3 ms·

I had the same thought. As far as I can tell, they are leaning on the ability to pause recording at any time, meaning that in all-party consent states, it's up

I had the same thought. As far as I can tell, they are leaning on the ability to pause recording at any time, meaning that in all-party consent states, it's up to the user to disclose that they are employing a recording device. That seemingly defeats the point of the device in many situations where the default state should be off. I would most benefit from something like this in public situations where I'm meeting a lot of people, but it'd be impractical to use it that way where I live.

micimize 3y ago
That would be disappointing. The way I've always figured this would work is to just record the wearer using voice recognition and filter out everyone else unless some consent phrase is heard.
- spicybright 3y ago
  That would be the ideal way, but from the use cases on the site it doesn't seem to be the intended use. My prediction is typical move fast break things tech bro culture. Release a product to everyone that is illegal in most states, wait for people to get hurt by it and care enough to complain, withdraw the product from the problem areas. The fact they're so vague on who is recorded means they don't actually care, or at best don't have a solution yet to the problem.
- IshKebab 3y ago
  Do you have to say it again every 5 minutes though?