All I’m saying is last time this tech trend came around, enough people who had a problem with it took drastic actions that directly affected the popularity of wearing a spycam on your face.
Wouldn’t surprise or upset me if history repeated itself.
Its not. I wish we lived in a world where we could be trusted with things like this, but we dont.
I really want a camera on my face and a HUD so I can live life more like a video game with screenshots, but we as a species have shown time and time again that we can’t behave.
Look, taking such glasses into a locker room is a problem. But someone wearing them in public is not. Anyone punching someone who does that should be taken to jail, simple as that.
I’d say there are some valid use cases. Like sports? Biking, skiing, anywhere you might use a GoPro. This might work for sports where it is impractical to wear a GoPro.
Also if they did this right, if it had a decent hud and zoom, this could be really helpful for the visually impaired or for other disabilities or medical conditions. That’s where these would be really helpful to society. But they never focus on that kind of shit. Instead it’s tech bros who want to sell this as a gimmick people can record themselves fucking, or stupid shit in the bar for their TikTok.
If you think something is wrong then, unless that risk places you at actual risk of harm, you can have that conversation - in public forums, at the ballot box, with your political representatives. If, rather, you want to dictate what you think is right on everyone, with threat of violence then that is something else.
nothing is being dictated. surveillance is violence. if you harm me, maybe i will reduce that harm, also using violence. fuck around and find out logic.
The Gestapo, known for using violence to suppress the activities of those they don’t like without allowing the public to come to a democratic decision on the matter? Interesting.
Amid a second Trump presidency that is going very poorly is truly a wild time to start crowing about a person’s rightful freedom to be dumb on purpose.
violence is the answer against people who already commit violence. reducing your sense of privacy and safety is violence. not to mention that this data could be used for ICE’s benefit, which would even add physical violence.
Filming in public is not a form of violence in and of itself. Have you ever noticed that the public is called “public”, which is the opposite of “private”?
sharing that information with facebook is the violence. i don’t care if you take a photo and print it out to have it in a photo album. i care when i am in a big tech database, or even worse, an intelligence agency database. not that the two are very separate.
That’s a twisted view on the definition of violence… Anyhow, how would you distinguish between people filming for journalistic purposes, people filming and sending it to Meta, and people filming for other reasons? How would you decide who deserves your violence?
if i feel uncomfortable being filmed i will make myself heard, first nonviolently, then maybe with a bit of physical pressure. if I don’t even get to know when i am being filmed that’s intensely devious.
But violence isn’t the answer. And certainly not to people doing legal stuff in public. Wearing a Google Glass in private is different though.
Violence is SO often the answer.
All I’m saying is last time this tech trend came around, enough people who had a problem with it took drastic actions that directly affected the popularity of wearing a spycam on your face.
Wouldn’t surprise or upset me if history repeated itself.
Wouldn’t surprise me either. But it’s a hugely illogical reaction.
You can make the claim that it’s immoral or something, but you cannot claim it’s illogical.
Its not. I wish we lived in a world where we could be trusted with things like this, but we dont.
I really want a camera on my face and a HUD so I can live life more like a video game with screenshots, but we as a species have shown time and time again that we can’t behave.
Id rather nobody have one.
Look, taking such glasses into a locker room is a problem. But someone wearing them in public is not. Anyone punching someone who does that should be taken to jail, simple as that.
What about if we jail the people who wear spycams in public first? Then there won’t be any violence.
And would you make an exception for journalistic purposes? Serious question.
I’d say there are some valid use cases. Like sports? Biking, skiing, anywhere you might use a GoPro. This might work for sports where it is impractical to wear a GoPro. Also if they did this right, if it had a decent hud and zoom, this could be really helpful for the visually impaired or for other disabilities or medical conditions. That’s where these would be really helpful to society. But they never focus on that kind of shit. Instead it’s tech bros who want to sell this as a gimmick people can record themselves fucking, or stupid shit in the bar for their TikTok.
But how do you draw the line between good and bad use cases? Even trying to draw that line brings you on a fast lane to totalitarianism.
You can license journalists, same way we do automobile drivers.
How is it illogical if it worked? It might be immoral, but there’s a clear through-line of cause and effect.
It’s illogical because you’re being recorded for far more nefarious purposes anyways.
There’s fists to go around, guy
It’s never illogical to want less of a bad thing.
We don’t like those methods either. And?
Humans are illogical in most cases. It’s something you have to put up with when living in a society.
Just because its legal doesn’t mean its right
If you think something is wrong then, unless that risk places you at actual risk of harm, you can have that conversation - in public forums, at the ballot box, with your political representatives. If, rather, you want to dictate what you think is right on everyone, with threat of violence then that is something else.
Surveillance is a form of violence that those wearing the glasses are imposing on us.
You need to look up “violence” in the dictionary.
nothing is being dictated. surveillance is violence. if you harm me, maybe i will reduce that harm, also using violence. fuck around and find out logic.
You need to look up “violence” and “harm” in the dictionary.
If you wear this, you’re an agent of the gestapo.
The Gestapo, known for using violence to suppress the activities of those they don’t like without allowing the public to come to a democratic decision on the matter? Interesting.
No, you’re like one of the folks ratting out their neighbors to the gestapo.
He won’t even know he’s doing it. Why would anyone assume wearers have any control on these smartglasses and what they upload?
No I know what you were saying.
See, what’s “right” is a (shared) opinion. One of the consequences of living in a free country is that other people can have their own opinions.
Amid a second Trump presidency that is going very poorly is truly a wild time to start crowing about a person’s rightful freedom to be dumb on purpose.
deleted by creator
The smartest thing you did today was delete that comment. What happened, did you have an epiphany?
I realized arguing with a dipshit like you was beneath me
No that’s not what happened. You realised justifying physical violence with your personal feelings and beliefs isn’t right.
👶🍼
Have fun beating up journalists! I’m glad you aren’t a politician.
violence is the answer against people who already commit violence. reducing your sense of privacy and safety is violence. not to mention that this data could be used for ICE’s benefit, which would even add physical violence.
I agreed with you up to this statement, no Karen, getting filmed in public is not violence, even if it’s concealed, Jesus Christ
Filming in public is not a form of violence in and of itself. Have you ever noticed that the public is called “public”, which is the opposite of “private”?
sharing that information with facebook is the violence. i don’t care if you take a photo and print it out to have it in a photo album. i care when i am in a big tech database, or even worse, an intelligence agency database. not that the two are very separate.
That’s a twisted view on the definition of violence… Anyhow, how would you distinguish between people filming for journalistic purposes, people filming and sending it to Meta, and people filming for other reasons? How would you decide who deserves your violence?
if i feel uncomfortable being filmed i will make myself heard, first nonviolently, then maybe with a bit of physical pressure. if I don’t even get to know when i am being filmed that’s intensely devious.
You can’t force people to act on you’re subjective feeling of being uncomfortable. Can’t.
We can by making it illegal. I mean, what other purpose do laws serve?
people shouldn’t make others uncomfortable.
That’s unenforceable.
Removed by mod
When the law abandons the people, the law of the jungle returns.
One of those people
?
A loser
Are you calling me a loser? If so, would you care explaining why you consider me a loser?