unitedwithme comments on Reframing smart glasses as 'pervert glasses'

Reframing smart glasses as 'pervert glasses' (this.weekinsecurity.com)

submitted 1 month ago* by XLE@piefed.social to c/privacy@lemmy.world

172 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Smart glasses equipped with cameras, microphones, and AI are a creeping privacy and security nightmare, prompting backlash.

And rightfully so.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] unitedwithme@lemmy.today 88 points 1 month ago (6 children)

Anyone wearing those are absolutely being a perv and playing dumb about it. Apple will probably come out with those next, and push them just like they have air pods so that they'll have a camera to go with their always active mics! Fucking drives me nuts when people act like they're so technologically savvy by using siri to call people on the phone.

hideshow 12 child comments

[–] Canconda@lemmy.ca 49 points 1 month ago* (1 child)

I've had to inform all my boomer/genx peeps that have one about how they send video footage back even when you aren't recording. Instances like people just putting the glasses down on their bedside table and some meta contractor ends up seeing your wife get dressed after a shower.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] unitedwithme@lemmy.today 25 points 1 month ago (1 child)

My beef, what about underage users?? Let's say a high schooler gets frisky with his gf?? A kid at my kid's school was bragging about using his glasses for school work, and they were joking about taking a poop, etc then a kid joked about walking into the girls bathroom with them on.. Idk man, so many problems with them!!

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Amdouni@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago

One of the police officers was using it when I was in highschool, even in the restrooms I think.

parent

[–] SouthEndSunset@piefed.blahaj.zone 33 points 1 month ago

Don’t forget…Facefuck was found by a massive letch/perv.

parent

[–] Bitflip@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 month ago (1 child)

eye pods

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 month ago

parent

[–] jaaake@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago* (1 child)

I hate how these are being used, both by Meta and by creeps.

I bought a pair of them after trying out a friends (back before they had any AI capability, and had not yet been hacked to dox people) because they're really good speakers and the exact same style of sunglasses that I've worn for 30 years. The first thing I did was disable the always on mic (which required me to log in to meta, which I had to make an account for using a burner email). The second thing I did was purchase lens covers so people could be confident I wasn't recording them. Finding covers that worked for the lens and not just the light was a pain because I apparently everyone is doing the opposite thing with these that I wanted to. Also, I wanted to make sure that the lens cover could be removed because I wanted to be able to retain the ability to make hands free first person videos (in places without other people). It's also super helpful for making footage of things that require you to use both hands.

I hope any future smart glasses (because there's no way this product is going to go away) don't just indicate when they are recording, but they make it obvious to others when they're in a state that they cannot be recording (video at least). A built in lens cover solves that. If I was to buy another pair of smart glasses (which I currently have no plans to do), it would be an absolute requirement that people around me understand that I'm not making video of them, doxxing them, or in any way using an image of them.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] YawningNostalgia -5 points 1 month ago (1 child)

There are a ton of great applications for this and other cameras. If you're a woman walking around by herself it could help prove that an assault took place, for example. The problem is that the people buying these things are the freaks, not the innocents.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 8 points 1 month ago (2 children)

"Invading people's privacy by recording them without their knowledge or consent is only wrong when a man does it."

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] edible_funk@lemmy.world -3 points 1 month ago (1 child)

Nobody has a right to not be recorded in public spaces. Whether that's a good thing or not I'll leave to you, but nobody in public should ever assume they have any kind of privacy while in public.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

Okay, so you're pro-smartglasses and forfeit your right to complain about men being "creeps" in public. "Nobody has a right to not be recording in public spaces" "Nobody in public should ever assume they have any kind of privacy while in public." Your words, not mine. Now let's see you squirm to try to explain why actually that's not the case whenever it's convenient for you to contradict yourself.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] edible_funk@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago (1 child)

You can't read, can you?

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 month ago (1 child)

Apparently you can't

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] edible_funk@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

I'm sorry that the concept of not having privacy in public is foreign to you

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 month ago (1 child)

What do you think this post is about? What do you think the main point it's trying to make is?

