The creator of Nearby Glasses made the app after reading 404 Media’s coverage of how people are using Meta’s Ray-Bans smartglasses to film people without their knowledge or consent. “I consider it to be a tiny part of resistance against surveillance tech.”

more at: @feed@404media.co

https://tech.lgbt/@yjeanrenaud/116122129025921096

  • 87Six@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I agree but the biggest defense for this is to always assume you’re being recorded when in public even if you’re not. You never know.

    The issue becomes relevant in private spaces, to me. Nobody with smart glasses is coming into my home.

    • GardenGeek@europe.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Doesn’t this boil down to self-censorship in public? Better not critizise the government in public becaus you never know whos waring smart glasses…

      • MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I agree with the core of your point. I’d like to assert, though, that all people exert some level of self-censorship in public on the basis of the opinions of their neighbors and peers. Having to worry about powerful organizations like governments and megacorps also always being there (instead of just sometimes, or usually) adds a new degree of reason to self-censor, for sure.

        • Donkter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Yes. You should have to censor yourself for neighbors and peers to have a functioning society. You should not have to do it for corporations. The line is pretty cut and dry and we should fight to keep it.

    • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      the biggest defense for this is to always assume you’re being recorded when in public even if you’re not

      So women in July should wear tarps?

      What posible application is there for this CreepTech?

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

        would these help lead to more arrest if assaults were captured on the cameras

        It might also help find lost puppies, but that’s not a good enough reason to give up any additional amounts of privacy to the megacorporations or to a police state.

        • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          56 minutes ago

          Everyone around you has a phone with a camera. Businesses and the government have additional cameras looking all over. The phone camera being less obvious and handsfree seems like an arbitrary choice of where to draw the line

      • TheSeveralJourneysOfReemus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 hours ago

        I agree 100%, but a thought occurred to me…would these help lead to more arrest if assaults were captured on the cameras. It sucks that such an existential threat to privacy could do real good. Forces some moral and ethical issues that techno feudalism is forcing on us, and we aren’t making the choice.

        you should be reading more cyberpunk / scifi literature. There is literally the case for human action and freedom within the machine. And assuming that AI cameras are also the freuquent next step in police states. Do you really want this? Are you allowed to have ambitions outside the machine?

        • yermaw@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          5 hours ago

          I would love for an AI machine to be all knowing and all pervasive. It honestly sounds like it could be great.

          Except definitelt not because we know 100% that nobody could be trusted to be in charge of it.

        • highjayhawk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Ofc I don’t want this. But I look at my wife and daughter and their safety comes first hence the dilemma. And philosophy should be considered as well.

      • JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Those who would give up any measures of Liberty to purchase any amount of temporary Security deserve neither Liberty or Security.