Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 152 posts

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#91

Post by MrPatan »

pronlover723 wrote: post #84

I know this will get DVed but this seems like one of those things we'll look back on in 20yrs and "mostly" wonder what all the fuss was about. AR cameras seem inevitable. They're strange today but ask any 2006 non-techie if they'd consider carrying a pocket computer and they'd laugh at you. Now they all have one and you'd likely only get them to part with it from their cold dead fingers. The privacy issues are a huge…

The fuss is about the "Facebook" bit, not the "smart glasses" bit. I want smart glasses that are mine, not Mark's.

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#92

Post by concordDance »

bobthepanda wrote: post #69
concordDance wrote: post #65

Why are people up in arms about this? Imagine a transhuman future where we all have superhuman memory and have integrated mind machine interfaces, able to perfectly transfer information between ourselves. Would you insist that people's memories be degraded to be close to the average memory quality? Or would you prevent them from transferring the information via things like degrading their perfect drawing skills? (Or…

I live in an all-party consent state, and would like to keep it that way. I don't want to be traced through other people's recordings, particularly through something that is easy to always have on.

So what is your solution to the dilemma I pose? Forced memory degradation or prevention of memory transfer?

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#93

Post by novok »

pronlover723 wrote: post #84

I know this will get DVed but this seems like one of those things we'll look back on in 20yrs and "mostly" wonder what all the fuss was about. AR cameras seem inevitable. They're strange today but ask any 2006 non-techie if they'd consider carrying a pocket computer and they'd laugh at you. Now they all have one and you'd likely only get them to part with it from their cold dead fingers. The privacy issues are a huge…

Violence is always an option and ability for most humans, but we have laws and culture that prevent humans from doing those actions, and some places are better than others than this because of those legal and social differences. Similarly we can choose a similar future in regards to privacy, even with newly evolved tech with their privacy issues.

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#94

Post by 13415 »

verdverm wrote: post #72

For those who worry about the camera and your privacy, how do phone cameras differ in this respect with everyone taking and uploading pictures, videos, snaps, and tiktoks in public spaces?

There is no substantial difference, but the glasses hide it better and therefore have more nefarious uses. Making pictures of someone without consent is prohibited by law in most European countries (Edit: Not quite right, only in some), and people will react negatively if you try to do it.

Glasses that looked almost identical to these Ray Bans used to be available from Chinese wholesale sellers. It has always been hard for me to imagine them getting used by anyone else than creeps for making pictures of women on the beach, etc. Just because they're Ray Ban doesn't suddenly make them noble, on the contrary the resolution is probably higher, which makes these even more problematic spyware.

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#95

Post by maccolgan »

pronlover723 wrote: post #84

I know this will get DVed but this seems like one of those things we'll look back on in 20yrs and "mostly" wonder what all the fuss was about. AR cameras seem inevitable. They're strange today but ask any 2006 non-techie if they'd consider carrying a pocket computer and they'd laugh at you. Now they all have one and you'd likely only get them to part with it from their cold dead fingers. The privacy issues are a huge…

Indeed the elimination of privacy seems inevitable...

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#96

Post by FridayoLeary »

shever73 wrote: post #24

This is exactly what I thought when I first saw them. The LED can be easily covered, and they look too much like normal sunglasses for the average person to notice. Day after day, my loathing for Facebook grows.

It's not FB. It's progress. You can replace them with any other name in the world. It just happens to be that Facebook announced this rather obvious technology.

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#97

Post by eps »

FridayoLeary wrote: post #96
shever73 wrote: post #24

This is exactly what I thought when I first saw them. The LED can be easily covered, and they look too much like normal sunglasses for the average person to notice. Day after day, my loathing for Facebook grows.

It's not FB. It's progress. You can replace them with any other name in the world. It just happens to be that Facebook announced this rather obvious technology.

You must've missed the first eposide of this show called "Glassholes".

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#98

Post by mc32 »

pronlover723 wrote: post #84

I know this will get DVed but this seems like one of those things we'll look back on in 20yrs and "mostly" wonder what all the fuss was about. AR cameras seem inevitable. They're strange today but ask any 2006 non-techie if they'd consider carrying a pocket computer and they'd laugh at you. Now they all have one and you'd likely only get them to part with it from their cold dead fingers. The privacy issues are a huge…

There is one example of a technology which was curbed because it infringed on privacy: high iso + IR video cameras in daylight. Sony had come out with a “camcorder” whose functions allowed people who wanted to take surreptitious up skirt videos (it was good under low light conditions and added IR light). This was a big problem in Japan so Sony took it off the market.

Now all cameras with IR suppress IR in good light conditions so as not to allow “see thru” capabilities.

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#99

Post by ojbyrne »

dmoo wrote: post #12
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.

Just to say, they will notice them in Ireland. There are not that many sunglasses days…

They’re also selling regular glasses, no tint.

Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses

#100

Post by amelius »

mc32 wrote: post #98
pronlover723 wrote: post #84

I know this will get DVed but this seems like one of those things we'll look back on in 20yrs and "mostly" wonder what all the fuss was about. AR cameras seem inevitable. They're strange today but ask any 2006 non-techie if they'd consider carrying a pocket computer and they'd laugh at you. Now they all have one and you'd likely only get them to part with it from their cold dead fingers. The privacy issues are a huge…

There is one example of a technology which was curbed because it infringed on privacy: high iso + IR video cameras in daylight. Sony had come out with a “camcorder” whose functions allowed people who wanted to take surreptitious up skirt videos (it was good under low light conditions and added IR light). This was a big problem in Japan so Sony took it off the market. Now all cameras with IR suppress IR in good light…

That's nothing compared to the professional voyeurism performed by Google and Facebook.
Post reply on HN