4 ms·
Are there any less obviously aggressive tactics we can use? Wear something that is blinding to the cameras, or something else to obfuscate?
by hightrix 7mo ago
Are there any less obviously aggressive tactics we can use? Wear something that is blinding to the cameras, or something else to obfuscate?
- pluc 7mo agoSlapping a pair of glasses that are recording you, processing your face, sending biometrics and images back to one of the worst privacy offenders on the planet off of the face of someone who is willingly doing all that without asking your permission is a perfectly appropriate reaction. Put your shoulder into it. I'd rather we normalize that than adversarial fashion.. but that's probably what you were looking for.
- hightrix 7mo agoWhile I'd like to agree with you, and do in some cases, there are many cases where this just isn't a feasible approach. For example, a peer coworker has a pair of these. I just don't interact with her while she is wearing them. If my boss were to get a pair there is no way I can justify slapping them off his face.
- miki123211 7mo agoThey're incredibly popular in the blind community, and for good reason. I think even the political activists will be extremely divided on this one. You have privacy on one hand, accessibility and a genuinely life-changing technology on the other.
- tartoran 7mo agoDo blind people not care about data privacy? Most likely they do and should ask for good TOS now while still possible.
- lynx97 7mo agoBlind user here. Reality is, we are so disadvantaged in this world that we will gladly accept any tool that is useful. Almost nobody would ever read the TOS. Its a bit like with cars... Sure, there are some urban exceptions, but truth is, if you ask someone to give up their car, they will laugh you out the door.
- tartoran 7mo agoI'm sorry that you are in this predicament. Many rely on these tools. When something finally works, few are going to walk away because of a long terms of service most of us will never read. That doesn't mean you don't care about privacy though, it just means you are forced into a tradeoff. With AI glasses like the ones Meta is pushing, the device is not just helping you. It is recording. Photos and videos can be sent back to company servers. Reports show that human reviewers can see very private footage users never meant to share. That includes sensitive personal moments. The device is basically an always-on camera tied to a giant data company. If you depend on that device to understand the world, that makes you more vulnerable, not less. If ads, errors, or AI hallucinations start shaping what you hear about your surroundings, that affects your only channel of perception. If your daily life is constantly captured and stored, that affects your autonomy. So yes, many of us will still use the tech. But that is exactly why pushing for strong, clear privacy terms now matters. Accessibility should not mean giving up control over your own life.
- lynx97 7mo agoSure, every interaction in society is a tradeoff... However, I must destroy your dreams. Being disabled almost always means surrendering control over your own life to others. Or, better phrased, constantly fighting to keep control from being taken away from you by external, mostly well meaning, forces. But I get it, really. No need to ELI5. I hope the "you" in your explanation was rethorical... because if it wasn't, I definitely feel talked down to. I read the article we are commenting. I am well aware about the problem of hallucination, especially when image LLMs get used to describe the world. I have even done my own empirical tests to get a feel of the extent of the problem. All my comment was trying to say is, that when it comes to assistive technologies which actually provide value, idiology and privacy concerns pretty much go out the window very very fast, much faster then the average HN reader might assume. That is why Meta glasses are very popular amongst the visually impaired. Or do you seriously suggest they (we) are all so naiv as to not know what kind of deal we just struck with the devil? Full disclosure: I don't own Meta glasses (yet), but I know some users and observe rollout amongst assistive technology resellers.
- numpad0 7mo agoHigh end phones these days run smaller LLMs sorta fine.
- samtheprogram 7mo agoAnd?
- deaux 7mo agoThey shouldn't be divided, they should (wo)man up and say the thing they well know out loud: the harms to society are not worth it, the societal consequences of Meta being in control of this are severe and will, as always, hurt the weak and poor the most. Unfortunately the blind community will have to wait a few more years to get a local version, which is guaranteed to appear with how things are going.
- quantified 7mo agoYeah, this could be the "lost dog" approach that Ring was trying. I feel for the blind. But in weighing their concern against everyone else's... they should get a different supplier.
- tdeck 7mo agoI don't have much of an objection to Blind people wearing these, but there are all kinds of things that are OK to do with a disability that aren't OK to do if you don't need special accomodation.
