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

351–360 of 870 posts

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

#351

Post by chwahoo »

zhubert wrote: post #337
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?

I think the most likely case is: this company is labeling images from meta AI use from people who opted-in to share their data with Meta.

It's certainly possible that it's something much more surprising / sinister, but there is a fairly logical combination of settings that I could see a company could argue lets them use the data for training.

I'm also very certain that few users with these settings would expect the images to be shown to actual people, so I'm not defending Meta.

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

#352

Post by ghostpepper »

giobox wrote: post #150
paulpauper wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they look like big bulky ray-bans that no one would wear unless they were starring in a 50s remake or something . easy to spot

The Wayfarer style was always bulky, they have been a fashion staple for decades at this point. The Meta gen2 ones aren't really that noticeably larger than "normal" Wayfarers - probably why they latched on this style as it gives the most room to stuff electronics while remaining similar sized to the original Wayfarer design. I still see folks wearing Wayfarers almost every single day, and have owned various (non-Met…

As an aside, it’s crazy that Ray Ban would hitch their most valuable brand cachet to such a controversial wagon

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

#353

Post by ipython »

deaux wrote: post #314
refulgentis wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm 37, single, no family or extended family b/c of an...interesting...childhood. Every day I understand more and more that I have something really priceless and rare, complete luxury of choice, and 99% of people don't. (as with all things, it has its downside: nothing matters!) I refused to get "stuck" in my hometown, which motivated me from college dropout to FAANG. Once I got there, it was novel to me that even ri…

Of course they have a choice, just like you do. You're making excuses for them that they don't need. They're actively choosing the "work at Meta and maintain lifestyle" rather than "don't work at Meta and maybe slightly change lifestyle". Every day, they make that choice. Take all the people who get and got laid off. Their life goes on. > responsiblities that come with obvious, healthy, lifestyle choices (i.e. marria…

Unfortunately, because 99.999% of people in the world are “customers” of Meta, making profit for Meta, the 0.001% of people who do work at Meta are paid like relative kings.

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

#354

Post by 1659447091 »

kungp wrote: post #316
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.

Wasn't there something about how the LIDAR in self-driving cars destroys camera sensors?

https://old.reddit.com/r/MVIS/comments/1i6zryi/reports_of_15...

Now to find a way to make 1550nm lidar glasses to burn out any cameras pointed directly at your face

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

#355

Post by twodave »

bigyabai wrote: post #218
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…

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

Well, I personally don’t think the answer to, “Our enemies might use the same tactics,” is to avoid entering into what I believe is a justified conflict. Besides, if you think China could push over the US without lighting the entire world on fire then I don’t know what to tell you. Nobody wants that, and they’re not stupid or religiously radical enough to pull something like that. Obviously Iran is, since they woke up yesterday at war with 2 counties and ended up at war with 7 by the end of the day. Imagine if they had nukes.

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

#356

Post by jmye »

juleiie wrote: post #342
quantified wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First wearers are more likely to have a concealed carry. They have the money, and are from the right demographics.

Yeah in any case it will end badly for you if not the first time then eventually. Who lives by the sword dies by the sword. It just takes one unlucky time where the other person doesn’t subscribe to the idea of proportional response or has military training with muscle memory that takes over.

It’s weird how y’all are so desperate to catastrophize responses, and then want to call other people “internet badasses”. Look in the mirror next time you tell someone they’re going to get shot, bud. You’re the problem.

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

#357

Post by jmye »

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.

Yes, cops will jump right on someone getting slapped. That definitely sounds like reality. Good call.

Do you guys ever like, go outside?

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

#359

Post by twodave »

twodave wrote: post #355
bigyabai wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Well, I personally don’t think the answer to, “Our enemies might use the same tactics,” is to avoid entering into what I believe is a justified conflict. Besides, if you think China could push over the US without lighting the entire world on fire then I don’t know what to tell you. Nobody wants that, and they’re not stupid or religiously radical enough to pull something like that. Obviously Iran is, since they woke u…

Anyway, I can be against domestic surveillance while also being willing to take advantage of my enemies’ surveillance of their own citizens.

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

#360

Post by jmye »

Waterluvian wrote: post #265
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 really cannot comprehend how someone can work for a company like that and maintain possession of a soul. I feel like the older I’m getting, the further away I am from understanding.

> how someone can work for a company like that and maintain possession of a soul

I mean, they don’t. There isn’t a single decent person who has ever worked at Meta, and that started long before this nonsense. The entire company is about the social destruction of its users. Everything anyone there works on drives towards that goal.

Post reply on HN