Live data from Hacker News

Meta’s AI smart glasses and data privacy concerns

svd.se

201–210 of 870 posts

Re: Meta’s AI smart glasses and data privacy concerns

#201
post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any less obviously aggressive tactics we can use? Wear something that is blinding to the cameras, or something else to obfuscate?

Slapping a pair of glasses that are recording you, processing your face, sending biometrics and images back to one of the worst privacy offenders on the planet off of the face of someone who is willingly doing all that without asking your permission is a perfectly appropriate reaction. Put your shoulder into it. I'd rather we normalize that than adversarial fashion.. but that's probably what you were looking for.

while noble, basically any western system will punish such behaviour as assault ... perhaps this point could be expressed as a prefererence for the law to change such that deprivation of privacy becomes a valid self defense argument ... in the meantime there do exist passive defenses such as face masks designed to interfere with facial recognition

Re: Meta’s AI smart glasses and data privacy concerns

#202
post #118

Just think of the children. Changing a soiled garment, transmitting video of the whole ordeal, isn't that super illegal?

Not in the U.S.

To be illegal, it would either have to be focused on the genitals or of sexual content. Nudity is not automatically sexual.

Re: Meta’s AI smart glasses and data privacy concerns

#203

"People just submitted it. I don't know why. They 'trust me'. Dumb fucks." -Mark Zuckerberg, 2004

oh come on, who of us didn't go through a power-tripping edge lord phase? i too had a community game server once...

Because we should hold the most powerful people to the highest standard, not the lowest one.

Re: Meta’s AI smart glasses and data privacy concerns

#204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

People don't care about privacy as long as a faceless corporation is doing the spying. People very much care if it has a plausible path to embarrassing or creepy situations involving actual people in your life. The chilling effect of ubiquitous phone cameras is well documented now this would amp it up by a 100. Many cool clubs already put stickers on phone cameras.

> Many cool clubs already put stickers on phone cameras.

Can you elaborate on this?

Re: Meta’s AI smart glasses and data privacy concerns

#205
post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i actually agree with this take; i dont see the problem that smart glasses solve. what, my phone screen isnt literally in front of my eyeballs 24/7? i have a need to be absolutely plugged into scrolling social media and consuming content so much that i just have to have the screen in my glasses? this feels much more like what tech companies want people to want rather than what people want.

You don't want your hands free?

to do what? We've already had this experiment in the form of phone calling and texting. And that's not technological because both are mature. People vastly prefer the latter. It's discrete, faster and asynchronous. In the same vein, does anyone actually use their Alexa?

Re: Meta’s AI smart glasses and data privacy concerns

#207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

People don't care about privacy as long as a faceless corporation is doing the spying. People very much care if it has a plausible path to embarrassing or creepy situations involving actual people in your life. The chilling effect of ubiquitous phone cameras is well documented now this would amp it up by a 100. Many cool clubs already put stickers on phone cameras.

> People don't care about privacy as long as a faceless corporation is doing the spying.

This isn't true. Most everyone hates the fact they are being surveilled, but it is pervasive and people only can deal with so many complications in life.

Avoiding surveillance is not a decision or action, it is 1000 decisions and actions. Endless decisions and actions.

Re: Meta’s AI smart glasses and data privacy concerns

#208
post #194

I do think it's completely unacceptable if Meta makes the glasses unable to be used for routine functions without (a) other humans reviewing your private content and (b) AI training on your content. There needs to be total transparency to people when this is happening - these are absolutes. But I'm a bit confused by the article because it describes things that seem really unlikely given how the glasses work. They shi…

Agreed. I'm confused trying to map what the article is saying to what's happening at a technical level. For example, obviously it's not doing on-device inference, so it's unsurprising that it won't work without a network connection, but this is totally distinct from your recordings ending up getting labeled. It talks about being able to opt into that, which is one thing. But I guess I don't understand if you don't opt in, if the data still gets sent out for labeling.

I feel like this article is either a bombshell, or totally confused.

Re: Meta’s AI smart glasses and data privacy concerns

#209
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems his values aren’t much better now. Too bad his company is so successful.

Remember when facebook was busted playing silent audio so the app could stay active in the background? I honestly don't think there's a company I trust less than facebook/meta. And it's because the rot is at the top, and has always been there.

No. I did a search and found this though:

https://techcrunch.com/2015/10/22/facebook-says-it-fixed-a-b...

Supposedly it was a bug, but with Facebook, who knows.

Re: Meta’s AI smart glasses and data privacy concerns

#210
post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slapping a pair of glasses that are recording you, processing your face, sending biometrics and images back to one of the worst privacy offenders on the planet off of the face of someone who is willingly doing all that without asking your permission is a perfectly appropriate reaction. Put your shoulder into it. I'd rather we normalize that than adversarial fashion.. but that's probably what you were looking for.

While I'd like to agree with you, and do in some cases, there are many cases where this just isn't a feasible approach. For example, a peer coworker has a pair of these. I just don't interact with her while she is wearing them. If my boss were to get a pair there is no way I can justify slapping them off his face.

They're incredibly popular in the blind community, and for good reason.

I think even the political activists will be extremely divided on this one. You have privacy on one hand, accessibility and a genuinely life-changing technology on the other.

Post reply on HN