3 ms·
As you point out, the data collection that enables this privacy abomination is the larger problem... ...but not by much. The difference here is that spying wit
by thomassmith65 2y ago
As you point out, the data collection that enables this privacy abomination is the larger problem...
...but not by much. The difference here is that spying with glasses is passive, whereas spying with other devices requires the spy to take some kind of action.
If some stranger wants to identify me using their smart phone, or other portable camera, they need (1) to care enough about me to bother (2) to physically hold up their device (which draws attention, and is socially unacceptable).
But smart glasses, CCTV, and other passive spy devices are much worse: the subjects being spied upon can be spied upon en masse, and get fewer opportunities even to notice they are on camera.
- pk-protect-ai 2y agoThe variety of devices available on the market surpasses your imagination. Meta's glasses use the same cameras that may be embedded elsewhere in hats and clothing. There are smaller and larger cameras. Meta's glasses simply provide a single person with real-time operational feedback. Whoever is spying usually already knows what they are after. I can't grasp why people are not frightened by the fact that their information can be so easily accessed, yet they are concentrating on some specific device (yes, with some additional benefits for the user, though it's not the only device of its kind).