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

Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 463 posts

Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

#401

Post by ghm2180 »

jdiff wrote: post #334
ghm2180 wrote: post #193

About the "they asked us to view it and then fired us for it". Having worked in their RL division(I don't work at meta anymore) this story is quite weird for two reasons: 1. Meta AFAIR paid/compensated people — contractors or recruited via ads — to have them submit their data. There are strict privacy protocol and reviews in place to distinguish data use in these cases vs gen public. This is not to say the process is…

You seem to misunderstand the situation. These contractors were reviewing sensitive customer data, not collecting data of their own.

The contractors in the report are separate from the incentivized people or contractors typically used to collect data.

Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

#402

Post by DrewADesign »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #345
DrewADesign wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, let’s see that consent form and how explicitly it states that random call center people will possibly look at anything you record. I’ll bet you a crisp $50 it was a form designed to be as click-through-worthy as possible, being sure to not trigger the “wait, should I do this?” reflex in users, and also not loudly disclosing that you could still use the device without agreeing, if you even can, while still technic…

I can't say anything about the consent form. The privacy policy for the glasses is here: https://www.meta.com/legal/ray-ban-stories/facebook-view-pri... It incorporates by reference the general Facebook privacy policy. The relevant subsection is here: https://www.facebook.com/privacy/policy?subpage=4.subpage.12... Facebook reserves the right to share any information they have about you with their contractors, for pur…

Right. The whole point is that click-through consent forms get users’ ”clear“ ”consent” legally, but not morally. They’re deliberately opaque about the implications (ask 10 users if they consider recording a video on a device voluntarily ‘sharing’ it with anybody and I’ll bet 9 will say no,) are pretty inscrutable to regular people, are designed to not raise suspicions like a social engineering attack, often mean not being able to use the product they just bought if they don’t consent, (which is manipulative as hell when you’re talking about inessential functionality like telemetry,) and extremely consequential. The only evidence you need for that is how pissed off people get when they find out what these companies actually do with that consent.

Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

#403

Post by expedition32 »

SoftTalker wrote: post #347
powvans wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. There's also nothing stopping us from stigmatizing the use of smartphones in public. Even a slight discouragement of it would be progress. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.

I think smartphones are a lost cause. Even at the gym, there are guys in the locker room taking pics of themselves in the mirror. Meanwhile I'm walking ass-naked out of the shower. There is just no sensitivity to appropriate time and place anymore.

Man I don't even want to know how many photos I'm in.

And the people who act annoyed because you are disturbing their film set as if they are James Cameron are the funniest.

Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

#404

Post by abustamam »

moritzwarhier wrote: post #379
rdiddly wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, they are "lightly scripted."

Didn't watch it really, I just meant that at the time (early 2000s), the very idea of the show made people say it's unethical, even with consent. It being scripted doesn't really change much, but yes, I think your tangent is correct. I wanted to illustrate the shift in what's considered "normal", fully acknowledging that a scripted show catering to voyeurism is different from the situation discussed here. Completely…

Gotcha, thanks for the clarification (and FTR I never watched either).

> some people consider it immoral to incentivize people to overstep boundaries of privacy, decency and human dignity

I'd be one of those people. Mr Beast is a cancer on our society and the fact that he is the most popular YouTuber says volumes about our society as a whole (again--never watched, but I've read enough). Though I imagine much of his stunts are staged as well, I think it just goes along with what you're saying about Big Brother.

I don't think this kind of public discussion is antiquated (assuming you're talking about this meta-discussion in this comment thread), I'd say it's just rare to see unless you look for it (HN for example). And I'd also argue that those who criticized pop culture were always in the minority (almost by definition). I think it's a good callout regardless.

Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

#405

Post by coldtea »

zippothrowaway wrote: post #362
bonesss wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have coal miners destroying their bodies and lungs, cobalt mining slavery, cocoa nut child labour and de facto slavery, sex workers, CPS investigators, first responders, and doctors with high rates of suicide… Not only is there an acceptable market rate for trauma, it’s sometimes competitive and requires licensing.

