Comment on Dumb glasses

• FishFace@piefed.social ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  You don’t have the right not to be filmed in public. Do you punch every person filming in public? and if you punch someone wearing the glasses, most likely they weren’t even recording.

  source

  • starman2112@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    *Unless Facebook is the one doing the unreasonable search, and we simply buy their data

    most likely they weren’t even recording.

    Sweet summer child

    source

    • FishFace@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      You didn’t answer the question. You could just have said that you’re overreacting because it’s tech associated with Meta and you don’t like them, even though it’s basically the same as a phone, just on your face.

      You think smart glasses have enough battery to record constantly? lol.

      source
  • EisFrei@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    You do in Germany, except during events/gatherings/marches.

    source

    • FishFace@piefed.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      I am aware. If the yanks want to copy it then they should

      1. overthrow the orange turd
      2. campaign for it democratically

      not go around punching people for violating a legal right they do not have. Your discomfort at maybe having your picture doesn’t entitle you to violence.

      source
  • matlag@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Most likely either the glasses are in a state of recording, or the wearer has no idea what it’s doing. Damned! After so many scandals, people still assume Meta will do what it claims and not trick its users! Fool me once, shame on you! Fool me twice, shame on me! Fool me 42 times, more, please MOOOOORE!

    source

    • FishFace@piefed.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

      A simple back-of-the-envelope calculation involving battery capacity and power consumption puts that idea to bed.

      source
• lumen@feddit.nl ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  What right would be violated here exactly?

  source

  • baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    facebook knowing my personal information against my will goes against my right to privacy. there are also the ethics of recording people in secret instead of making it very obvious. no, a blinking red dot does not count, and it can also be covered with a special purpose-made made black sticker.

    now that i think about it, I’m just not comfortable being filmed by strangers at all, in any way, regardless of where the images end up.

    i don’t think people should get used to it either. it’s incredibly creepy, even if no law is broken where you live.

    and yes, i do understand that in many places just being in public reduces your right to privacy so that you’re legally allowed to be photographed as long as you’re not the focus. i don’t care. still creepy.

    source

    • Soulphite@reddthat.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      I’m sure you’re aware while you traverse in public you are on camera pretty much the entire time, right? There are cameras everywhere always filming, some you know about and can clearly see, some you will never know about and never see. Your face is in a database whether you consent or not.

      The part about Facebook knowing your information without your consent? Do you have an account with them?

      source

      • matlag@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

        The proliferation of cameras in public is not a good thing. I am yet to see data showing it reduces criminality (supposed to be the intent), meanwhile it’s a massive surveillance system.

        And the fact that a given situation is bad is hardly a good argument to promote making it worse.

        Meta collects data on everyone: from contact info in cellphone through their apps, uploaded photos, videos etc. If you don’t have an account nor consent to anything, they will just not show the data, but will still build the profile combining different sources and feed it to its algorithms.

        It has been a well known practice for many years.

        source
      • baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        i know, doesn’t change my stance. i don’t have a facebook account, at most a shadow profile because others may talk about me

        source
      • LordCrom@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Facebook has a profile on everyone. Accounts or not. They are just like every other data broker. All they want is access to more data and more data.

        All that medical data is the holy grail… Anyone who thinks medical data will remain private is naive. All it takes is very deep pockets and lawmakers who want contributions to change the laws.

        source
    • lumen@feddit.nl ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      I agree it can be creepy. But where I live, and in the US, as well as many other countries, you have no expectation of privacy in public. That’s why it’s called public. It might feel right to want to impose some restrictions on public photography, but since there’s absolutely no way to fairly draw a line, it’s better to not impose limits at all.

      source

      • baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        there’s absolutely a way to draw a line. no smart glasses.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • starman2112@sh.itjust.works ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    *Unless Facebook does the unreasonable searching and we pay them for any data they collect

    source
  • Soulphite@reddthat.com ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Funny how people think they have a “right” of privacy in public… there is absolutely no expectation of privacy in public. Besides, there are cameras EVERYWHERE always filming.

    source

    • petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      This only makes sense if you imagine rights are granted to you by your wise and benevolent king when he’s in a good mood and no one else.

      source
    • lumen@feddit.nl ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      And you’re the second person in this thread who can think. Thank you.

      I’ve been threatened with violence twice already in this very thread, in the hypothetical scenario that I would film them. I don’t think Lemmy is for me. Too violent.

      source

      • thethunderwolf@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        I don’t think Lemmy is for me. Too violent.

        We will not miss you

        source
      • BluJay320@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Bye, then

        source
  • lauha@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Quite many when used anywhere except in public space.

    source