9 ms·
Meta's ships facial recognition on smart glasses
- panzi 4mo agoHow many ships does Meta have?
- gizajob 4mo agoThis company is so beyond creepy and disgusting.
- everdrive 4mo agoDisgusting. Meta does not care about the harm they do so long as they make money.
- attila-lendvai 4mo agoi'm afraid it's about much more than just money... it's about retaining power/dominance over the very game that is being played. (i.e. if you control the money printer, then all you care about is that your subjects continue playing. fb is just one cog in a big machine.)
- gigel82 4mo agoFudge... we can de-flock all we want but if naive people walk around with the portable surveillance cameras on their face, there's nothing we can do about that. We need privacy regulation...
- jondwillis 4mo agoI don’t think it’s reasonable to think that privacy regulation is coming with the current admin and weak “opposition”, and lack of capacity to care or understand the stakes by the populace. We need some very effective political organizing, yesterday. And normalized, cheap, scramble suits wouldn’t hurt either.
- jimt1234 4mo agoThe US courts have almost always held that anything in public can be recorded. The only expectations of privacy relevant to 'smart glasses' that the courts recognize, I think, are gonna be restrooms and your own home. I guess what I'm getting at is I don't expect regulation or the courts to do anything about the privacy and recording issues. IMHO, the only potential regulation might be around how the recorded data is handled, but honestly, I don't expect anything there, either. I mean, apparently, the US DHS wants to build their own 'smart glasses' to record and do facial recognition for ICE.
- gigel82 4mo agoI think we need legislation. The "no expectations of privacy" probably was ok when little old ladies were spending time outside their home watching passerbys, but not when everyone's movements are tracked and saved by fully autonomous systems.
- ncr100 4mo agoYes, our rights are being narrowed, and billionaires including Meta executives are collaborating with the increasingly authoritarian US government's executive, in my understanding. I recently read in a couple of articles and saw a video, of US ICE agents obnoxiously taunted protesters during their manhunt activities, saying, "we now know who you are," referring to the agent's cell phones who they are using to record the immediate-area protest activity, and apparently collecting faces on preloaded apps. Rhetorically, what's to stop the US ICE from requesting, and the authoritarian-administration-friendly billionaire executive leaders granting, special editions of the Meta glasses? Or, requesting for national security reasons, which is literally what ICE's mandate is, requesting all of the databases of PII laden facial recognition social networking in the real world, of regular citizen owned Meta smart glasses?
- miltonlost 4mo agoHope they get sued out of existence for this by Illinois. The biodata stored and used only serves authoritarians.
- KaiserPro 4mo agoFormer Facebook wanker, who worked in research. 1) we were always told and legal always pushed back hard on anything face detecting.(ie haar cascade "this is a face" let alone actual this is dave/sally) 2) the FTC would audit us to make sure we weren't doing that kind of stuff 3) all of the research prototypes had inbuilt/inline face removers up until 2024(I left after that so I don't know when/if that changed) 3.1) One of the very first things I worked on was face removal, it was a central core of the entire fucking project. Like if we didn;t have any of those constraints we'd have been 2 years ahead. 4) Stella is the name for v1 rayban stories, so its very odd that they get the update when they've not had any new features since for a long time(unless I am mistaken).
- KaiserPro 4mo agonow, I will say that Boz was pushing to have facial recognition when I was were, and some of the early storyboards for XROS were pretty reilant on it (ie in an office having the sims like diamonds above your head that indicated who you were and if you were busy) I assumed that Zuck said no because he'd had enough time with the lawyer and the FTC sniffing about to not bother. However the glasses based AI lifelog stuff (which was basically a really effective personal assistant) would be a lot more effective if it could use facial recognition (we weren't allowed to use speaker diarization as that would allow us to record individual audio from users and recognise them like with facial recognition)
- giobox 4mo agoI know a few folks who work in FTC compliance roles at Meta. I don't think the wider nerd-sphere appreciates the extent to which the FTC regulates Meta following the consent order after their privacy scandals of the 2010s, or the sheer number of roles within Meta now working only on FTC related compliance. I'm sure Zuck is no doubt desperate to ramp it down. > https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2019/07/ftc-imposes-5-billion-penalty-sweeping-new-privacy-restrictions-facebook https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2019/07/...
- ninininino 4mo agoPure speculation, probably they finally figured out the correct legal ToS and privacy policy and everything else that made them feel confident + some regulatory/lawmaker discussions reached a certain point that they finally decided they could do it? Does that add up?
- micromacrofoot 4mo agothey finally wore down all the people internally who were against this
- pesus 4mo agoOr they all left or were fired. It's safe to assume anyone still working there at this point in time after everything they've done is in favor of this.