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[+] edible_funk@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 child)

[deleted]

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Snitching on yourself so hard you had to delete it within 30 minutes, I see. Good job. Slow clap.

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] edible_funk@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 child)

No you dumb fuck I replied to the wrong thread because all you fuckin lemmings are idiots with the reading comprehension of a fucking walnut.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 month ago

Sounds like projection on your part, pal

parent

[–] edible_funk@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 child)

You do not have an expectation of privacy in public and you're really fucking goddamn stupid if you behave in a way that assumes you do have any privacy. I never once actually commented about the implications of internet connected camera glasses, I said you're a fucking moron if you think you have any privacy in public. Learn to read you phenomenal twat.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 month ago (1 child)

Blow a few more vessels and see if it digs you out of that hole you're in

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] edible_funk@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

Oh you're stupid on multiple threads. Profile stalking or just that dumb? Sad little fucker.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 month ago

You're the one profile stalking. You replied to me on both threads. Go fuck yourself.

parent

[–] YawningNostalgia -3 points 1 month ago (1 child)

So obviously beside the point...can you not turn this into Reddit please? I don't own meta glasses or film anyone in public without them being aware. The only situation in which I would, which I've already said I don't, is if I'm alone and concerned for my safety.
And yeah men are more likely to use them for perverted reasons.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 month ago (1 child)

So are we gonna normalize them and say they're okay, or are we gonna say they're an invasion of everyone's privacy and shouldn't be acceptable?

Because you can't have it both ways unless you want to call yourself a hypocrite. This isn't reddit, but that doesn't mean you can flaunt your logical inconsistencies and expect no one to call you out on it.

By the way, I'm firmly in the camp of "these are an invasion of everyone's privacy," but if you wanna argue "well actually they have some uses" then I don't want to hear you crying later when someone uses it to invade your privacy. Don't be so short-sighted.

It's not beside the point at all.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] YawningNostalgia 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

That's not what I said at all. I think they could have uses if someone is camping in the back-country, especially someone from a vulnerable group. I don't think they should be normalized. I said they're attractive, even to non-perverts.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 month ago

It seems you don't know what the word 'normalize' means...

Have fun writing those regulations that somehow ban their use except for if you're camping or a minority

parent

[–] Captainautism@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 month ago

Fucking drives me nuts when people act like they're so technologically savvy by using siri to call people on the phone.

Years ago, I worked with this guy who would purposely leave his office and pace the halls only to stop in my doorway to say, “hey siri, call _____” with a huge fucking smirk on his face!

He was so annoying.

parent

[+] Flames5123@sh.itjust.works -6 points 1 month ago* (1 child)

What the fuck do AirPods have to do with this? Any wireless earbuds are awesome. I can start playing a video on my phone, and it connects. I take a call on my laptop, and it jumps there immediately. I don’t have to fiddle with a cord that constantly gets tangled and then eventually just stops working because it’s been bent in the same spot for 2 years. I can connect my AirPods and my wife’s AirPods to my phone on a plane, and we watch a video together, and I didn’t have to remember to bring my headphone splitter. Wireless earbuds are not the same as a mass surveillance device.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] unitedwithme@lemmy.today 9 points 1 month ago* (2 children)

Dude, you to offense like nobody's business... I'm not dissing on wireless ear buds, I'm specifically calling out Apple brand for the "always active mic" which is a privacy concern in itself. And 2. Its the popularization of trying to make it a normalized thing that everybody wears. It wasn't socially acceptable to otherwise wear them around all the time, but now it's seen as a "status symbol" so now is OK to do..

Go ahead and keep spending exorbitant money on Apple products, they've clearly wrangled you into their ecosystem and I somehow hit a nerve lmao. I get the point to their functionality, too, you don't have to explain magical wireless technology to me, it sounds like you're trying to justify something to yourself.

