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

331–340 of 870 posts

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

#331

Post by quantified »

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.

Yeah, this could be the "lost dog" approach that Ring was trying. I feel for the blind. But in weighing their concern against everyone else's... they should get a different supplier.

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

#332

Post by juleiie »

scotty79 wrote: post #292
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.

It's also an assault, with intrinsic video evidence of the crime committed.

Exactly, not only you agree to any sort of harm (potentially fatal) in return by any sort of weapons that person has you can’t see, they can just do nothing and record you and you have problems with police and serve short sentence even.

This is all children talk here. Seriously people stop being so edgy on the internet and what you wouldn’t do. Use your god damn brain

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

#334

Post by 1659447091 »

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?

> Are there any less obviously aggressive tactics we can use?

If you are in the US, and hopefully in a state that is open to blocking this sort of thing, be very vocal and persistent with your state reps about the issue. Get others to join. I am curious if this will be legal within the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act or a couple other states with similar laws

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

#335

Post by IG_Semmelweiss »

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?

water to the face ?

Would that work ?

Seems benign enough that its not going to earn you a visit to the judge, but should disable most electronics, no?

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

#336

Post by conception »

rudhdb773b wrote: post #298
blakesterz wrote: post #29

Meta aims to introduce facial recognition to its smart glasses while its biggest critics are distracted, according to a report from The New York Times. In an internal document reviewed by The Times, Meta says it will launch the feature “during a dynamic political environment where many civil society groups that we would expect to attack us would have their resources focused on other concerns.” https://www.theverge.co…

I never understand why a company would put something like this in writing. I worked at a midsize financial company before and whenever there was something even approaching a legal or ethical grey area, we'd pick up the phone and say come to my office to talk, and then you'd close the door. We weren't doing anything nearly as nefarious as Meta, yet everyone was always aware that email and phone conversations were reco…

When you have no fear about repercussions of being caught. Case in point, nothing will happen about this.

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

#337

Post by zhubert »

chwahoo wrote: post #271

I'll confess that I like my Meta Ray Ban glasses: I love using them to listen to podcasts at the pool/beach, while riding my bike, and it's cool to snap a quick picture of my kids without pulling out my phone. I wish this article (or Meta) were a bit clearer about the specific connection between the device settings and use and when humans get access to the images. My settings are: - [OFF] "Share additional data" - Sh…

So you believe that you are in control?

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

#339

Post by dylan604 »

skillina wrote: post #260
dylan604 wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always wanted to sew very bright IR LEDs into a hat that would blind a camera. Your face would naturally be shadowed by the bill of the hat as that's its intended purpose. The IR would hopefully make the camera want to adjust shutter speed and gain/ISO while assuming a fixed aperture lens.

Depends what your threat model is, but this will literally turn you into a glowing signal that says "hey, look at me!" Your face might be protected but anyone manually reviewing security footage will be paying way more attention.

When did we change the subject from fucking the Meta to hiding from security cameras?
Post reply on HN