The Nordic country says wearable camera headsets need to be regulated given their privacy risks.

  • Da Oeuf@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    18 hours ago

    It’s insane that these aren’t banned everywhere by default.

    It should just be assumed.

    • HugeNerd@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      15 hours ago

      What’s the difference from people having a camera with them at all times anyway? Walk downtown and there are people taking pictures of everything at all times.

        • HugeNerd@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          13 hours ago

          Well then explain it to me, O Wise One. I can’t take the fucking metro or walk down a main street without people filming doors and sewers and I’m bound to be in some of these film/pictures.

          I just want to know why I’m supposed to be OUTRAGED at one form of incivility but accept the other?

          We live in a world where clipping your nails on the bus during rush hour is normal behavior now.

          • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 hours ago

            You might be incidentally in some of those videos/photos, which is fucked up, as the other commenter mentioned, but it’s a lot more difficult to make you the focus of them without your knowledge with a phone or traditional camera than it is with glasses.

            Pick up artists are hitting on people, then posting videos of the interactions, either making fun of them if the PUA got rejected or crowing about having been successful, either one of which can lead to serious online harassment, doxxing, and consequences in real life for the victims. People are also taking pictures and videos of intimate situations and sexual interactions with partners who aren’t aware of it, sometimes without even knowing it themselves.

          • voidsignal@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            12 hours ago

            200%, but I don’t see the point in being meh about it, because it’s yet another step in the wrong direction. Not wanting a worst state of affairs doesn’t mean you accept the current one.

  • altphoto@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    12 hours ago

    The PervPods look incredible… funny 🤣😂. Like the nerdiest person would feel nerdy using those things.

  • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I agree in principle, but not execution. How is that going to be determined, is my frame too thick? The glasses too heavy? Does it still count if i sew its camera into my backpack strap? Or mount it inconspicuously on my shoulder? What if the camera is in my phone?

    What i’m getting at is that banning the form factor of surveillance glasses while allowing other forms of modern consumer electronics to continue existing is at best as effective as the Internet ID laws are at protecting kids.

    • damnthefilibuster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Yeah, you’re right. The ban should be more outright. Every country should strive to ban every product and service related to Mark Zuckerberg.