The pair/brand I own don't have an always-on mic, they don't send data to the Mothership, and they probably sound a whole HELL of a lot better than yours trash apple product 😂

Cracks me up though, you're spending $600+ on 2 SETS of airpods for a (2-4hour?) flight vs a <$10 headphone splitter.. Who you convincing they're great, yourself??

ANYWAY back to my point, I can see Apple trying to release their own version of these glasses and trying to normalize them, and poor fucking saps like you will gobble it up and continue trying to justify it all the same... I bet you have a pair of their $3500 augmented reality headset too...

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 month ago*

Listening for a phrase is not the same as always recording.

parent

[–] Flames5123@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

Calling me offensive because I used “fuck”? It’s called poe’s law. Don’t assume people are mad just because of words. I was just trying to figure out what the heck you meant with AirPods. The always on is for the transparency mode. It’s all on device and not even sent to the phone. AirPods are t even that expensive and we use them for more than just a flight. We have jobs where we listen to music and work with our hands so we don’t get stuck in our cords.

But you’re the one being very extra and aggressive now, even going into name calling, which I never did. Take a step back. This is Lemmy, not Reddit or Xitter. Take a chill pill and engage in the conversation instead of spewing vitriol.

Also, why would I have the AR headset? There’s no use for it. You can’t even play games! 😂

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] unitedwithme@lemmy.today 4 points 1 month ago (1 child)

It read angry and defensive. You made a lot of cases for why they're "so great" like you had to convince more than me. Anyway, I know how they work, I'm a pretty big tech nerd myself, but at no point would I ever use their tech. This is a privacy group, so you can't defend a company that's known for spying on their customers. Apple might push themselves as privacy-focused, but maybe they just keep other "bad actors" from your data while they happily gather as much as they want and ~~share~~ sell to 3rd party partners.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Flames5123@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago* (1 child)

I’m going to need a source on Apple selling your data. Just one source is fine. They do push themselves as security focused, and they are very overpriced for what you’re getting. But I haven’t seen any news or sources of them actually breaking any of their privacy promises. They did give anonymized audio data to a third party contractor to quality grade their “hey siri” detection but this is something the user has to opt into. They have a better track record than Google, and back in 2009 when I was getting into smart phones, those were the only two options.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] unitedwithme@lemmy.today 3 points 1 month ago

Totally understandable, and yes, Apple does have a better track record with consumer/customer data. They've pushed really hard to hang on directly to user data since they have their own ad platform now. They gather the same types of data that Google does, and Google goes to extra lengths to get even more. I get that.

I think it's the verbiage I don't trust in some of their privacy policy:

"## Apple’s Sharing of Personal Data

Apple may share personal data with Apple-affiliated companies, service providers who act on our behalf, our partners, developers, and publishers, or others at your direction. Further, Apple does not share personal data with third parties for their own marketing purposes."

So data IS shared, but not allowed to be used for marketing purposes, so it sounds great at face value, but they leave out what's allowed... Again Apple has their own ad platform.

Cookies and Other Technologies

Apple’s websites, online services, interactive applications, and advertisements may use “cookies” and other technologies such as web beacons.

While they allow you to disable cookies, there's still other tech at work... It later says:

In addition to cookies, Apple uses other technologies that help us achieve similar objectives.

I just don't fully trust it. Apple has A VERY large legal team and they certainly have better wording to sound super great!! They do offer better privacy out of the box and settings to lock down or opt out, yes, 100%. But they do admit several times data is shared, be it personal or non-personal (anonymized).

They also allow Google to still remain the default search engine (for $12b) which then for millions of people all that data is gathered... And you KNOW Apple gets a slice of that data... So while Apple appears to take the high road on this one, I think they're far from innocent. They're allowing other companies to do the legwork for your data while maintaining its "pure" view. inserts Clever_girl.gif

Anyway, sources: https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/

https://fossbytes.com/apple-data-collection-explained/

https://www.wired.com/story/apple-privacy-data-collection/

The gist: data is gathered, data is shared, days is allowed to be stored with 3rd parties "until they're done with it" just don't use it for marketing, that's our space, etc.. They've come a long way, but far from innocent!

parent