- lynx97 7mo agoAccessibility never really prevented anyone to do shit which breaks it. Remember CAPTCHAs? (and I am blind, I know what I am talking about)
- tartoran 7mo agoYou could always say you're not comfortable being processed and uploaded to Meta. If they wear the glasses at their desks replacing their screen , that's fair game.
- nakedpwr 7mo agoLololol that's really good.
- lacunary 7mo agodoes your workplace allow recording coworkers without their permission?
- hightrix 7mo agoIn the office? No. But at lunch or outside of the office is not controlled by work place policy.
- dylan604 7mo agoI don't think you could justify slapping them off of anybody's face unless you really just like to assault people.
- deaux 7mo agoStreaming someone live to Meta, potentially the most evil company in the world (not "per employee" but by "damage done per day") without their permission, especially in a place where this is not at a expected - like an office rather than a football stadium - is great justification. It ticks all the boxes.
- dylan604 7mo agoYeah, it ticks all of the boxes that HR loves to tick before firing you with cause
- DrewADesign 7mo agoIt’s also at least simple assault, and quite possibly aggravated assault on someone that has a sophisticated camera pointed at your face that’s sending biometrics, images, and probably video back to one of the worst privacy offenders on the planet. Feels great to say it. Would feel great to do it. Morally defensible to anyone that knows anything about privacy if the person isn’t low-vision or something. In reality, a terrifically stupid idea.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- diath 7mo ago[flagged]
- juleiie 7mo agoThis is trolling at best. If you touch a wrong person, you will not live to tell the tale. People aren’t some NPC in a video game my friend. This isn’t a movie. Even I, average looking girl, walk with a knife everywhere and I am trained how to use it to kill, it’s muscle memory. In US, a lot of people stroll around with guns.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- diath 7mo ago> Even I, average looking girl, walk with a knife everywhere and I am trained how to use it to kill I can guarantee you that if you ever end up getting sucker punched by an adult male, you will at best get dazed and not know what's going on, and at worst knocked out cold. The knife is giving you a false illusion of safety. It would only ever be really effective if you were the attacker that pulled out the knife on a victim with the intention to inflict harm. The first to strike usually comes out on top.
- __MatrixMan__ 7mo agoI would acquit
- listeria 7mo agoHave you tried bringing it up with HR? If you explain why you try to avoid her while she's wearing them, they might ask her to stop wearing them to work. Meta's own guidelines[1] say that you should "Power off in private spaces." You can't always tell if you're being recorded since they can be tampered with to disable the LED. And from what I gather, the LED only serves to indicate of video recording, and not necessarily audio. [1]: https://www.meta.com/ai-glasses/privacy/ https://www.meta.com/ai-glasses/privacy/
- Aeglaecia 7mo agowhile noble, basically any western system will punish such behaviour as assault ... perhaps this point could be expressed as a prefererence for the law to change such that deprivation of privacy becomes a valid self defense argument ... in the meantime there do exist passive defenses such as face masks designed to interfere with facial recognition
- scotty79 7mo agoIt's also an assault, with intrinsic video evidence of the crime committed.
- juleiie 7mo agoExactly, not only you agree to any sort of harm (potentially fatal) in return by any sort of weapons that person has you can’t see, they can just do nothing and record you and you have problems with police and serve short sentence even. This is all children talk here. Seriously people stop being so edgy on the internet and what you wouldn’t do. Use your god damn brain
- jmye 7mo agoYes, cops will jump right on someone getting slapped. That definitely sounds like reality. Good call. Do you guys ever like, go outside?
- phil21 7mo agoPlenty of places in the US are not large dense urban cities, and the cops will absolutely respond to a battery call. Like every time. Plenty of places this would be the most interesting call of the day for a police force and you'd have 5 squad cars show up. Other places won't even bother responding to the call. Your mileage will greatly vary.
- juleiie 7mo agoYeah sure you are going to start slapping people on the street mr badass guy. That’s all cool and fun until someone pulls a knife on you. Look, the previous commenter has legitimate question how can we do it for real. Not just speed run to the gates of afterlife after touching the wrong person.
