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

581–590 of 870 posts

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

#581

Post by tene80i »

fabbbbb wrote: post #567
itake wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, for most countries I mean, otherwise countries couldn’t use security cameras

What’s the chain of reasoning that brought you to this conclusion?

That's quite an antagonistic way to request an explanation, particularly as it seems straightforward:

If you needed consent to film people in the street, security cameras (in public places) couldn't be used. They _are_ used. So it must not be the case that you need consent to film people in the street. Assuming there is not just widespread lawbreaking, I suppose.

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

#582

Post by _ink_ »

zmmmmm wrote: post #194

I do think it's completely unacceptable if Meta makes the glasses unable to be used for routine functions without (a) other humans reviewing your private content and (b) AI training on your content. There needs to be total transparency to people when this is happening - these are absolutes. But I'm a bit confused by the article because it describes things that seem really unlikely given how the glasses work. They shi…

I do believe people do all of that with the light on. And then there are also people who tamper with the device to deactivate the light. You can find guides for that online.

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

#584

Post by fergie »

jspdown wrote: post #557

Don't you need to obtain consent before filming random people in the street? I already feel uncomfortable when someone takes a photo in public and I happen to be in it, but this type of device takes things to an entirely different level. With smart glasses, there's no visible cue that you're being recorded. No phone held up, no camera in sight. I'm questioning the legality of this in Europe, where privacy laws tend t…

I'm pretty confident that these would be illegal in public spaces in Norway.

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

#585

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]

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

#587

Post by pfortuny »

amszmidt wrote: post #572
jspdown wrote: post #557

Don't you need to obtain consent before filming random people in the street? I already feel uncomfortable when someone takes a photo in public and I happen to be in it, but this type of device takes things to an entirely different level. With smart glasses, there's no visible cue that you're being recorded. No phone held up, no camera in sight. I'm questioning the legality of this in Europe, where privacy laws tend t…

In Sweden, you're allowed to film/photograph in public without the need for any consent. There is (in general) no expectation of privacy in public in Europe. How you can use the material though, is a different matter ...

Privacy of your image, not of your voice, at least as regards recordings.

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

#588

Post by contubernio »

itake wrote: post #558
jspdown wrote: post #557

Don't you need to obtain consent before filming random people in the street? I already feel uncomfortable when someone takes a photo in public and I happen to be in it, but this type of device takes things to an entirely different level. With smart glasses, there's no visible cue that you're being recorded. No phone held up, no camera in sight. I'm questioning the legality of this in Europe, where privacy laws tend t…

No, for most countries I mean, otherwise countries couldn’t use security cameras

In Spain a private entity can't put a security camera that points into public spaces ...

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

#589

Post by contubernio »

fbelzile wrote: post #73
flir wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's strange to me that that's the line society seems to have drawn in the sand. Body cam, no problem. Doorbell cam, practically universal. Body cam worn on the face? No way. I wonder why.

Police body cams are typically only used while on-duty and in public, where there is no expectation of privacy. They also don't automatically send video into the cloud to be analyzed by a human for AI training, as mentioned in this article. Video is usually only retrieved if needed on a case-by-case basis. Doorbell cameras are also typically pointed toward public streets, where again, there is no expectation of priva…

In Spain the typical doorbell camera is illegal. In an apartment building it is illegal to have a camera on the door that points into "common" areas even though these are still private areas vis-a-vis the general public.
Post reply on HN