Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses • Hacker News Board

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#41

Post by lmkg » Sat, Sep 18, 2021, 6:13 PM UTC

andylynch wrote: post #5

Surprising it’s the DPC piping up. They aren’t generally known as an aggressive regulator

The Irish regulator is the one with jurisdiction, so they're the one that's on point for this topic.

They're also quite proactive in offering guidance, material, and feedback. Their cookie sweep from a few years back is something I still reference on a regular basis for the contours of "strictly necessary."

They just don't actually regulate. They offer a lot of guidance and ask a lot of strong-worded questions, but those don't turn into fines.

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#42

Post by aierou » Sat, Sep 18, 2021, 6:19 PM UTC

I don't mean to go too much against the narrative in this thread, but aren't cameras on glasses necessary to achieve AR? Are people concerned about these glasses just because it's Facebook, or is there broader opposition to AR technology?

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#43

Post by filoleg » Sat, Sep 18, 2021, 6:21 PM UTC

13415 wrote: post #21

rusk wrote: post #16

The glassholes have returned. This time incognito.

At least they have "Ray Ban" written fairly large on the side, I'll certainly avoid people wearing Ray Bans in the near future.

Given that Ray-Ban has been one of the most popular sunglasses and eyeglasses brands for a long time, following that principle might make it really difficult for you to go anywhere in public.

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#44

Post by iamstupidsimple » Sat, Sep 18, 2021, 6:22 PM UTC

rvense wrote: post #19

foobaby wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with these is that they're essentially masquerading as normal sunglasses. I don't think most people in public will even notice that these aren't normal Ray Bans. Google Glass wasn't effective in part due to the fact that they were obvious to those around the wearer. That's not the case with these, which is frankly terrifying.

It's hard for me to articulate how this makes me feel. As someone who values anonymity and, for no particular reason, would prefer not to be photographed and have my movements tracked, I feel like I am being forced from public spaces. Regulated CCTV coverage of certain areas is one thing. This is untracked, unlimited surveillance by a private company whose goals and motives are completely removed from any semblance o…

If it wasn't Facebook, somebody else would or already is doing this. There's no escaping public CCTV in major cities nowadays. It's not nearly as regulated as you think and is also majority run by private companies.

If you don't like this, changing the laws to ban public surveillance is the only option.

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#45

Post by briandear » Sat, Sep 18, 2021, 6:23 PM UTC

aierou wrote: post #42

I don't mean to go too much against the narrative in this thread, but aren't cameras on glasses necessary to achieve AR? Are people concerned about these glasses just because it's Facebook, or is there broader opposition to AR technology?

For me, it’s because Facebook. They have no track record of trust. I work for a significant Silicon Valley tech company and have seen up close the types of shenanigans that have been attempted by Facebook — especially with their mobile apps. Don’t trust them.

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#46

Post by jayd16 » Sat, Sep 18, 2021, 6:25 PM UTC

aierou wrote: post #42

I don't mean to go too much against the narrative in this thread, but aren't cameras on glasses necessary to achieve AR? Are people concerned about these glasses just because it's Facebook, or is there broader opposition to AR technology?

I think its pretty much just a complaint against Facebook. You could buy the first gen Snap Spectacles and its the same thing, no?

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#47

Post by a5aAqU » Sat, Sep 18, 2021, 6:33 PM UTC

foobaby wrote: post #11

trebligdivad wrote: post #2

Can we just look back to all the stories about Google Glass a few years back and repeat them?

The problem with these is that they're essentially masquerading as normal sunglasses. I don't think most people in public will even notice that these aren't normal Ray Bans. Google Glass wasn't effective in part due to the fact that they were obvious to those around the wearer. That's not the case with these, which is frankly terrifying.

People who are concerned about it will stop talking to people who wear Ray-Bans.

I could see this having a negative effect on Ray-Ban, especially since it's easy to say "ban Ray-Bans" or "Ray-Bans are banned" when you're hosting a gathering or event.

Customers are going to want to know, "Why do people around me always seem to look angry when I wear Ray-Bans? I get called 'glasshole' a few times every week."

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#48

Post by ajb » Sat, Sep 18, 2021, 6:39 PM UTC

foobaby wrote: post #11

trebligdivad wrote: post #2

Can we just look back to all the stories about Google Glass a few years back and repeat them?

The problem with these is that they're essentially masquerading as normal sunglasses. I don't think most people in public will even notice that these aren't normal Ray Bans. Google Glass wasn't effective in part due to the fact that they were obvious to those around the wearer. That's not the case with these, which is frankly terrifying.

David Brin predicted that surveillance would be impossible to control in his 1998 book "The Transparent Society", going on to argue that there are two possible futures: one in which the masses are under 100% surveillance, while elites can act behind closed doors, and one in which the masses can also see what the elites are doing ("sousveillance").

I'm still hoping that there is a way out, but Brin is looking more and more prescient.

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#49

Post by fsociety » Sat, Sep 18, 2021, 6:40 PM UTC

siva7 wrote: post #34

kmlx wrote: post #33

what’s the difference between these glasses and the snapchat spectacles? https://www.spectacles.com/

The new Spectacles are not for sale. They’re built for creators looking to push the limits of immersive AR experiences.

And what is the end goal of Spectacles? Surely to do more than just be exclusive for creators.

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#50

Post by e3bc54b2 » Sat, Sep 18, 2021, 6:45 PM UTC

briandear wrote: post #45

aierou wrote: post #42

I don't mean to go too much against the narrative in this thread, but aren't cameras on glasses necessary to achieve AR? Are people concerned about these glasses just because it's Facebook, or is there broader opposition to AR technology?

For me, it’s because Facebook. They have no track record of trust. I work for a significant Silicon Valley tech company and have seen up close the types of shenanigans that have been attempted by Facebook — especially with their mobile apps. Don’t trust them.

> They have no track record of trust.

Its worse. They have a consistent track record for asking for trust and then breaking it in most abusive way possible, then issuing a non-apology only after getting caught and then repeating same process all-over again. Oh, I forgot mentioning FB getting rich in the process, so it somehow becomes justified and has zero chance for change.