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

801–810 of 870 posts

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

#801

Post by teejmya »

chucksmash wrote: post #720
greentea23 wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand how a parent can be OK non-consenually uploading pictures of their children's real faces to an ad driven AI company famous for abusing people's data and manipulating children on their platforms.

Non-consensual? Abuse? The terminology you chose is tasteless, loaded, and detracts from your point.

The child did not consent.

Facebook us currently being sued for targeting children with "sexual exploitation, solicitation, sextortion and human trafficking."

However, you have chosen to directly attack the above commenter based on your own views. This is tasteless, loaded, and detracts from your point.

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

#802

Post by losvedir »

greentea23 wrote: post #519
chwahoo wrote: post #271

I'll confess that I like my Meta Ray Ban glasses: I love using them to listen to podcasts at the pool/beach, while riding my bike, and it's cool to snap a quick picture of my kids without pulling out my phone. I wish this article (or Meta) were a bit clearer about the specific connection between the device settings and use and when humans get access to the images. My settings are: - [OFF] "Share additional data" - Sh…

I don't understand how a parent can be OK non-consenually uploading pictures of their children's real faces to an ad driven AI company famous for abusing people's data and manipulating children on their platforms.

You don't get how parents share pictures of their children with their friends and family on Facebook?

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

#803

Post by kakacik »

chucksmash wrote: post #720
greentea23 wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand how a parent can be OK non-consenually uploading pictures of their children's real faces to an ad driven AI company famous for abusing people's data and manipulating children on their platforms.

Non-consensual? Abuse? The terminology you chose is tasteless, loaded, and detracts from your point.

Tasteless to you, factually correct to me. Both correct actually.

Look, you do your kids, literally nobody in the world cares how great or messed up individuals they will become, the result always match the process so its pretty obvious.

But your freedom to do whatever stops when you start infringing rights of me and my family. Right to privacy is, where I live and most sane places, enforceable by law. Also, its called not being an asshole or similar rougher terms.

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

#804

Post by kakacik »

OrangeMusic wrote: post #784
dwighttk wrote: post #707

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People using hidden miniature cameras should be shamed and punished when that is discovered just like the people using these glasses.

All right here's my position: - filming people without their consent is wrong - the vast majority of people are not creeps and are not discreetly filming random people - the vast majority of people are not interesting, and nobody is filming them - today, in a public space, everybody already has lots or cameras pointing to them (e.g. anyone with a phone), without a way to know if they're being filmed. So this is not a…

Incorrect points, there should be just first and the rest is just fluff.

Try taking a photo of somebody with your phone. Usage will definitely look like you are snapping a picture, nobody walks around with phones straight up. The result is, when you take pics with phone, most often its obvious. When you insult people by not asking, they see it and react negatively.

When you point to people with smart glasses, nobody knows do they and that seems to be the point. Or is it beeping and blinking some led to make everybody aware? I don't think so.

Also, we live in society where smart doorbell for which it shouldn't be technically possible to upload any pics to cloud due to not having subscription still did that, and from major manufacturer. Security is a moot point, quadruple that for facebook / meta who are consistent assholes regarding breaking security and privacy to scoop any possible data points for further advertising. The slaps on wrist they receive is just cost of doing business.

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

#805

Post by ninininino »

galleywest200 wrote: post #303
ninininino wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

POV camera footage without holding your phone out in front of you distracting you from having to look down at your phone instead of up at the thing you're filming? Imagine you want to capture your POV but also want to be present and in the moment, not looking at a 6 inch rectangle screen to check your framing of what you're capturing.

Go-Pro on forehead? Thats what outdoor enthusiasts do. If you need to make room for a headlamp then pin it to your jacket maybe.

I'll be sure to strap a GoPro to my forehead on a daily basis so I can take impromptu footage of stuff.

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

#806

Post by Dylan16807 »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #518
monero-xmr wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I can't even guess what you think is racist in what I said about voting. And listen, I'm all for requiring IDs if we make sure 99.999% of people have an ID first . But actual decisions must be made based on the actual situation. We're not even to 99% right now.

I guess I'll humor the dead reply for a second.

> But why does every country on earth require ID to vote but America?

First off, they don't. Second, lots of countries actually give everyone an ID and America doesn't do that.

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

#807

Post by josefresco »

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.

https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2011/EFTA02718...

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

#808

Post by filoleg »

kakacik wrote: post #804
OrangeMusic wrote: post #784

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All right here's my position: - filming people without their consent is wrong - the vast majority of people are not creeps and are not discreetly filming random people - the vast majority of people are not interesting, and nobody is filming them - today, in a public space, everybody already has lots or cameras pointing to them (e.g. anyone with a phone), without a way to know if they're being filmed. So this is not a…

Incorrect points, there should be just first and the rest is just fluff. Try taking a photo of somebody with your phone. Usage will definitely look like you are snapping a picture, nobody walks around with phones straight up. The result is, when you take pics with phone, most often its obvious. When you insult people by not asking, they see it and react negatively. When you point to people with smart glasses, nobody…

> Try taking a photo of somebody with your phone. Usage will definitely look like you are snapping a picture, nobody walks around with phones straight up.

I urge you to visit any big city and see for yourself how wrong you are. I see it at least every time every day just during my barely 20-25min subway commute to work.

And that's the most unremarkable the most uninteresting place and scenario here. Any big park, any even remotely touristy location, any public square, any concert/sports venue, and even an overwhelmingly large proportion of restaurants are like that.

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

#809

Post by stronglikedan »

_ink_ wrote: post #582
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.

The funny thing about the light is that it doesn't even matter when surreptitious recording devices are trivial to make these days. You can never know when you're being recorded, even when no one is wearing glasses.

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

#810

Post by nedt »

matsemann wrote: post #649
chwahoo wrote: post #271

I'll confess that I like my Meta Ray Ban glasses: I love using them to listen to podcasts at the pool/beach, while riding my bike, and it's cool to snap a quick picture of my kids without pulling out my phone. I wish this article (or Meta) were a bit clearer about the specific connection between the device settings and use and when humans get access to the images. My settings are: - [OFF] "Share additional data" - Sh…

I'll confess I look at Meta Glasses the same as Google Glasses: A big sign saying "punch me in the face". If you enter some premises I'm in while wearing those, I'm either leaving or they will have to come off your face somehow. Wearing these glasses is just as obnoxious as walking around putting your phone in people's faces while recording.

If it say "punch me in the face" then you have bigger problems. And after you got recorded showing what it says to you they might be growing. Tell them what you think but don't forget "Pretty, I feel pretty, ..." - just in case.
Post reply on HN