221–230 of 311 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes actually. You can poll for nearby Bluetooth devices and cap the packets advertising the manufacturer.
Advertising packets only go out on startup and pairing, not during normal operation.
In case anyone missed it. Michel Foucault the face tested in this article talked about the mechanisms of surveillance and the Panopticon.
When Google Glass first released back in 2012 I was running a conference technology startup, and since we had a database full of speaker and attendee profile photos the obvious thing we could build with Glass would be a "your glasses help you spot the people you are planning to meet in a crowded room" app. The Google Glass developer terms strictly forbid building that, and it didn't take more than a few seconds of de…
Yeah, but Meta is the stalker that planted the bushes outside your house so they can have a place to hide while they're fapping as they're getting more data from you so they can... I mean, they don't know what they want to do with the data, but they have it. They also said they like the way you smell.
I 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.
Isn’t this offline? Where do you see that it’s online?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, but Meta is the stalker that planted the bushes outside your house so they can have a place to hide while they're fapping as they're getting more data from you so they can... I mean, they don't know what they want to do with the data, but they have it. They also said they like the way you smell.
They now what to do with it. They sell it to gov
Earlier quoted context omitted.
$650M to Meta is a drop in the bucket.
When people violate the law, we incarcerate them, i.e. restrict their movement. Corporate stock should be incarcerated (i.e. movement restricted i.e. can not be sold/traded) when corporations break the law.
I'd like to wear an EXACT OPPOSITE of this... Namely, if someone is using Facebook's AI-powered glasses in my vicinity, I want to get a notification (of some sort) so that I can avoid those persons
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If only people already had recording device in their pocket they take with them everywhere…
How often you see someone taping a phone to their head and wearing it into a bathroom? It's sociopathic to wear spywear in a public setting.
(I think the precise form factor is something of a distraction. I'm talking about cheap, tiny, always-on cameras hooked up to giant hard discs in the sky, however they're packaged).
IMHO, Meta is the prime example for privacy intrusion in tech history and with this new smart glasses device, they've leveled their game too far by recording people in their home, sometimes even naked , without their consent. This was already discussed here about a month ago: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47961838 )
It should be socially normalized to eject people wearing these from your premises and/or life. I don’t care what convenience feature this possibly has, if you’re wearing a data miner you have no place near me. Fuck off.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
you're implying there is some kind of symmetry here, that facial recognition will empower individuals in a way to counteract the power given to governments and corporations. I should try to compile my own database of everyone's location? I fail to see how it helps me in any way
You as an individual? Probably not, but you could lobby your local government to, for instance, require any such dataset taken from information in the public be subject to the freedom of information act.
We have traffic/crime cams all over the place. We’ve done nothing to flip that on its head. A little minor vandalism here and there and some bad press. Why would this be any different?