521–530 of 870 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately, the Meta glasses look much more normal, and a person who isn't actively looking for them (and especially one who is unaware of them) isn't likely to notice them.
they are still very easy to spot. they are very bulky around the rims
Earlier quoted context omitted.
they are still very easy to spot. they are very bulky around the rims
If you know what to look for, yes. But the average person doesn't browse Hacker News and watch tech YT videos in their free time and has likely not even heard of them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The big problem with checking IDs is not the checking, it's the people with the right to vote that don't have IDs. (and can't get one super easily) So with that noted, when people make false claims of high levels of voter fraud, to justify government intervention that disenfranchises people, that falls into the fascism bucket. And anyone that stays in favor of those actions despite these explanations gets to be in th…
[flagged]
Statements like this show that you are living in a bubble with little connection to people outside your immediate social circle. LOTS of people don't have government ID of any kind, much less one that proves citizenship (basically birth certificate or passport). About half of Americans don't have a passport. Do you carry around your birth certificate with you?
You should really get out of your comfortable suburban bubble, turn off Fox News, and talk to actual poor people. Your misinformation about basic facts is leading you to support dumb policies.
> To pretend every single thing in society is so important to be gated by ID, except voting, is insanity.
But yet you're willing to disenfranchise millions of Americans of their constitutional right to vote, in order to stop the crisis of in-person voter fraud that doesn't exist. That it is conflict with the ideals of this country.
Meanwhile, I bet you're totally fine with Trump's plan to illegally federalize voting, because the Constitution means literally nothing to you
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think you could justify slapping them off of anybody's face unless you really just like to assault people.
Streaming someone live to Meta, potentially the most evil company in the world (not "per employee" but by "damage done per day") without their permission, especially in a place where this is not at a expected - like an office rather than a football stadium - is great justification. It ticks all the boxes.
Why was the title changed from "The workers behind Meta’s smart glasses can see everything" to "A hidden workforce behind Meta’s new smart glasses"? It doesn't go against any guidelines: > Please don't do things to make titles stand out, like using uppercase or exclamation points, or saying how great an article is. It's implicit in submitting something that you think it's important. > If the title includes the name o…
Terms like "hidden" and "see everything" are in a title are clickbait. That's why the title would have been changed. I've changed it again to match the article's original title, removing the clickbait part.
The one containing "hidden" is the one you apparently changed it to originally - I don't think GP can, nor has any reason to - so you initially changed it to.. clickbait?
It seems a serious reach to call "see everything" clickbait.
> First-ever in-utero stem cell therapy for fetal spina bifida repair is safe, study finds
Currently 9th on the front page, is "is safe" also clickbait, since surely it's not 100.0% safe, just like with "see everything" it's surely not every single frame?
The large number of replies this renaming got in a short timeframe is because it's not in line with what we're used to when it comes to title changes on HN.
Original HN title - The workers behind Meta’s smart glasses can see everything
Editorialized HN title v1, 7 hours after post - A hidden workforce behind Meta’s new smart glasses
Editorialized HN title v2 - Meta’s AI smart glasses and data privacy concerns
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I'll fight against any position that supports dehumanizing people for their ethnicity, Ok, but that is not what you said. >I never said that every voice on the right is a Nazi, just that Nazis are among those voices. And that's enough for me
I don't know what your point is, and I don't think you do either. Are you really here to defend Nazis? I feel like you're trying to deploy some clever rhetorical trick, but you aren't quite smart enough to pull it off.
Yea, that is quite possible. Good day!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the US, at least, it's pretty much legal to record the public as long as people have no expectation of privacy (IANAL, exclusions apply, non-commercial use, etc) It's difficult to draw a bright line between these activities: - I told someone else something I saw the other day - I painted a picture of the public square or wrote a book about specific activities that I witnessed - I specifically remembered an individ…
Legal doesn't mean socially acceptable. Neither does it mean good. The last two items on your list (person, drone) likely constitute stalking outside of specific limited situations. > Implement some form of right to forget The passive voice here is deceptive. When rephrased as the right to make others forget it suddenly seems quite nefarious (at least to me).
My last two bullets intentionally walked the line on stalking and spoke to some of the arguments law enforcement have attempted to use to nefariously surveil the public without a warrant [0].
I also have a difficult time jamming 'right to forget' through the first amendment protections in the United States but it does provide some protection/agency to individuals to protect their identity.
[0] https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/warrantless-pol...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Terms like "hidden" and "see everything" are in a title are clickbait. That's why the title would have been changed. I've changed it again to match the article's original title, removing the clickbait part.
> Terms like "hidden" and "see everything" are in a title are clickbait. The one containing "hidden" is the one you apparently changed it to originally - I don't think GP can, nor has any reason to - so you initially changed it to.. clickbait? It seems a serious reach to call "see everything" clickbait. > First-ever in-utero stem cell therapy for fetal spina bifida repair is safe, study finds Currently 9th on the fro…