• artyom@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    2 days ago

    I don’t think “smart glasses” are the problem. The term is too broad. The problem is, more specifically, cameras pointed at people constantly, with those cameras being designed to upload 100% of the data to surveillance systems, owned by surveillance companies.

    It’s totally possible to have “smart glasses” like GoPro that just record locally. Or ones that connect to a local AI model.

    The obligatory response to this is “there’s no expectation of privacy in public places”, and they’re right, and changing that comes with a whole boatload of new problems, like recording public servants/officials.

    • FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      24 hours ago

      “there’s no expectation of privacy in public places”

      In the US, the judicial system is shifting about that. Slowly! But it is. There is a name for this legal theory which I forgot now. The idea is, once you string together enough individual data points, they enjoy 4A protection. Even if any one by itself wouldn’t rise to 4A level. That means while you don’t have an expectation of privacy, you DO have an expectation the gov won’t use all that data to surveil you without a warrant.

      Ofc, that only binds the government. It does NOT bind private co’s! Google. Meta. A million data brokers. Flock! So it only addresses part of the prob. Is it good? Yes! But we also need protection against private collectors. In meatspace, we cannot block Flocks and randos with smart glasses. Or the total data fusion that results.

      • pucker4676@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Ah, good. The government will finally start obeying the law. I’m sure Edward can come home now.

        • FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          This is a logical fallacy. I’m not picking on you specifically, because that way of thinking is all over social media. But it is not a useful or productive way to think about the world.

    • porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 days ago

      The obligatory response to this is “there’s no expectation of privacy in public places”,

      That is a USA-specific legal standard which doesn’t apply in much of the world. While it has it’s upsides it also has downsides and it shouldn’t be seen as gospel, or the only way to do things.

    • atrielienz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yeah, I can see a use for smart glasses. Specifically in assisting the hard of hearing, those with partial blindness, maybe even people with other disabilities as well. But the upload of data and cameras recording people without their knowledge and consent is a problem. Not just a problem, but the problem.

      But also our laws have a habit of not catching up to the reality of how people use tech to violate the rights of others and that really needs to be addressed. Not against consumers but against tech firms and manufacturers.

    • NarrativeBear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      Similarly I have no issues with people using dashcams, but I have issues with dashcams that upload to third party companies without anyones knowledge.

  • guyincognito@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 days ago

    There’s a very easily way to rid society of these. Buy a pair of glasses and follow politicians and their families around and post constant updates about them on social media.

    • porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      Nah, you will just individually get sent to jail or shot by the police depending on the country, and that’ll be enough of a warning to everyone else.

      • guyincognito@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Don’t wuss out so quick. This weak attitude is why the surveillance state has risen in America and Europe. If it’s ok for private companies to keep tabs on everyone, why isn’t it ok for private citizens?

        The fact you, and by you I mean Western citizens, just roll over and accept this is sickening. What do you think the proud military men and women who earned your freedoms through blood, sweat, and tears would think of modern society today?

        • porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          WTF are you talking about? I’m not condoning anything, just giving my estimate of the likely factual outcome. And no military man earned my freedom, such as I have any it was won by union organisers and socialist activists.