What a huge surprise coming from the company that records its own employees.
Meta's ships facial recognition on smart glasses
21–30 of 311 posts
Re: Meta's ships facial recognition on smart glasses
#22I'm in the position to make security policies at work, and one of them is that no smart glasses are allowed in the office. We will not be having workers aiming Facebook glasses at our screens showing confidential information. And along those lines, I can think of damn few scenarios where I'd be OK with someone using face recognition against me. Restaurants? It's not Facebook's business to know where I like to eat, pr…
To make matters worse, I’ve seen threads where people with these glasses discuss how to circumvent/disable the “now recording” light, so people won’t know when they’re active.
[flagged]
Re: Meta's ships facial recognition on smart glasses
#23I fail to see how nonstop recording of every interaction with people in everyday life will pass muster in a two-party consent state.
Re: Meta's ships facial recognition on smart glasses
#24Fudge... we can de-flock all we want but if naive people walk around with the portable surveillance cameras on their face, there's nothing we can do about that. We need privacy regulation...
The US courts have almost always held that anything in public can be recorded. The only expectations of privacy relevant to 'smart glasses' that the courts recognize, I think, are gonna be restrooms and your own home. I guess what I'm getting at is I don't expect regulation or the courts to do anything about the privacy and recording issues. IMHO, the only potential regulation might be around how the recorded data is handled, but honestly, I don't expect anything there, either. I mean, apparently, the US DHS wants to build their own 'smart glasses' to record and do facial recognition for ICE.
Re: Meta's ships facial recognition on smart glasses
#25Another case of really cool tech done badly. Imagine a world in which you could use facial recognition, have an instant summary in front of you you reminding you of someone's birthday, the names of their kids ... Then imagine that it wasn't tracked, recorded, saved, or tied into anything at all. Just a useful service, in service to only you. Thanks Meta et al, for pushing forward with this broken (for people) model o…
There's this degradation over the last ~30 years from "wow it's like a kind of capital-equipment anyone can own that'll empower them with agency and serve their own individual interests" to "you're renting this product from a supranational corporation so that it can exploit you".
The problem isn't that I'm being recorded by cameras everywhere, the problem is when those silos are broken down to create a panopticon.
Re: Meta's ships facial recognition on smart glasses
#26Dystopian
Re: Meta's ships facial recognition on smart glasses
#27If Zuck could ship a set of 1950 x-ray glasses, they would.
Never really grew up past middle school. I have dealt with high schoolers with better self control and moral compasses.
The rest of SV billionaire class is so abhorrent that you figure they either enjoy being the villains or they figure "it's ok if you get away with it." Sociopaths.
Re: Meta's ships facial recognition on smart glasses
#28The number of times those get grabbed of someone’s face and stomped on will be greater than zero. And businesses will have signs for No guns/spyglasses.
At what point does civil disobedience become justified? Expected even? Also let's be clear - this is not violence, not assault, it is simple destruction of property.
Re: Meta's ships facial recognition on smart glasses
#29I wish something like this existed that was completely offline. I'm face blind (prosopagnosia) so being able to feed an offline database photos of friends so it can recognise them would be great.
Accessibility shouldn't require giving up privacy.
Re: Meta's ships facial recognition on smart glasses
#30Former Facebook wanker, who worked in research. 1) we were always told and legal always pushed back hard on anything face detecting.(ie haar cascade "this is a face" let alone actual this is dave/sally) 2) the FTC would audit us to make sure we weren't doing that kind of stuff 3) all of the research prototypes had inbuilt/inline face removers up until 2024(I left after that so I don't know when/if that changed) 3.1)…
Pure speculation, probably they finally figured out the correct legal ToS and privacy policy and everything else that made them feel confident + some regulatory/lawmaker discussions reached a certain point that they finally decided they could do it? Does that add up?
Trump is POTUS. And Zuckerberg seems to be on good terms with Trump.