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

Meta’s AI smart glasses and data privacy concerns

svd.se

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 870 posts

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

#211

Post by tartoran »

hightrix wrote: post #198
pluc wrote: 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.

You could always say you're not comfortable being processed and uploaded to Meta. If they wear the glasses at their desks replacing their screen , that's fair game.

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

#212

Post by alanbernstein »

martin1975 wrote: post #179
xboxnolifes wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An entire new generation of people have been born and raised into a world that is more accepting of always recording and being recorded since 14 years ago.

And they will soon find out that world's make believe. No one I know, and I know hundreds and hundreds if not thousands of people would allow themselves in a room to be recorded surreptitiously.

And yet we are surrounded by cameras that do this constantly

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

#213

Post by tartoran »

miki123211 wrote: post #210
hightrix wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Do blind people not care about data privacy? Most likely they do and should ask for good TOS now while still possible.

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

#214

Post by lacunary »

hightrix wrote: post #198
pluc wrote: 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.

does your workplace allow recording coworkers without their permission?

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

#215

Post by WD-42 »

hightrix wrote: post #174
pluc wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They better invest in frame designs too cause as soon as they're recognizable they're gonna get slapped off faces real quick

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

Take out your phone, hold it up, and record them back. Get others to do it too for extra comical effect.

Honestly I’d love to hear from someone who actually owns one of these things how doing this is any different than using the glasses.

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

#216

Post by Nevermark »

jiggawatts wrote: post #50
lnrd wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cameras in phones are pretty much locked up today, assuming you have an updated version of the OS from a respectable manufacturer. Apps will not be able to access the camera feed (or the microphone) without explicit consent and a visual warning. The manufacturer might access it, Apple states they don't, Google and Samsung I'm not sure. A bad actor with 0days might too.

For reference, Samsung screenshots everything shown on their televisions at regular intervals and sends these to their South Korean data centres for advertisers to use. It's called Automatic Content Recognition (ACR), which any sane country should be outright banning under international espionage laws.

I give no screen a network connection.

Screens are for playing what I send to them. Not for running their own apps or network traffic.

I would pay more for dumb screen TVs.

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

#217

Post by metamet »

flockonus wrote: post #151
palata wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because you think that "being able to track leadership of a country that knows that other countries may want to target them" does not mean "being able to track pretty much anyone"? Or do you think that those cameras are less secure because the leadership is not good with their people? I'm not sure I follow the criticism here.

Anyone who has a mobile phone has been tracked by their phone provider forever, with the accuracy of a couple blocks. Smartphones only bring more trackers to the equation in the form of apps. What's the material concern to tracking that glasses add?

Surely the difference between location tracking (that still requires a warrant for the government to get access to, thus Stingrays) and the intimate visual processing and tagging that is derived from the likes of smart glasses is self explanatory, right?

To that point, the difference between geolocation and video tracking and analysis (like Flock) seems pretty obvious to me.

It's invasively panopticon.

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

#218

Post by bigyabai »

twodave wrote: post #95
jbxntuehineoh wrote: post #85

On an unrelated note, the FT reported today [1] that Israel was able to track Iranian leadership by hacking "nearly all" of the traffic cameras in Tehran. Anyways, I think we should continue to put as many networked cameras, microphones, and other sensors in as many products as possible. There are no downsides! [1] https://archive.is/QSCjf

I overall agree with your point, but I don’t think “tracking leadership of a country that murders tens of thousands of its own citizens” is a strong supporting argument…

Why not? China is taking notes, it's merely a matter of time before the shoe is on the other foot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_Typhoon

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

#219

Post by nitwit005 »

xboxnolifes wrote: post #115
MerrimanInd wrote: post #17

I was in engineering school back in ~2012 when Google Glass came out. One of my classmates got hold of a pair when they were still quite uncommon and wore them to an extracurricular club meeting. Within minutes someone made a comment about him wearing the "creeper" glasses and asked if he was filming. He never wore them to the club again. I just don't see a world where that doesn't happen with Meta glasses.

An entire new generation of people have been born and raised into a world that is more accepting of always recording and being recorded since 14 years ago.

A common fear for younger people has become being recorded and becoming famous in some embarrassing video. I don't see the problem as having gone away.

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

#220

Post by numpad0 »

miki123211 wrote: post #210
hightrix wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

High end phones these days run smaller LLMs sorta fine.
Post reply on HN