• Talentless Sculptor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      55
      ·
      4 days ago

      I thought it was a good idea to record every interaction with the police without them knowing that you did so. Are we now saying that wearing a hidden camera in public is bad?

      • stoy@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        46
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        The US police doesn’t even care if people are overtly filming them killing people without cause, they still get away with it.

        How would a “hidden” camera change this?

        Also, it is fairly easy to see the camera lenses on smart glasses, they could easily find a way to knock the glasses off your face and step on them to look like a plausible accident.

        You take them to court, the police department pays, best case, the police is transferred to another district.

        It is far better to have a dashcam with a fisheye lens in your car, it is easily overlooked and and has a large FOV, while also picking up sound.

        • 87Six@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          The US police doesn’t even care if people are overtly filming them killing people without cause, they still get away with it.

          I see your point and agree but this part is not that clear cut.

          Cameras help, they just aren’t 100% effective against all cops, and against all types of abuse.

          But the guy you’re replying to did miss the whole…whole-whole. He crazy.

        • Talentless Sculptor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          4 days ago

          The US police doesn’t even care if people are overtly filming them killing people without cause

          Not true. They hate it.

          they still get away with it.

          The individual police officer might, but filming them is for your protection from a wrongful conviction and to secure damages should they break the law during the arrest.

          Also, it is fairly easy to see the camera lenses on smart glasses, they could easily find a way to knock the glasses off your face and step on them to look like a plausible accident.

          This sounds far more contrived than knocking a phone out of your hand.

          You take them to court, the police department pays, best case, the police is transferred to another district.

          A few hundred thousand dollars is a lot of money to most people. Maybe not to you though.

          It is far better to have a dashcam with a fisheye lens in your car, it is easily overlooked and and has a large FOV, while also picking up sound.

          Sure, but when you are a pedestrian, this isn’t an option.

            • Talentless Sculptor@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              3 days ago

              I don’t use them, but if I lived in a country where the police habitually abuse innocent citizens and get away with it, I would carry a camera on my person 24/7.

              Baseless insinuation in an ineffective attempt to smear, not withstanding.

  • 87Six@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Thank fucking god.

    Wearing those should allow anybody to punch your face without law-based repercussions

  • Alpha71@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Nice to see no one learned anything from Google Glass. This is why we’re fucked as a species.

    • TIEPilot@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      I got the first invites and I soul searched and bowed out, I offered my code to a few close friends and they saw what I was talking about and moved on.

      Its late and I’m full on run on sentences.

  • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 days ago

    I’ve worn split wireframe glasses since I was in middle school. I’ve never worn thick plastic rimmed glasses. For most of my life, I didn’t know this is why, but it is now.

    • TIEPilot@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      Works out for you and no shade I’m happy for you :)

      I’ve worn wires, but I’m a rough guy. They don’t hold up for me. I will stress for ME.

      I also like the look of heavy frames, military they called them “BC’s”. Call me old, er old school but its my jam.

      • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Birth Control Glasses. Spectacles so ugly you can’t get laid wearing them. +2 perception, -11 charisma.

        I’ve got a scar across the bridge of my nose because of my wireframes. I was working as both an instructor and company mechanic at a small flight school, I needed to take some precision measurement of something on the engine, so I went to the toolbox, got a pair of calipers, and I was setting them up as I was walking to the plane, I ran slam into the trailing edge of the wing at eye level. Knocked my ass to the floor, and as I got up I realized I had blood running down my nose, because the wing had pushed my glasses into my face so hard the wire frame cut me.

        Do you know what a static wick is? See, airplanes are prone to gathering static electricity, which will build up around the airplane and cause Saint Elmo’s Fire. Which wasn’t a problem back in the days of tall ships, it is a problem in the days of modern avionics. So airplanes will often have these antenna or frayed wire-like structures attached to their trailing edges to bleed off static electricity. And judging by the scratch I left on that wing flap, my eye socket missed one by about 5 inches.

