Meta’s AI smart glasses and data privacy concerns

Post by derwiki » Tue, Mar 03, 2026, 2:36 AM UTC

dyauspitr wrote: post #48

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.

It’s just going to be accepted. Or there is going to be some sort of Japanesque requirement that there be some light on when the camera is filming.

Post by nerevarthelame » Tue, Mar 03, 2026, 2:39 AM UTC

boca_honey wrote: post #257

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

[flagged]

Post by nakedpwr » Tue, Mar 03, 2026, 2:42 AM UTC

conception wrote: post #336

rudhdb773b wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Post by nakedpwr » Tue, Mar 03, 2026, 2:44 AM UTC

tartoran wrote: post #211

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.

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.

Post by twodave » Tue, Mar 03, 2026, 2:47 AM UTC

palata wrote: post #124

twodave wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

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.