- 5 hours
Wait…does this mean every time someone wearing a meta glass looked at me…rather its camera looked at me, meta stored my face for profiling purposes regardless of me being an user of meta Apps or not?? This is so messed up. Initially I thought that only friends of meta users used to get profiled via face recognition…wtf…but again it’s meta…violated multiple privacy laws and as such…so not a surprise tbh
2 hoursyea, they did that before the glasses too. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/resources/library/media/20180524RES04208/20180524RES04208.pdf
- 4 minutes
On the internet every company does User profiling mainly for advert purposes…its impossible to escape these days but what’s most concerning about glasses was face data was pretty easily made available by the user…still advert and tracking cookies can be blocked…but meta glass camera? Which is basically one of its most highpoint feature? I doubt anyone will heights to block it physically considering that they cost an arm and a leg
- xenomor@lemmy.worldEnglish6 hours
Meta deserves all the scrutiny and scorn it is getting for this terrible project. You know who else deserves scorn? Ray-ban. They hitched their brand to this bullshit and should be held just as accountable.
- Donkter@lemmy.worldEnglish8 hours
Listen Meta, all you have to do is make the technology free and available to everyone, prove you aren’t motivated by profit, use your vast wealth and resources to improve society, and be completely transparent with all your business interactions. Then you wouldn’t be getting all this hate
- skisnow@lemmy.caEnglish10 hours
The starkest signal of the MAGAfication of Silicon Valley isn’t this fairly par-for-the-course spyware tech, but their public response.
A short couple of years ago they would have downplayed the whole thing and peppered a few apologies in, but these days the standard response is attack, attack, attack. Call the journalist a liar, call the journal failing, no need for evidence on either, just as long as you keep attacking.
- webghost0101@sopuli.xyzEnglish11 hours
Meta’s Vice President of Communications Andy Stone complained that Wired waited until the fourth paragraph to note the facial recognition feature was “not enabled,” and doesn’t note until the 16th paragraph that the feature is exploratory.
Why is the code pushes to the customer downloadable app of its an internal experiment.
- 2 hours
If it was “experimental” and “not enabled”, why the fuck did you push it to the totality of the devices’ user base, fuckerberg?
- corey931@lemmy.wtfEnglish10 hours
Yeah, it seems clear to me that they intented to enable it in the future. But of course the CEO left that out barking at someone else instead. “Experimental”, sure. Certainly wasn’t internal anymore. Hypocrite. Tech companies managed to shatter my trust in them. They gambled my customer loyalty away. Now, if I don’t like something, I switch. Byeee
- grainfed@quokk.auEnglish9 hours
Thank goodness for the geeks who go exploring all the tech nooks and crannies to find interesting tech behaviour. We need you.
We’ll keep going - it’s what we do as a hobby and for fun after all :)
- Kekzkrieger@feddit.orgEnglish13 hours
When you see someone wearing those glasses, get your phone out and keep filming their face and what they do all the time. When they ask you what you do say you just keep it to yourself they can trust you.
Only fair to put a mirror on themselves.
- Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.worldEnglish12 hours
Or option B.
Which is to punch them in the face. Which does tend to be effective, but also carries legal risk.
- Paper_Phrog@lemmy.worldEnglish9 hours
Pro tip: Be sure to put a bag over their heads from behind to avoid them filming it.
if the feature was “exploratory” why are they mad? you explored what the reaction would be by having the code behind a feature flag in prod and the response wasn’t good so you scrapped it? seems like you should be glad wired did you a solid by not having you waste engineering hours developing a feature nobody wanted.
Oh, no. They didn’t scrap the code. It’s there, waiting to be deployed again with an obscured name once the dust settles a bit.
Mostly just mad they got caught.
Smart Glasses: looks at Zuck “That’s him! That’s the criminal.”
- lepinkainen@lemmy.worldEnglish14 hours
Why can’t a company do smart glasses with self-hostable or fully local processing?
I’d love a pair but fuck streaming everything I see to a random dude in Nigeria
Self-hosted doesn’t mean “look how nice I am”. When a piece of tech is shit, it’s shit whether it is self-hosted or not.
- lepinkainen@lemmy.worldEnglish5 hours
It’s not about being nice. It’s about me knowing where my data is.
Are you a cybersecurity expert? Can you guarantee that the data you’ll collect with your secret agent glasses won’t end up in the open?
- lepinkainen@lemmy.worldEnglish2 hours
Yes.
Unless someone phyiscally breaks into my house and steals my server. Which would require a very targeted attack which again is WAAY out of scope in my (and everyone else’s) threat model
- very_well_lost@lemmy.worldEnglish14 hours
Well for one thing, it’s creepy and the people around you don’t want to be passively recorded 24/7.
Remember Google Glass? Its users were called “glassholes” for a reason.
- stoy@lemmy.zipEnglish14 hours
Sadly, Meta’s glasses is less obvious, so that term is harder to use accurately.
- 8 hours
That’s why smart glasses with a hidden camera need to be banned by law.
Or include punching people who film you as self defense, might be even more impactful.
- ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.netEnglish13 hours
Because recording people without their consent is creepy AF.
- lepinkainen@lemmy.worldEnglish7 hours
Of course it is. But if I do it locally it’s just me, not some megacorps wage slaves looking at the data.
Mostly my nerd brain would like to go “what is this plant” or “overlay all planes overhead to my screen” 😀
- ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.netEnglish6 hours
There are to separate issues here:
- corporation gathering surveillance data on everyone
- creeps filming women and children
Even if it’s just for you it’s still creepy. You may not record people without consent but we don’t know that. All we see is a camera pointed at us.
- 10 hours
The G2 augmented reality glasses fit that. No camera or microphone.
- lepinkainen@lemmy.worldEnglish7 hours
But I want a camera and a microphone.
I just want to use my own hardware to analyse whatever they’re recording.
