Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is HN, everyone is trying to become part of the elite here.
I am not.
That's exactly what the elitist would say.
Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses
141–150 of 152 posts
Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses
#142Can 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.
I welcome these because it is all the same problems with Google Glass + a bunch of others.
This obviously goes too far and we might even get some sane legislation out of this.
Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fuss is about the "Facebook" bit, not the "smart glasses" bit. I want smart glasses that are mine, not Mark's.
Do you also want to make the decision for everyone else, that they can't wear Mark's glasses?
Yes. Finally use those antitrust laws to crush Facebook. Make it illegal for anyone to sell glasses that are not completely under its owners control. Also prohibit centralized storage. Prohibit centralized face recognition. And while you're at it, imprison everyone who was ever involved in mass surveillance...
Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses
#144Why 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…
Because this is the exact same cyberpunk delusion that has got us to this point.
All the utopian cyberpunk dreams were/are wrong. There is just no evidence anything plays out like this. All evidence points towards a dystopian outcome.
Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's possible to do AR without at the same time streaming and recording the video stream to a social network. Almost nobody will feel violated if a blind person has camera-based prosthetic eyesight... unless it's also recording for others to gawk at later. I think the key privacy distinction isn't whether there's a device using a camera to augment vision. It's whether the glasses are recording for publication via Fac…
Right. However, it is my understanding that these glasses in their current form do not stream or publish data to Facebook, and I have no reason to suspect that future AR glasses would do that either. Technology has no inherent morality, and can be used for just as much good as bad.
There's lots of reasons why they will want to stream single snapshots or small clips to fb. look at what Google lens and Google translate are doing
Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses
#146You know these kind of aggressive under the alcohol or party drugs people who will start a fight with zero hesitation if they think someone looks at their partner?
If these individuals just think you are filming them or their partner or families, this will end ugly.
This depends on the location and culture, but I have seen people having a gun stuck in their face for a single wrong look.
This is just one of the many, many potentially disastrous outcomes, not even mentioning the smart glass users with malicious intent.
Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses
#147I 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…
> Better to just accept that it's coming and figure out how best to deal with it. No - I massively disagree with this we're still at the forefront of the internet revolution , if we simply cave in on things like this, then all the subsquent generations will get the pain. We can stop it if we say no - it is 100% NOT inevitable, we can choose as a society
"We" cannot choose "as a society" any more than an individual can choose not to consume fossil fuel products, or sweatshop labour, or child slavery (yes, child slavery, and you're benefiting from its fruits, too; where did the materials to build the computer you're reading this on come from?). The environment, the slate of available choices, are intentionally constrained in order to make a small number of people richer than even numerate HN readers can conceive.
Victim blaming consumers, or even the engineers who create the products that usher in our inevitable future, isn't useful. Well, OK -- I suppose it isn't inevitable, it's just not avoidable without the failure of several complex societal institutions dedicated to preventing the kind of grass-roots, bottom-up reorganization required to stop it.
Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
These glasses have no AR though, just a camera.
If these were AR glasses first, would we have accepted the cameras as a necessary evil? If that is the case, then the concern seems superficial.
If the AR glasses were very useful, then I would think so.
Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah, more of Zuckerberg's jealousy because Snapchat refused their acquisition offer?
> Ah, more of Zuckerberg's jealousy because Snapchat refused their acquisition offer? This sounds like a complement, to be honest. If we get awesome, real, AR glasses because Zuckerberg is jealous, then more power to him.
Is this really the general point of view on this website? Are you comfortable with an entity like Facebook which has shown to lie repeatedly, to have spy glasses? An entity like Zuckerberg who is hell-bent on crushing all his competition? Really?
Re: Ireland raises privacy question over Facebook smart glasses
#150How about a light, a beep, and an RF broadcast? When the camera is on, the LED on the glasses lights, the glasses beep, your phone beeps, and the glasses send an RF broadcast to all nearby phones so those phones beep. In fact, the nearby phones could reply with a message that says "do not record" preventing the glasses from recording. Everyone within range would have to approve the recording. If someone new moves into range their approval is also needed, so the glasses must continually send "can I record?" queries to surrounding devices. Anyone who does not want to be recorded can get a cheap RF badge that replies to all "can I record?" messages with "No". The RF could be range limited so that people far away do not get a vote. Maybe the RF range would have to vary depending on whether the glasses camera is zoomed in or not. All cameras could have this approval system making approval/disapproval automatic. The same could be done for audio recording.
"Virtual Walls: Protecting Digital Privacy in Pervasive Environments"
https://homes.luddy.indiana.edu/kapadia/papers/walls_pervasi...