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

'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

seattletimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 280 posts

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#181

Post by aqme28 »

dgellow wrote: post #73
rdmuser wrote: post #26

Our idea of a public/private privacy division where private recording is discouraged and public is a free for all really feels dated. I know personally I'd love to see a private/local/wide distribution division or something like that where simply going outside to get groceries or whatever doesn't count as consent to be plastered across the net. There are real harms to being a public figure and the net rarely understa…

Germany makes a distinction between expectations of privacy and being in a public space. If you’re in a cafe and talking to someone at your table, you generally do not expect others to participate and listen to your conversation, that can be enough to be considered private and would likely be illegal to record without consent. The act of recording audio is in itself restricted, though if you share you can have additi…

I think the "American" version is the one that's outdated, if anything. The German one is a bit too restrictive, sure, but I'd rather lean a little towards too much privacy than too little.

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#182

Post by wolvoleo »

bonoboTP wrote: post #129
rtkwe wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct the issue isn't Meta people just don't like the idea they could be being recorded at any time to get blasted out to the whole world. Yes, in theory you're always open to being recorded in public but the glasses make it far more subtle /and/ up close so more normal interactions become subject to the intrusion in a way that would normally be quite obvious. It's basically the same backlash that hit Google Glass…

Phones already make people much more reserved and less "wild" eg at parties compared to pre-phone-cameras (that are always online and can upload to social media effortlessly).

True, though there's a lot of parties that now ban phones or put stickers on them.

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#183

Post by aqme28 »

Ekaros wrote: post #177
aqme28 wrote: post #18

I was trying to brainstorm ways to make these palatable to general society. Because I think this kind of thing is going to happen, but a lot of people (myself included) have a legitimate problem with surreptitious recordings. It needs a "recording" light when it is recording. But creeps will just disable the recording light with e.g. a sticker. Idea: What if the recording light embeds a little IR signal, and if the c…

It is something that must be treated as crime. And punished actually harshly say 1 year mandatory minimum for first offence, 5 for second and then life in prison for third strike. No parole.

Life in prison is a bit harsh but I otherwise agree.

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#184

Post by watwut »

jayd16 wrote: post #45
andy_ppp wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you want this? I honestly think we’ve completely forgotten how to be present and notice the real world without the idea of augmenting it.

Because its cool. I mean, the real answer is that we have the technology to be tech wizards. You could conjure spatially anchored widgets and screens and gauges. You could put a cooking show screen above the stove, where a physical screen wouldn't work. You could put a synced calendar on the wall. Notes app on the fridge, weather reminders by the door. ...a million mundane conveniences in the house alone. But still,…

> You could put a cooking show screen above the stove, where a physical screen wouldn't work. You could put a synced calendar on the wall. Notes app on the fridge, weather reminders by the door. ...a million mundane conveniences in the house alone.

Honestly, they sound all useless. Like, junk gandgets you get because someone needed to give you a christmas gift, then you use them for like 2 weeks as toys and then they end up forgotten collecting dust junk.

The reason people dont have those is because they dont have real actual utility.

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#185

Post by ipaddr »

rurp wrote: post #135
ipaddr wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A little league game has hundreds of people taking pictures and video. Unless your child plays naked there is nothing you can do to stop them. If you really want to stop anyone from seeing your child in public you would need a Burka or don't allow them to be in public. I think you are fighting a losing battle if you choose to allow your kids to enter society.

Scale matters. Parents taking their phones out to record discrete events in a visible way is one thing, and the data may or may not make its way to Facebook. Parents wearing glasses that record and upload 100% of what they are seeing to Facebook is qualitatively different. Similar to how cops getting a warrant and tapping a single person's phone is different from the government spying on all citizens at all times.

Not sure I see the difference. Family uploads photo to facebook friends and family see and facebook scans their face. Video uploaded to meta platform instagram facebook scans there face and no friends and family see and probably no strangers because its a boring video.

Probably safer with a stranger considering children attacked by people they know.

People should be more worried at facebook scanning faces and linking photos to real identities.

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#186

Post by stasomatic »

hn_submit wrote: post #58

Why is Meta insisting on forcing these "pervert" glasses on us? I can tell you why: advertising. I bet some "pervert" within Meta (may Zuck himself) has already thought up that whatever you look at will result in you getting an ad for that item. "I see you're looking at a car. How about this new Toyota RAV4?" "I see you're looking at a mobile phone. How about this new Samsung Galaxy Fold which is on sale." "I see you…

The users are the problem. It's not the same as gun control, but smells a bit similar. Let's revisit this when Apple ships? I wonder what the sentiment will be then.

In the meantime, I use the Metas on dog walks, take fast pics of wild life, while biking, things like that, AirPods annoy me even if I own a few pairs. I don't even like the Metas, they are too heavy on the face, they are far from attractive, but they are the only thing of its kind I can buy in the states with my vision insurance (hello, Luxotica and LensCrafters). So please, don't come at me when you see me outside, I'm simply walking my dog.

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#187

Post by JeremyNT »

wombat-man wrote: post #4

I hope one of these companies pulls off a compelling set of glasses with a display and no camera.

These exist already; they're sometimes called "XR glasses." They simply act as a monitor for a connected device.

The market is maturing and the hardware is pretty cool. The software situation is pretty dire though; phone OSes don't have a way to use them effectively. Samsung Dex is probably the best experience right now to just use them as a desktop display.

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#188

Post by asdff »

daheza wrote: post #17
yoyohello13 wrote: post #6

Tech is so frustrating in real life. I feel like we have all the cool sci fi stuff I always wanted, but everything comes with a monkey's paw style gotcha. The idea of meta glasses is so awesome, I want a heads up display to show me whatever I want. But there is no way in hell I would use them because the company that makes it can’t be trusted.

After covid I forgot the names of coworkers, I'm really bad at remembering them. Having something that could just show me peoples names would be nice. Maybe I'm just a bad person for not remembering them and it could be a nice challenge to my existing social behaviors to ask again. I wouldn't trust meta enough to use these glasses, I dont even use instragram.

You don't think that would actually make you worse at remembering names over time?

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#189

Post by 8note »

yoyohello13 wrote: post #6

Tech is so frustrating in real life. I feel like we have all the cool sci fi stuff I always wanted, but everything comes with a monkey's paw style gotcha. The idea of meta glasses is so awesome, I want a heads up display to show me whatever I want. But there is no way in hell I would use them because the company that makes it can’t be trusted.

i thonk sci-fi was too focused on the tech existing and not enough about what it means to give it to people.

black mirror is a breath of fresh air in that, but even that lacks in how to think about how technology and society really interact

Re: 'Pervert glasses': Backlash against Meta's smart glasses grows

#190

Post by zappb »

adolph wrote: post #94
fusslo wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I agree with this sentiment most. I am having trouble articulating it. I think wearing smart glasses in some situations is on a scale between rude, offensive, and wrong. I think that's what culture teaches us about what is and what isn't acceptable behavior, right? Like some places teach us it's rude to speak over each-other. Here in New England it is rude not to. I am 100% on board with calling smart glasses…

What situations call for "Pervert glasses?"

The workers at Meta who watch their video feeds are the perverts.
Post reply on HN