- quantified 7mo agoFirst wearers are more likely to have a concealed carry. They have the money, and are from the right demographics.
- juleiie 7mo agoYeah in any case it will end badly for you if not the first time then eventually. Who lives by the sword dies by the sword. It just takes one unlucky time where the other person doesn’t subscribe to the idea of proportional response or has military training with muscle memory that takes over.
- jmye 7mo agoIt’s weird how y’all are so desperate to catastrophize responses, and then want to call other people “internet badasses”. Look in the mirror next time you tell someone they’re going to get shot, bud. You’re the problem.
- juleiie 7mo agoWhen stranger assaults you, every person with some practical military training is going to want to neutralise target as fast as possible because this is the survival strategy that is hammered into your muscle memory. There is no thinking or musing whether they just want to slap you or I don’t know what. You don’t know your attacker and their intentions. This is the real world. I don’t know why you would think this is some kind of stupid game to go around and slap people. It will cause problems.
- 7mo ago
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- WD-42 7mo agoTake out your phone, hold it up, and record them back. Get others to do it too for extra comical effect. Honestly I’d love to hear from someone who actually owns one of these things how doing this is any different than using the glasses.
- noah_buddy 7mo agoThis seems like the most obvious, legal, and direct way to stigmatize use of these glasses. Put a phone up to their face and say “I might be recording you.”
- WD-42 7mo agoExactly. If you do this and the wearer says something like “I’m not even recording bro” the perfect response is “I’m not either”
- transfer92 7mo agoand turn on the flashlight while recording
- dylan604 7mo agoI've always wanted to sew very bright IR LEDs into a hat that would blind a camera. Your face would naturally be shadowed by the bill of the hat as that's its intended purpose. The IR would hopefully make the camera want to adjust shutter speed and gain/ISO while assuming a fixed aperture lens.
- skillina 7mo agoDepends what your threat model is, but this will literally turn you into a glowing signal that says "hey, look at me!" Your face might be protected but anyone manually reviewing security footage will be paying way more attention.
- dylan604 7mo agoWhen did we change the subject from fucking the Meta to hiding from security cameras?
- 542354234235 7mo agoMeta isn't the only camera that might be pointed at you at any given time.
- jim33442 7mo agoThere was a fictional version of this in the Artemis Fowl books. My old camcorder picked up a lot of IR outside of visible range, but I think newer sensors are much less susceptible to this.
- kungp 7mo agoWasn't there something about how the LIDAR in self-driving cars destroys camera sensors?
- 1659447091 7mo agohttps://old.reddit.com/r/MVIS/comments/1i6zryi/reports_of_1550_nm_lidar_damaging_camera_sensors/ https://old.reddit.com/r/MVIS/comments/1i6zryi/reports_of_15... Now to find a way to make 1550nm lidar glasses to burn out any cameras pointed directly at your face
- Bender 7mo agoEmail corporate security and the chief privacy officer with logs of who is wearing spy glasses. Remind them Facebook controls where that data is stored and who has access to it. Ask how to respond to auditors inquiring about it leave off, "in the future audits". - Or - Walk around with a vlogger camera that has a large microphone. If anyone takes issue, say "I'm the 5th person here walking around recording everyone today. The others are using a spy camera in their glasses." - Or - Borrow a pair of them when in public at a restaurant and loudly say, "Oh my god! These AI smart glasses really do remove everyone's clothing, even on the children!" be ready to run. _________________ Only do these things if you typically rock the boat regardless. i.e. often try and fail to get fired or arrested.
- 1659447091 7mo ago> Are there any less obviously aggressive tactics we can use? If you are in the US, and hopefully in a state that is open to blocking this sort of thing, be very vocal and persistent with your state reps about the issue. Get others to join. I am curious if this will be legal within the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act or a couple other states with similar laws
- IG_Semmelweiss 7mo agowater to the face ? Would that work ? Seems benign enough that its not going to earn you a visit to the judge, but should disable most electronics, no?
- DonHopkins 7mo agoWho of us hasn't accidentally performed a spit take of a mouth full of beer into someone's face?