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

451–460 of 870 posts

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

#451

Post by duskdozer »

drawnwren wrote: post #371
alterom wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>hard to believe even Meta would do this intentionally). Hahahahahahahaha ZUCK: yea so if you ever need info about anyone at harvard ZUCK: just ask ZUCK: i have over 4000 emails, pictures, addresses, sns FRIEND: what!? how’d you manage that one? ZUCK: people just submitted it ZUCK: i don’t know why ZUCK: they “trust me” ZUCK: dumb fucks Actual quote, BTW [1]. [1] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/09/20/the-face…

As much as this is a damning quote, it is perhaps also damning that any time someone wants to smear zuck they have to reach 20 years into the past.

There's a big difference between "someone said something stupid as a kid"... "but now has changed and is a totally different person" and "is doing the same things but now knows how not to say the quiet part out loud"

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

#452

Post by operatingthetan »

DonHopkins wrote: post #406
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…

The best Robert Scoble was when he was advocating for NEC tablets (Windows XP Tablet PC Edition) on various forums in 2002 or 2003.

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

#453

Post by kulahan »

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.

4chan once tricked a number of people into microwaving their iPhones by claiming it was a new feature for fast charging. This probably isn't too hard if you've got enough friends or fans in on the joke.

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

#454

Post by whycome »

wraptile wrote: post #402
zdragnar wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> It's sad that the gap between a "glasshole" and meta glasses is just a branded frame.

You might say they reframed the issue.

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

#455

Post by jackcviers3 »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #299
jackcviers3 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like a more polite way of handling this in private spaces is just to ask that people take them off - just like we do when a pig farmer walks into our house with their boots on. I get why people are creeped out by them, but we get filmed or photographed hundreds of times a day in a big city when we are in public spaces. Gatekeeping a potentially useful technology for being filmed in public -- well, everyone i…

> well, everyone is _already_ filmed in public. ATM cameras, stoplight cameras, drone cameras, smartphone cameras, security cameras, doorbell cameras. And we probably ought to regulate how all such footage is handled. > banning all non-consensual recordings in all spaces It's a false dichotomy. Even if recording is permitted that doesn't mean the systemic invasion of personal privacy needs to be.

Great, let's regulate it! And why are glasses more offensive than cell phone cameras, or go pros, or drones? I genuinely do not understand why people don't worry about the other form factors, but draw the line at the glasses, so help me here. To be clear - I understand why people find being recorded creepy. I don't understand why the glasses form factor is creepy but random cell phone recordings that are shared on the internet all the time without the consent of the recorded people aren't.

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

#456

Post by jackcviers3 »

AshamedBadger56 wrote: post #311
jackcviers3 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like a more polite way of handling this in private spaces is just to ask that people take them off - just like we do when a pig farmer walks into our house with their boots on. I get why people are creeped out by them, but we get filmed or photographed hundreds of times a day in a big city when we are in public spaces. Gatekeeping a potentially useful technology for being filmed in public -- well, everyone i…

"It seems like a more polite way of handling this in private spaces is just to ask that people take them off - just like we do when a pig farmer walks into our house with their boots on." Just FYI, they do heavily market this towards RX glasses wearers. So, you wouldn't quite be able to just as simply ask someone to take off their glasses and no longer be able to see.

I'm going to guess that someone who can afford smart glasses can afford to have another pair of unsmart glasses. What is it about the _glasses_ that people find creepier than a smartphone that can literally do even more invasive things than the current glasses technology?

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

#457

Post by SchemaLoad »

amdolan wrote: post #443
bravoetch wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your reaction appears to be ignorant of the real use cases for these. A friend of mine is totally blind, and uses meta glasses. He finds them incredibly useful, as do others.

In that case, the data collected should be subject to strict privacy laws.

That's the only way this can be fixed. Socially shaming everyone isn't going to beat facebook. Laws banning them from doing evil things with the data will.

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

#458

Post by rps93 »

coliveira wrote: post #411
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.

At this point Meta has probably the largest collection of illegal videos of underage kids in private situations on the planet. Maybe followed closely by Google with their cams that record everything even if you think they're not. If there was any concern for kids, the FBI should be stopping them right now and taking the executives to jail.

Will we be in the same up in arms once Apple releases their AI Glasses?

How about if their glasses either...

1. Can not take pics or videos but its camera is just for AI vision?

or

2. All pics and videos taken through Apple's smart glasses the pics/vids of anyone not in your network (Apple already automatically list faces & sometimes names in your network under "People & Pets," and has done so for years & they are the privacy company) show as anonymous/randomized faces.

I own two pairs of Meta Glasses since 10/2023 and find them very useful to capture or record my own life experiences only. Tho I share hate for them because Meta makes trashy non-durable smart glasses that quickly become dumb glasses. A software update killed my 1st pair in March 2025 and then my next pair couldn't handle water splashes in June 2025.

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

#459

Post by 1shooner »

chwahoo wrote: post #403
roughly wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I'm not an expert on all of Meta's historical criminal activity, but just going back a few months:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/08/jury-finds-meta-...

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

#460

Post by DonHopkins »

IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #335
hightrix wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any less obviously aggressive tactics we can use? Wear something that is blinding to the cameras, or something else to obfuscate?

water to the face ? Would that work ? Seems benign enough that its not going to earn you a visit to the judge, but should disable most electronics, no?

Who of us hasn't accidentally performed a spit take of a mouth full of beer into someone's face?
Post reply on HN