        • TIEPilot@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Jesus, glad you didn’t lose an eye! That it, I’m sticking w/ my BC’s!

          And funny you bring up static wicks, I worked an antenna farm years ago w/ a TV tower. We had salt wells and static wicks all over the place!

  • grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    (Although TBH, I would really love to have a wearable computer that was fully open source and local. Unfortunately, big tech going full Orwell has ruined the idea permanently.)

    • TIEPilot@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      Oh I would love a computer on my face to that isn’t part of some BS like meta. How fun would it be to look at an object and ask “what is it” and it can find the answer. On a sidebar giving you real time health updates like heart rate, O2 levels, ect. Oh theres a storm rolling in, good to know I’ll roll my cars windows up.

      Or my fav, your approaching a flock camera, here is an alternate route.

      Plus news/rss/emails all in a AR setting.

      But we all know this is probably never going to happen because these scumbags want to monetize/teach their failing AI to make a buck.

      • abigscaryhobo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 days ago

        Honestly this is one of the biggest bummers for me. I love new tech that comes out, but every time I see something my first thought isn’t “oh boy I wonder how I can use this” it’s “ah great I wonder how that’s gonna gather data on me”

        It sucks, the “user data” market has taken all the whimsy out of tech for me.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        I had high hopes for Google Glass because of the previous work of the GA Tech professor who led it, until it came out. That thing was a regression in both privacy and functionality compared to his self-built wearable computers from the '90s or 2000s.

      • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Oh I would love a computer on my face to that isn’t part of some BS like meta. How fun would it be to look at an object and ask “what is it” and it can find the answer. On a sidebar giving you real time health updates like heart rate, O2 levels, ect. Oh theres a storm rolling in, good to know I’ll roll my cars windows up.

        Tbh, I don’t see how this is significantly better than a smartphone or smartwatch, besides the gimmick factor of having a HUD

        • Axolotl@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          That’s only for the gimmick factor of having an HUD, but now that i think about it, it could be useful for people with some problems that need constant monitoring or smth, like they get a pop up “the sugar in your blood is too low, remember to eat a candy” or smth

          • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            like they get a pop up “the sugar in your blood is too low, remember to eat a candy” or smth

            A notification on a smartwatch with sound could easily do this tbh

            • Axolotl@feddit.it
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              Yeah but they aren’t very good usually, they also don’t allow you to use an analogic watch which is way better for some people, even just for the aesthetic, and you can easly not notice it and the sound is not viable in some scenarios

                • Axolotl@feddit.it
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  13 hours ago

                  Uuh because now you can wear the analogic clock if you prefer and have just a pop in the corner of your vision which is very noticeable but without disturbing anyone around ya?

    • TIEPilot@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      I think I would rather have AR glasses then glasses w/ a camera.

      Yeah more I think about it the more I can get behind that.

          • Thorry@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            3 days ago

            A HUD and AR are something different tho.

            A HUD is just a display you can look at while keeping your focus on something else. My car has that, it has no relation to the outside world, it’s just a display.

            With AR the information presented is placed within the world around you. Using a camera and motion tracking, it can place stuff in relation to real stuff around you. Think Pokemon-Go.

  • hushable@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    4 days ago

    At least two major events that happen in my city have announced a full ban on the pervert glasses

  • unitedwithme@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    4 days ago

    Good. Cuz if I see you recording and I ask you to stop, you get one warning… I won’t hesitate to punch you in the face and break those obnoxious glasses on your face if you argue. Hey maybe you’ll go viral 😅

      • unitedwithme@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Most likely a ticket and court appearance.

        I’m telling you, Zuck aka Zuck the Cuck is obsessed with watching people. First, Meta buys Oculus in a really odd/weird move for the company, as AR/VR grows slightly popular, mostly niche. The partnership with Rayban shows they’re really more so just for data gathering, eavesdropping, spying, invasion of privacy, getting there juicy gossip that isn’t posted to social media, intimate moments between 2 people (which could include underage users too), and other likely more sinister purposes I haven’t thought of.

