1143
Woman Calls Out Doctor Wearing Smart Glasses During Consultation Where She Had To Take Off Her Clothes: 'They Need To Be Banned' (www.fashiontimes.co.uk)
submitted 3 days ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
354 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 24 points 3 days ago (4 children)

so fucking sick and tired of the pervert glasses boosters.

these things belong on people with visual difficulty, the visual description service should be free to them, and the devices restricted otherwise. it's fucking gross that so many people think 'you have no reasonable expectation to privacy in the public' == creep cameras are cool.

fyi, there are laws in most states against voyeurism - in my state that creep behavior is a felony.

https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.44.115

so fucking sick of the creepglass fanboys

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    I could use them to document, diy content creators would get some great close up work details ...hell even the OG google glasses are in wide use in warehouse logistics for their huds. There are use applications. But they're not advertising for that. They're advertising for abuse. And they're getting that demographic

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    do whatever you want with other consenting adults in the privacy of your home.

    No one would say shit.

    It's the upskirt downshirt creepshot assholes, it's the pick up artists and racist harrasment dickheads that should be beaten in the fucking street.

    I feel bad for the people with vision impairment that these could genuinely help, but instead of making an accessibility tool, meta's chosen to make a privacy invasion tool that has some great accessibility uses, then try to use that as cover for the creeps.

    it's all so fucking on point for the creepshow that is meta

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 days ago (2 children)

    Lemmy unfortunately does have a chronic sexism problem.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    You do know these glasses have a little light that turns on when filming right?

    The issue is that techs have been drilling these lights and "turning them off" for these perverts and that should be made into a severe FELONY.

    Also if you are found with these glasses and the light is drilled out then you should face the same jail time.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago

    you do realize the light can be blocked by 1 cent worth of electrical tape? that there are tutorials online showing how to block just the light using a hole punch?

    there's always going to be ways to circumvent the light. I say restrict the devices to the visually impaired. everyone else can use a fucking camera.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -17 points 3 days ago (2 children)

    Strong disagree. Smart glasses will be one of the biggest tech advances in the next decade or 2 for the normal person, and I’m here for it. The awesome things that they will unlock the ability to do are almost unlimited.

    There are a million cheap, easy to get and conceal cameras that perverts have access to. There are already laws around where and when and what you can record. Smart glasses don’t make anything any easier for perverts.

    All that’s needed is a standard to be developed on how to physically cover the camera by default, and make it extremely obvious when the camera is not covered, even if it’s not recording. Shouldn’t be hard technically.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 child)

    You don't care that people will find you creepy?

    Like, I get it if you think you'd never do awful things, sure, but being perceived as someone in that same crowd?

    Huh

    Also, equating these to a phone camera, a pen camera or other device is specious as shit. 'spy cams' often have terrible resolution; these things do not. LOL get a minox it's the same. derp.

    also, none of your concealable cameras are RUNNING FUCKIN FACIAL RECOGNITION OR OTHER AI GARBAGE they're certain to make for these shitspecs.

    re: a standard - if it wasn't hard technically to do so, why do you think they neglected to do it?

    because the creeps who will buy these don't want that shit.

    https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/us/tiktok-sellers-show-how-to-disable-meta-smart-glasses-privacy-light/articleshow/123133545.cms

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -4 points 3 days ago* (2 children)

    I wouldn’t be wearing them anywhere that would be considered “creepy” to wear them, and as a middle aged heavily tattooed metal fan I’m long past caring what other people think haha.

    I’m not planning on buying any yet either - the tech that I’m waiting for isn’t there yet. I want all the AR stuff, maps, live translations, the ability to look at something and get info about it, do price comparisons, get instructions, etc. basically the next iteration of Microsoft’s HoloLens or Apples Vision Pro, but in normal glasses. By then the large majority of the population will have gotten over this “only perverts wear them” thing, which is quite frankly silly anyway.

    The resolution of creep cams is irrelevant really (I’m sure there are many 1080p and 4K ones though), since the fact that it’s being recorded at all is the issue. Walking around with smart glasses on at least makes it obvious that you could be going to record.

    As for the standard - it won’t be up to the manufacturers eventually. It’ll be regulated. I’m all for that. The EU commission will do something about it soon, though at the same time they’ll probably mandate all footage and data gets sent to law enforcement and governments since they seem to tick-tock between good and horrible actions haha

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago (1 child)

    large majority of the population will have gotten over this “only perverts wear them” thing, which is quite frankly silly anyway.

    sure thing buddy.

    imho the people who find these creepy af is only going to grow as awareness of them grows.

    but you do you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 days ago* (1 child)

    People felt the same way about phone cameras at one stage. You might not be old enough to remember, or might not have even been born.

    Phones in Japan had to be made so you couldn’t disable the shutter sound when taking a photo.

    One thing I’ve really learned over the years is that a huge percentage of the population has virtually no ability to think ahead even a few years in terms of tech, let alone long term. I guarantee you that smart glasses are going to be as ubiquitous as smart phones and smart watches in a decade or 2. They are the natural evolution of the smartphone, or as an everyday wearable.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    dude, I've been using phones since they had dials. one place I lived, we had a party line shared with 3 neighbors.

    it's not the same thing at all. Stop acting like phones and EYEWEAR are the same. People have no reasonable expectation if you're holding a phone to their face that they aren't being recorded. Looking at your silly stupid mug while serving your food or walking by isn't consenting to be recorded.

    One thing I’ve really learned over the years is that a huge percentage of the population has virtually no ability to think ahead even a few years in terms of tech,

    this is rich, considering how out of touch you are on this subject.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    Ok so you fundamentally don’t understand that in public places you have no expectation of privacy and can be recorded or photographed without consent in most of the world. You might not like that or agree with it, but that’s how it is.

    Seems you’re the one who is out of touch.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 15 hours ago (1 child)

    yeah it's just me buddy, keep telling yourself that.

    https://m.slashdot.org/story/456972

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 11 hours ago* (1 child)

    From your own link:

    Germany's network regulator says smart glasses are legal "as long as the recording function is clearly visible." Reuters reports:

    People can file lawsuits all they want, doesn’t mean they have merit or will win.

    Every country has had laws around recording/photographing in public for decades. This isn’t new. Most of them, overwhelmingly so, give you no expectation of privacy when in public areas, because otherwise you’d essentially be banning cameras and video recording in the country.

    I say you’re the one who is out of touch because you don’t appear to know that these laws exist already.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago

    Look up the Rokid smart glasses. They're pretty close to what you're describing. Camera, AI assistant, live translations in over 80 different languages, auto transcribe, monochrome heads up display, and they look like normal glasses. They're surprisingly lightweight for the amount of technology that's in them.

    A little pre warning though, they start at $599. There is also the Even Realities G1 smart glasses which are a little cheaper and do most of the same stuff, but there is no camera on them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    That's the same logic like "there's no point in gun control, people can use knives". People don't like to be recorded without their knowledge and consent, whether you use smart glasses or other cameras.

    Yes, people use these smart glasses for stuff that's not creepy and invading people's privacy - I've seen people use them for recipe videos and such. Cool. You can also achieve the same with other cameras. That's really not an argument to normalise them in public or private settings involving other people who haven't consented to it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago

    It’s not at all like that, because guns and knives are different and give different results. You can buy any number of “spycam” glasses online whenever you want.

    Laws already exist around using them in private settings. They also exist around using them in public settings too - you have no expectation of privacy in public, because you’re in public. You can’t stop someone taking your photo while you’re walking down the street.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent