Norway considers ban on camera-enabled wearable 'pervert glasses' | TechCrunch
TechCrunch
Norway considers ban on camera-enabled wearable 'pervert glasses' | TechCrunch
The Nordic country says wearable camera headsets need to be regulated given their privacy risks.
Do it. These things are just a tiny step away from face-scanning surveillance - wired.com/…/meta-smart-glasses-face-recognition-n…
it’s a shame that people with visual impairments are losing out on valuable systems but the perverts have already shown how easy the indicator light is to overcome. creeps ruin shit for everyone.
Not that showing an indicator light would be enough, anyway. I don’t want to have an explicit conversation with every Tom, Dick and Harry about whether they’re allowed to stream me to Meta, and I don’t have the means to sue them if they ignore my stated nonconsent or hide the filming in some other way.
And it really is a shame, smartglasses would be amazing opportunities for all kinds of legit applications if it wasn’t for the complete lack of ethics of the involved companies and many governments.
Don’t think you have any recourse in public anyway depending on your jurisdiction. Better that these things get banned in enough places that companies don’t see any point in making them.
In my jurisdiction, it’s generally not allowed to film without consent. This can even apply in public places, to the point that people in apartment buildings aren’t allowed to film the space in front of their doors.
Nope, it’s bullshit like this that emboldens the creeps.
you don’t have a reasonable expectation of PRIVACY, while in public, but there’s a whole wide galaxy of harassment and stalking that states have regulated - WA state for example:
app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.44.115
which stipulates you can’t creepshot someone’s tits or ass, filming without consent, filming with the purpose of distributing it elsewhere without the consent of the subject, etc.,
First degree is a felony.
Check your local laws, people - there are things on the books to use on these perv creeps, and the blanket ‘if you’re in public you have no privacy’ mantra is garbage.
would prefer to see it all banned tho, agree there.
That’s if you can prove harassment or stalking. If someone’s just keeping their camera running all the time in public, that’s just recording in public, which in most of the US is unfortunately legal. In at least some European countries too.
both of which have been widely documented already.
www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/…/ar-AA1ULEhi
nypost.com/…/metas-pervert-glasses-fuel-trend-of-…
if someone’s doing that, I generally don’t have a problem, it’s the upskirt / down shirt / in faces / provoking for likes garbage that needs to be hit hard, and the easiest way to stop it all will be sensible regulation of this shitty tech.
It’s hardly just norway: politico.eu/…/meta-ai-glasses-face-criminal-compl…
petapixel.com/…/meta-smart-glasses-face-calls-for…
and, it doesn’t have to be nations - gadgetreview.com/metas-smart-glasses-are-being-ba…
private businesses can and should protect their customers right to shop without assholes.
MATE, YOU DON’T HAVE TO ACCEPT THIS. IT’S OK TO SAY NO TO CREEPS.
Once you see the indicator light, it’s already too late. Creeps got you, Meta’s database has tagged your location and time. Government agencies are consulting a GraphQL database against your latitude and longitude, building a history of who you were near and for how long, were you with anyone you ever had contact with before, were you near anyone on a watch list. You get added “heat” each time you are, and you don’t “cool off” until it stops happening. Also Meta’s 1728 partners who “care about your privacy” are building a profile on what shoes you wear, what style and brand clothing you buy. You’ll get more ads for stuff you like, unless you are in a new place in which case they may think you’d like a change in your style and they will show you what other people who were like you decided to go with when they changed it up.
Both of those perverts finish their gooning before the glasshole even snaps a photo.
Please drink a verification can.
Except those 1728 partners have this intricate profile of my whole personality, but still their recommendations be like
Indeed that is so utterly absurd.
Why give them the benefit of the doubt. Surveillance is exactly what they’re being made for.
They hide behind the benevolent uses of technology and its disgusting how they go about it. I’ve been saying it before, tech is a modern religion. It’s been co-opted by those who use it as cover to do evil. They act as the gatekeeper as if the only way to tech utopia is through them.
Think of the poor disabled children! You wouldn’t want to deny them the gift of sight would you??? Now wear the glasses and record everything and look at the ads. Or would you rather deprive poor blind little Billy over there.
That shit is played. Trillion dollar tech companies don’t need anymore quarterly growth to do things like build assistive technologies. The world could have had this technology in particular years ago with no frills. Or any other type of technological aid.
Zuck just needs another yacht or two. That’s what this is really about. Hiding behind the disabled like ghouls that they are. No different than those evangelical megachurch assholes who own private planes.
Sir, to assume that money is the goal is short sighted. Control is the goal, money is just a tool to facilitate that. Control is addictive. The most addictive substance known to man.
There is a reason they need all the computer components the entire world can manufacture for the foreseeable future. And it’s not AI.
entirely agree, but watch - there’s gonna be blind people giving testimonials to congress about how they can’t live without the tech, orchestrated by the creeps who want to keep making the creep glasses. they’ll beat the public over the head with ‘why do you want to take this great tool away from the blind’ - WATCH.
When in fact they’re the ones ruining the tech for everyone, especially the disabled.
I love when the editor has the integrity to use the right terms in the title.
Pervert glasses.
Way to make thick glasses lame again Zuck
I love wearing thick framed ugly as fuck glasses (they’re ugly, I’m ugly, we match). I hate that I just bought new glasses and I deliberately got thinner, clear frames just because I don’t want there to be any chance someone could think I’m wearing these dumb things.
My Elvis Costello cover band is fucked.
Considering the origin story of Facebook, it’s pretty on brand he’d invent new ways to be a fucking creep.
It’ll be interesting to see how this is worded such that the legislation bans these glasses without banning police body cameras and without stating yet another privilege that comes with being law enforcement.
Before anyone misreads the above and thinks it’s an endorsement of these glasses or their frequent use for perverted purposes: it’s not.
I think it is intended more for the relatively hidden cameras on some glasses. A body cam (at least currently) looks pretty obviously like a recording device, whereas some of the perv goggles can hide the lense pretty well.
I know the intent, I’m just speculating as to what the design will be.
Unless you’re hinting at that design being that it could explicitly state that “hidden” cameras are banned, at which point we have to get into the weeds of what’s considered “hidden.” Meta’s lawyers will of course argue that:
The lens is very visible
The additional bulky asymmetric frame gives away that there’s a computer
They’re so famous that everyone knows they’re Meta Glasses at a glance, which comes with recording implications
Body cameras aren’t as obviously body camera as you think; my lapel speaker/microphone was regularly confused for a body camera.
I hate these glasses but i fear other devices might fulfil a similar purpose, so legislating against them specifically might not be the answer.
I wonder whether it would be possible to create legislative areas where individuals are prohibited from recording video, and proprietors or governments recording video can only distribute it under specific circumstances like criminal onvestigations.
Fantastic; those things are terrible. Also, if one of your companies could hire me so I can move there, that would be great. Takk!
In many countries of this world it already is illegal to film in public space they way you would with such glasses. Thus making them practically unusable and only fully legal in private rooms or areas.
I think it is not enough in this case. It is not obvious that they are filming and iits too late if they are live streaming. I don’t know if it is possible now, but surely it’s arriving sooner or later.
It’s like filming with a hidden camera in a bag or so. Also, not obvious, can do live streaming aswell. Both are still illegal, regardless of what the greatest dipshit of our times is trying to push down people’s throats. I do prefer the fakebook glasses though compared to the hidden cam in a bag, because it is a bit easier to spot, thus I can punch the sucker in the face legally to protect my rights. I mean take off - gently of course - his new shiny expensive camera glasses and smash it, since it is possibly recording and streaming. Breaking it is the only way to prevent further illegal action. Being a little silly here, but you get the point. If I ever see some of those in the jurisdiction I live, it is certainly going to make some news in the local paper.
At this point these project failures HAVE to be tax minimisation strategy more than anything else. Simple cost shifting and over claiming losses to reduce taxable income.
zuckerborg, plans to download all of mankinds knowledge into his android body.
Please ban these glasses. Too risky for society and democracy.
They should be allowed (and issued free of charge) to blind people. For everyone else, gfy
Eh maybe if there wasn’t any recording capability just live feed
How would they show the picture?
Not sure what you’re asking. Blind people can make use of them in the sense that they can have them translate visuals to audio cues. For example to read a sign, label, book, etc.
Not sure why I didn’t think of that.
And make them a very obvious color like blaze orange, neon green, or optic yellow so it’s very obvious they are not normal glasses.
Those glasses make his face somehow even more punchable
Fuck yeah! Fuck Zuck, the Billionaire Cuck,
Why does he look like he's on his way to take on Dr. Evil?
She was so against this a few months ago. Her having changed her stance on this is a good thing, but she’s not exactly known for working fast.
They had another expert group going to regulate AI by the late summer of 2026, but had to go into new hearings and shit, so it’s now slated for late 2027.
I fear the same for the glasses ban. Basically, when they finally get around to it, it’ll be too little, too late, since they can wreak havoc in just two years
Good Work on YouTube did a surprisingly nuanced video on this showing “both sides” of pro vs anti pervert glasses.
Long story short, it’s way too fucking easy to disable the light (you go to some dude’s garage, he drills it out and replaces the glass so you can’t see the drill hole) and even if it works you might notice it so it makes perverts lives way too easy.
Aaaaand the other side of the coin: Apparently it’s super helpful for blind people to have a camera and AI whispering into your ear where you’re going, etc. Which makes things awkward because on the one hand you want to ban it because fuck pervert glasses, but on the other hand… blind people could kinda use all the help they can get with their disability?
Even wore by blind people, they could be recording/upstreaming their surrounding and use face recognition all around without notice.
Nice devices can be made for blind people. These are not.
There are many ways to visually indicate to others that you are visually impaired.
How’s that help?
I just meant it would help you avoid getting your face punched while wearing glasses with a camera as an assistive device.