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

Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week

inquirer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 226 posts

Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week

#171

Post by bigstrat2003 »

b00ty4breakfast wrote: post #94
inetknght wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The easiest way to get out of jury duty is to ask about jury nullification during voir dire. But the bigger thing is: why would you want to get disqualified from one of your biggest civic duties?

>But the bigger thing is: why would you want to get disqualified from one of your biggest civic duties? because jury duty pays like 2 dollars an hour and I gotta eat. I know lots of folks on this website are relatively well off, but the entire country doesn't make 6 figures

That's the only legitimate reason to not want jury duty, but you also just need to explain to the judge that you get paid by the hour for work and can't afford to not be paid for several days. The judge will let you go.

That's also not the typical reason people want out of jury duty. Most people are just lazy, not actually at risk of economic hardship from it.

Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week

#172

Post by bigstrat2003 »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #81
inetknght wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The easiest way to get out of jury duty is to ask about jury nullification during voir dire. But the bigger thing is: why would you want to get disqualified from one of your biggest civic duties?

>But the bigger thing is: why would you want to get disqualified from one of your biggest civic duties? Because jury duty does not pay enough to put a roof over one’s head and food on the table?

That's only relevant if you would lose out on your income from work, which most people won't as they are paid salary. So yes, for people paid hourly it's legitimate to want out of jury duty, but that's also not the typical situation. Most people just don't feel like doing it.

Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week

#173

Post by lrobinovitch »

randallsquared wrote: post #142

The vibe around smart glasses is so weird: Governments and businesses can record in public, which is right and proper, but if an individual person records what they see, that's wrong and creepy.

The reasonable suspicion around random people wearing secret face cameras is consistent with the idea that both more government and more corporate surveillance are bad.

Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week

#174

Post by mattmanser »

randallsquared wrote: post #142

The vibe around smart glasses is so weird: Governments and businesses can record in public, which is right and proper, but if an individual person records what they see, that's wrong and creepy.

It's because wrong and creepy people will use what they record for wrong and creepy things. Especially when it comes to women.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/mar/18/disturbing-r...

Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week

#175

Post by kstrauser »

ghaff wrote: post #103
_trampeltier wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For ex. in a lot factorys, is is forbidden to make pictures (and movies). So maybe you just don't have access to such areas. In Switzerland pen cameras etc. are just forbidden.

In fact, pre smartphones more or less, bringing cameras into even an office workplace was generally pretty controlled. Still is under some circumstances.

I banned them from our office and while using work-issued computers. There’s no circumstance here in which someone should be working with a personal camera aimed at their screen.

Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week

#176

Post by kstrauser »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #128
emptybits wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the audio side, it's not a stretch to imagine cochlear implants (or hearing aids) having an undetectable recording ability.

AFAIK some wireless buds can work as better hearing aids, they just don't have the medical device label to officially perform that function.

Some even have that label: https://support.apple.com/en-us/120992

Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week

#177

Post by kstrauser »

probably_wrong wrote: post #85
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're a TikToker, absolutely

I'm surprised it took this long but two weeks ago I saw my first live streamer at a flea market. He was wearing some type of camera on his head (can't tell which one) and had his phone mounted like a wristwatch to read chat notifications. It was like that old Penny Arcade's strip about Glassholes come to life [1]. He was definitely filming everyone without our consent. [1] https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2013/06/1…

“Hey security, I think that guy was filming young girls. Please eject him.”

Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week

#178

Post by ceejayoz »

mystraline wrote: post #131
pseingatl wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Miami, writing "No English" on the summons does the trick. Or, tell them that you do not consent to be searched (courthouse searches are deemed to be "consent" searches) so please have someone escort you inside without being searched. A quick note saying, "only God can judge" gets you off the hook. They'll hustle you right out of there if you mention jury nullification. Announcing that "the defendant must be guilt…

"Your honor, it is my ethical framework that I first must determine if the law should even be the law, and secondly if the defendant did it if the law is worthy. I will find the defendant not guilty even if they claim in open court they did it, but the law is bad." (Basis and justification of jury nullification.) Edit: Seriously, -1's? Given how many bad laws there are, judging the law first, then the defendant shoul…

You're getting downvotes because openly stating it like this is gonna get you contempt of court.

Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week

#179

Post by kstrauser »

simonbarker87 wrote: post #76

I had my first interaction with someone wearing Meta(I assume) glasses and it was very disconcerting. Ironically I was collecting my new (non-smart) glasses and it was the employee I was interacting with. I really wanted to ask for someone else to deal with me but since there has been no furore this time around (my how times have changed since Goggle Glass) I decided not to risk a scene

[dead]

Re: Philly courts will ban all smart eyeglasses starting next week

#180

Post by corndoge »

onionisafruit wrote: post #168
PunchyHamster wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely as a compromise the police dept can put cameras with audio livestreaming from every room in police dept ?

Or a compromise where defendants also have the same access to the camera feeds and pinky swear not to use the audio.

Still asymmetric as the police have the resources to comb the feeds and individuals do not
Post reply on HN