There is one difference between first responders/doctors and the other classes (and the moderators under discussion here) First responders/doctors/CPS investigators see the worst but they also have days where they make a difference. Save a life or multiple lives. I'm sure it's a huge part of what makes the job bearable, and to some meaningful. I'm not discounting your point about high rates of suicide either. If anyt…

>First responders/doctors/CPS investigators see the worst but they also have days where they make a difference. Save a life or multiple lives. I'm sure it's a huge part of what makes the job bearable, and to some meaningful.

You think miners don't make a difference or save lives?

Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

#406

Post by abustamam »

orthecreedence wrote: post #366
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #9

Not sure which is worse here - that Meta are recording video from customers' smart glasses, or that they are firing people who talk about it.

Or maybe that people are wearing surveillance glasses while they fuck their partner? I know we need to push these companies to not be shitheads, but ultimately you can only be a shithead with the data people give to you (with the exception of things like Flock, who are shitheads with "public" surveillance data). I know our culture is so supremely fucked at this point that wearing corporate surveillance goggles during…

well, this seems kinda like victim blaming, like when a bunch of celebrity phones got hacked and their nudes leaked to the public. Those were supposed to be for personal consumption/partners' eyes only, but they ended up on the web because some assholes decided the whole world was entitled to those photos. like, should those celebrities have uploaded their intimate photos the the cloud? probably not, but it doesn't mean that Google or Apple should be able to do whatever they want with those photos.

but i do agree that people just have become too trusting with our tech overlords, and its that trust that makes them continue to do shit like this over and over.

Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

#407

Post by abustamam »

sunaookami wrote: post #143
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can I squeeze in the just a teeny tiny bit of… why the hell are you wearing an internet camera on you while naked and/or having sex? … although I really extend that to why are you wearing an internet connected camera that is obviously going to be monitored by Meta.

The Ray-Ban stays ON during sex!

even when i had very expensive designer prescription eyewear i never wore them during sex, that's just weird.

Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

#408

Post by abustamam »

Tangurena2 wrote: post #231
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can I squeeze in the just a teeny tiny bit of… why the hell are you wearing an internet camera on you while naked and/or having sex? … although I really extend that to why are you wearing an internet connected camera that is obviously going to be monitored by Meta.

There are "content creators" who intentionally record people without any sort of consent. At least when they point cameras, one can notice the cameras and take action. With these sorts of glasses, no one in view has consented, nor have they agreed to any sort of terms & conditions. I never understood the appeal of upskirt pictures. But I think that taking videos of non-consenting participants/victims is the current v…

> I never understood the appeal of upskirt pictures

i think its a mixture of fetish (panty-fetish is a whole craze in some parts of the world...) and voyeurism, like the appeal _is_ the lack of consent. I recently saw on reddit there was a whole deluge of non-consensual porn being uploaded to a certain site and once that news broke, visits to that site spiked. I think that just says a lot about society as a whole.

Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

#409

Post by lostmsu »

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #400
lostmsu wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What your opponent is saying is, "there are mutually exclusive A and B". A being widespread CSAM and B being somebody need to look at CSAM to remove it. Can you elaborate on what exactly is wrong there? Do you see the third alternative C and it's not the "whole choice"? Or are you saying A or B do not exist and therefore there's no choice? Please name C, or tell us why A or B don't exist (or aren't acceptable), or ex…

Some people are not okay with actively facilitating harm to people, even if inaction results in harm to other people. See: the trolley problem. This is totally okay, but the point made above is that >That's a tradeoff you can choose to make is not correct: It is a tradeoff that one specific person can choose to make, but not one that I or we can choose to make, because we don't control facebook. Mark Zuckerberg contr…

He can't do it alone because Facebook is under US jurisdiction.

Re: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs

#410

Post by evenhash »

1718627440 wrote: post #62
OutOfHere wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> People have a right to record in public I do not want to live in such a dystopian country. No this right shouldn't exist and I'm glad it doesn't in my country. > If none of this makes sense to you, wait till standalone cameras become much smaller to where they become a smartbutton -- what will you do then? Why are you against killing? Wait till you don't need to hit them but can accelerate metal pieces at them -- w…

That seems backwards to me. In your country, if you were to record someone committing a crime against you in public, you’re the one who will go to jail?

Is the law applied equally, so that businesses, police officers, and government agencies are also not allowed to record in public?

Post reply on HN