to wear cameras on your face”. When is it ever appropriate? Try walking around pointing your cellphone at people’s faces all the time and see what happens.

  • TargaryenTKE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 day ago

    Others have said it better than I ever could, but in my own words, even IF every person who bought these was the epitome of the highest moral and ethical standards, I would still be uncomfortable due to the way-too-high possibility of them being ‘hacked’ remotely which would still have the potential to destroy lives

  • chewypoops@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Look, I actually want smart glasses, but there is absolutely no reason for there to be cameras in them.

    Just give me a HUD so I can follow transit directions or something. I’m not trying to take creepshots.

    What really frustrates me is that governments and big business have normalized surveillance everywhere, and now big business is basically selling wearable spyware, and this is all quite egregious.

    But, one of the biggest ways to combat this is with “sousveillance”, or the surveillance of oneself. This has proven to be quite effective for motorists who own dashcams, and could be useful other places as well. But AI-peddling billionaires have ruined the reputation of that kind of thing entirely to the point where even open source variants of this tech will be rejected by the public.

    So businesses, the government, and the police have the right, and in many cases the obligation to record your every move in public, but you aren’t allowed to record your own surroundings in return.

  • Ozymati@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    The amusing thing is put a gopro on your bike helmet, dashcam in your car? No problem. Camera on your face? Oh hells no.

        • Railing5132@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          2 days ago

          Attaching to this to remind everyone that these cameras have sensors to scrape rfid, nfc, tpms, Bluetooth, and wifi ssids as well. They’re not ‘license plate readers’. They’re full suite surveillance systems that’ll capture every ID passing by. Your list of remembered wifi connections in your phone is a trackable fingerprint, and unless you take steps, it’s being broadcast every time you turn on wifi.

          • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            2 days ago

            Your phone is not broadcasting a list of WiFi networks it wants to connect to. That’s not how it works at all.

            It is periodically (couple of times a second probably) checking the available SSIDs to see if there is one that matches a remembered network on it’s list.

            It would be horribly insecure to have a device broadcasting the name of a network that it would actively try to connect to.

        • CADmonkey@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          2 days ago

          Thats what i keep hearing. I bet they have cameras and maybe sim cards too. Along with a spiffy solar panel.

          • undefined@lemmy.hogru.ch
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            sim cards

            This gave me a good laugh, imagine putting the SIM card into a mobile router or something. Just use it like a data plan, no big deal.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 days ago

      Unfortunately, this has a habit of becoming a self-reinforcing need for authoritarian policing.

      “Flock camera destruction” becomes the rationale for more cameras and more cops and more draconian punishments. And this cycle continues so long as the public continues to send up corporate shills and industry hacks to fill the municipal offices.

      • Eggyhead@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        50
        ·
        2 days ago

        Oh good to know. I guess we’ll just have to stick with the alternative. Do nothing and watch it happen anyway.

        • MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 hours ago

          Or you could try to make ACTUAL change, instead of throwing temper tantrums like a child and encouraging others to get themselves in legal trouble that would affect the rest of their lives.

          How many have you destroyed? Let me guess. Zero. Another internet tough guy who others to take the hit.

        • jrs100000@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          2 days ago

          No, you have to go after the local politicians who keep approving these systems. Electorally of course, you psychos. Your local city council rep is going to feel much more pressure from an angry letter from a voter than your senator would.

            • matlag@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              2 days ago

              They will sue you for harassment. Keep in mind that when it’s done to them, it’s “different”.

            • jrs100000@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              2 days ago

              This is probably one of the few issues you could really get grass roots bipartisan support on these days. It would have to be marketed right though. Maybe something like “DEI cameras”, or “6G posts”.

            • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              2 days ago

              Ignore the vote! If we don’t vote, it delegitimizes the election and then the local government will be forced to ignore everyone that stayed home and still do the awful thing anyway because the winner is an open fascist.

              Much better alternative!

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            Electorally of course, you psychos.

            Or not, if push really comes to shove.

            But you do have to recognize that you can’t just break the fascade of the machine to get it to stop working.

    • M137@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Sure, but this is an international thing, Flock is US only. And it’s completely expected to see comments about something US specific written like it’s a global thing (or that nothing outside the US exists) because that’s fucking always the case.
      The 'Murica brain, like yours, just can’t comprehend that the vast majority of the world isn’t the US.

      • spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        The 'Murica brain, like yours, just can’t comprehend that the vast majority of the world isn’t the US.

        Your comment says way more about you than you comprehend and your assumptions about all Americans are laughable. Having a bad day, are we? Maybe you should call your mum.

        You should fly yourself and your asshole attitude back to Reddit, find the rest of your miserable flock and claim victory, that is if they don’t ignore your sorry ass there too.

  • irate944@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    2 days ago

    Creeps love an always-on camera that you can wear on your face so that it’s not obvious that you’re filming?

    Who could’ve seen that coming