        Meta is the least likely company to give a shit about any one individual as a person, and it’s all about “engagement” and obsession of use of their platform. If someone records me, in a state that’s a 2-party consent state for audio/video recording, and they do not comply, I would be swift to take action. Meta doesn’t care about laws or policy, they’ll push any blame to the users for needing to check with local laws, etc, and find any other scapegoat possible like always. “It’s never their fault” duh.

          • unitedwithme@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            You can record video, but you need consent for audio, or it needs to be posted somewhere for petiole to be aware. Most dash cams or security cameras can omit audio for this reason.

              • unitedwithme@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                Basically. If you’re not recorded by a perv, you’re recorded by dozens of businesses as you drive by or walk by. Where I work, I personally installed our 100+ camera systems.

  • jaschen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    2 days ago

    I have it and 99.9% of the time I’m just listening to music. I only record video or take a photo of things I would have normally taken with a phone like candid photos of my kids out something interesting I want to research later.

    Some of us use the glasses as intended.

    Don’t make some it seem like all of us are creepy. The mass majority are not.

    • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      The problem is you don’t decide when your camera is running, Meta does. Even if you’re not doing the creepy shit that other people are doing, it’s still somewhat invasive to everyone you look at.

    • Fluke@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Your ignorance of the root problem does you no favours.

      The world at large does not want to be part of Meta’s privacy invading dataset. By wearing them and pointing that camera around, you are forcing that on everyone around you. Meta are using that camera and sucking up data at all times.

      This is before we even get to the problems you allude to being accused of.

    • BrickEater@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      IDGAF, they’re creepy because fucking Meta makes them and they have cameras that I garuntee they’re scanning 24/7, whether you think so or not. You’re a nerd for buying them and you make people uncomfortable just by having them on.

    • belgium_is_a_valid_country@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      “I would have normally taken with a phone” so you recognise there is something not very normal about glasses with cameras correct? Consoomers will consoom anything they’re told to.

  • homes@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    4 days ago

    I was living in NYC when Google Glass first premiered. Within three or four days, almost every restaurant, every shop, and certainly every bar and club had a sign that said “Google glass forbidden! Anyone wearing Google glass will be banned for life!“

    I didn’t see many people wearing them, but when I did, it wouldn’t be long before I saw some random person just punch the fuck out of that person, or grab the headset off of the person’s face and just stomp it, and then just start screaming at the person who was wearing them until they ran away, while everyone nearby cheered them on.

    And every time, I felt that they deserved that— because they did.

    With all of these secret spyware sunglasses that Meta is pushing out today? I fully expected people being beat to death with baseball bats, or being shot in the face with guns. I’m actually quite glad that people are learning their lessons now before they are just being fucking murdered in the streets. But if that’s what it takes for people to stop wearing these sunglasses, not spy on people in record them without their permission, then so be it.

    Listen up, you entitled assholes. You wear these stupid spyglasses in public, and you deserve every shred of bodily harm and violence that you get coming to you. And if it takes every single person who puts them on their face being torn apart in the streets and dying horrific death until a long gets past banning them forever, then please please please make that happen. People need to learn that their personal entitlement will cost them their lives if it steps hard enough on others that the others fight back. And we others? We need to learn how to fight back hard enough to make them stop.

  • quick_snail@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Now do cell phones.

    Honestly the hot mic you carry in your pocket that can be used as a wire to record every conversation is more invasive

    • Axolotl@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      That’s kind of a different matter, those stupid glasses aren’t as widespread as phones, while we can prevent glassholes becoming the norm, we can’t prevent people from using their phones, it’s more effective to ask politicians to make regulations or bring companies in court than smash every phone

      You must think of the most effective strategy not the most obvious or the one that seems the fastest

    • fonix232@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Pretty funny that the big privacy promoters downvote these comments all the time.

      It’s perfectly okay to spy on them, apparently, as long as you do it in a way they don’t deem “unfashionable”.