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

401–410 of 870 posts

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

#401

Post by achierius »

quantified wrote: post #327
juleiie wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah sure you are going to start slapping people on the street mr badass guy. That’s all cool and fun until someone pulls a knife on you. Look, the previous commenter has legitimate question how can we do it for real. Not just speed run to the gates of afterlife after touching the wrong person.

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

Shooting someone for breaking your glasses would be an act of murder. Even shooting someone for slapping you in the face would be an act of murder. Clearly you don't have experience with firearms or the legislation around them, or you would be aware of this.

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

#402

Post by wraptile »

zdragnar wrote: post #394
sharkweek wrote: post #374

I really want to make a fake PSA that suggests anyone wearing the Meta glasses is probably a pervert and should be proactively avoided/shunned. This product cannot be allowed to exist in the type of world I want to live in. The power structure wants these to succeed in the market for so many horrific reasons and it will require some serious societal muscle to reject them.

I remember people with the Google glasses being called glassholes. The fact that companies are trying again and apparently succeeding tells you just how much A) they believe in the idea and / or B) how much money there is to be made having people wear them. Smart wearables as a general category of hardware have an awful rate of success, and hardware is much more expensive to get into than software. So, there's got to…

It's sad that the gap between a "glasshole" and meta glasses is just a branded frame. If anything Meta has significantly worse public reputation now than Google during Google Glass time.

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

#403

Post by chwahoo »

roughly wrote: post #379
chwahoo wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 i…

What in Meta's history would lead you to give them the benefit of the doubt like this?

Perhaps I'm ignorant.

I know some of the criticism of Meta: many people don't like the way their products are optimized for engagement. I've heard about their weird AI bots interacting on their platform as if they were people. And I know people of all political stripes have had complaints about content moderation and their algorithm.

But all of that is within the bounds of the law and their terms of service.

None of it would remotely approach something like: bypassing the well-advertised features in the glasses that show when the camera is in use and secretly recording things to train AI. It's hard to imagine any company's lawyers approving something like that. (this sounds like what many commenters believe is happening)

FWIW, I suspect this is the relevant section of the Privacy policy:

> "When you use the Meta AI service on your AI Glasses (if available for your device), we use your information, like Media and audio recordings of your voice to provide the service."

from: https://www.meta.com/legal/privacy-policy/

if so, "to provide the service" is doing a lot of work

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

#404

Post by phil21 »

lamontcg wrote: post #142
Forgeties79 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it always this accusatory “while you were distracted”-style rhetoric? Who has been distracted from Facebook’s shenanigans? Who are they talking about? Is it me? Because I can tell you I have certainly not been distracted on that front. Am I supposed to feel guilty? Am I supposed to hold somebody accountable who should’ve been paying attention? I do actually understand why it’s done, but I just find it very gra…

This is Meta claiming in their internal communications that they plan on doing it while people are distracted with other concerns. It isn't really "rhetoric", they're talking like they believe this actually happens, this is strategy. And I tend to agree with them that things like attention and political capital are ultimately finite resources. I've found that the "we can do two things" and "we can walk and chew bubbl…

> I've found that the "we can do two things" and "we can walk and chew bubblegum" line of argument to be simplistic and just wrong

It's painfully obvious to me society cannot do two things at once. You focus on one shared goal as a culture or everything falls apart very rapidly - as we are seeing today. It's why a common external "enemy" (e.g competitor, nation state, culture, whatever) has historically been so important.

The shared goal can be complex in nature, which requires many disciplines to come together to achieve it via a series of many parallel activities that might look like they are all doing something random, but it's all in the service of that singular shared goal.

This holds true from my experience at the national level all the way down to small organizations.

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

#406

Post by DonHopkins »

sharkweek wrote: post #374

I really want to make a fake PSA that suggests anyone wearing the Meta glasses is probably a pervert and should be proactively avoided/shunned. This product cannot be allowed to exist in the type of world I want to live in. The power structure wants these to succeed in the market for so many horrific reasons and it will require some serious societal muscle to reject them.

Where is Robert Scoble, the King of the Glassholes, the AR PR Torpedo, the Patron Taint of Making Everyone Disgusted to Use Google Glass, the Sexually Harassing Victim Blaming Shameless New Venture Plugging Non Apology Apologist, posting nude photos of himself in the shower, when we need him?

Larry Page on Robert Scoble’s Google Glass stunt: ‘I really didn’t appreciate the shower photo’:

https://www.theverge.com/2013/5/15/4333656/larry-page-teases...

Scoble: an utterly tone deaf response to harassment allegations:

https://onemanandhisblog.com/2017/10/scoble-utterly-tone-dea...

>The Verge‘s Adi Robertson sums it us thus:

>>But his latest defense puts forward an absurd definition of sexual harassment and effectively accuses women of reporting it to fit in with the cool crowd, while claiming he’s writing in “a spirit of healing.” There’s even a tasteless plug for his latest business venture. It’s one of the most disappointing responses we’ve seen to a sexual harassment complaint, which, after the past few weeks, is a fairly remarkable achievement.

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

#407

Post by soared »

WD-42 wrote: post #304
Waterluvian wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Gen Z doesn’t seem to carry the millennial “making the world a better place” sensibility. They are all hustle culture, all the time. While I appreciate a lot of their culture this is the aspect that makes me nervous about the future.

The person responsible for high level corporate strategy at Meta is surely not Gen Z but boomer or millennial.

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

#408

Post by benoau »

zdragnar wrote: post #394
sharkweek wrote: post #374

I really want to make a fake PSA that suggests anyone wearing the Meta glasses is probably a pervert and should be proactively avoided/shunned. This product cannot be allowed to exist in the type of world I want to live in. The power structure wants these to succeed in the market for so many horrific reasons and it will require some serious societal muscle to reject them.

I remember people with the Google glasses being called glassholes. The fact that companies are trying again and apparently succeeding tells you just how much A) they believe in the idea and / or B) how much money there is to be made having people wear them. Smart wearables as a general category of hardware have an awful rate of success, and hardware is much more expensive to get into than software. So, there's got to…

> B) how much money there is to be made having people wear them.

Meta have been desperately searching for “the next big walled garden” for like a decade.

The prize is clear: whatever the next big mass-consumer hardware device is with an app store attached will leech hundreds of billions in fees and enjoy absolute control over everyone building on it.

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

#409

Post by medi8r »

thunderfork wrote: post #392

Fun fact: all advertiser chat support agents at Meta used to (still might) have full super-read on FB. When you read "workers" in this headline, don't think "devs", think "legions of contracted-out T1 support staff"

It is worse:

> The workers in Kenya say that it feels uncomfortable to go to work. They tell us about deeply private video clips, which appear to come straight out of Western homes, from people who use the glasses in their everyday lives.

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

#410

Post by xboxnolifes »

boca_honey wrote: post #254
xboxnolifes wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An entire new generation of people have been born and raised into a world that is more accepting of always recording and being recorded since 14 years ago.

I'm not sure if you have experience with teenagers, but you’ll quickly realize they are even more resistant to this technology than we ever were. For the vast majority of kids today, this is their worst nightmare. They will reject it even more forcefully than we have.

The teenagers I know willing put geo-tracking software on their phones to see where their friends are at any time.
Post reply on HN