- pesus 4mo agoThis is incredibly creepy and invasive, and should be outlawed, frankly. There is no legitimate reason for this to exist. My only hope is regular Wayfarers aren't completely tainted by these creep glasses having the same design, but it may be too late.
- Morromist 4mo agoSmartglasses, NFTs, getting ai to write your emails, always talking to Alexa, taking photos of everything constantly for social media. People who do these things must think the tech makes them more likable and interesting. But, in fact, I immediately deeply dislike these people and would never want to be friends with them. Its a paradox. Its actually like watching a dude pissing themselves in public and thinking "Ah yeah, I'm covered in pee now! I'm so cool, look how jealous those non-pissers are!"
- endemic 4mo agoI had the exact same thought about the brand crashing due to association with Facebook. Gotta juice them numbers, I guess.
- kstrauser 4mo agoI'm in the position to make security policies at work, and one of them is that no smart glasses are allowed in the office. We will not be having workers aiming Facebook glasses at our screens showing confidential information. And along those lines, I can think of damn few scenarios where I'd be OK with someone using face recognition against me. Restaurants? It's not Facebook's business to know where I like to eat, presumably to sell ads to show to me. Music clubs? They don't need to know what I listen to. Anything vaguely resembling a public bathroom? Fuck right off with that. Public sidewalks? I don't want them tracking who I spend time talking to. No, I can't really think of any situation where I'd be remotely OK with this being used. To be blunt, I kinda hope this quickly turns not into just a public shaming against people wearing public spyware, but a situation where people are physically afraid to be caught wearing them outside. I think the branch of future possibilities where it's called out as antisocial behavior to poison public spaces like this would be a happier world than one where it becomes common behavior. Edit: In before the "do you ban cell phone cameras at work, too?" unclever gotcha: Yes. Yes, we'd definitely ban people spending the whole day holding their cell phone cameras up to their screens to record their work. We don't share confidential info with anyone other than vendors we've vetted and contracted with. If I walked by a desk and saw someone recording, I would pull them aside and explain why they're on thin ice.
- monkpit 4mo agoTo make matters worse, I’ve seen threads where people with these glasses discuss how to circumvent/disable the “now recording” light, so people won’t know when they’re active.
- kstrauser 4mo ago[flagged]
- RobotToaster 4mo agoThat's still common assault.
- j45 4mo agoI wonder if people held their phones in the face of people recording with glasses if they'd be ok with it.
- Lapsa 4mo ago[dead]
- footy 4mo ago_Careless People_ should be required reading for anyone buying this crap.
- attila-lendvai 4mo agoi was hoping that it's a good book to suggest to the "i have nothing to hide" folk... sadly, it's "only" about the sickos at fb. don't get me wrong, it's a good thing that it's written, but hardly anyone needs it who lived through the past few years with an open eye...
- Cider9986 4mo agoI have a feeling people using these don't read many books.
- ChicagoDave 4mo agoThe number of times those get grabbed of someone’s face and stomped on will be greater than zero. And businesses will have signs for No guns/spyglasses.
- hallway_monitor 4mo agoAt what point does civil disobedience become justified? Expected even? Also let's be clear - this is not violence, not assault, it is simple destruction of property.
- evilduck 4mo agoI don't think you could plausibly do this and only catch a property crime charge. If you're caught, forcefully removing worn objects from another person will almost certainly catch you a misdemeanor battery charge in most US jurisdictions. I'm no lawyer and things vary by location, but clothing is generally considered an extension of the person and usually touching their worn objects constitutes physical contact with the person themselves. Doing so with intent of committing criminal mischief, vandalism, or felony property damage will get all of them thrown at you. If you hastily do so and happen to harm the person in the process (since you're naturally grabbing at someone's eyes, that seems like a serious risk), there's a good chance you'll be given an aggravated or felony battery charge instead.
- ChicagoDave 4mo agoIf it’s a woman slapping them off a pervert and accidentally stepping on them, 100% walks no charges.
- evilduck 4mo agoMostly because perverts tend not to press charges when they're confronted, not because they wouldn't have legal standing. Also your scenario is clearly not what I was replying to about civil disobedience.
- 4mo ago
- bensyverson 4mo agoThey seem determined to make Chicago lawyers rich. [0] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biometric_Information_Privacy_Act
- joe_mamba 4mo agoLawyers operate on exciting laws. What happens when the laws change?
- bobmcnamara 4mo ago$1k/per with no exponential horsepower? Barely a tax.
- cbarrick 4mo ago> $5,000 per violation if the violation is intentional or reckless.
- bobmcnamara 4mo ago5kilobuxx, barely a tax.
- crowbahr 4mo agoHow many biometrics per minute can every glass in Chicago collect, each one costing 5k? It's not per biometric, it's per violation. Collecting the same face 20x is 20 infractions.
- bobmcnamara 4mo agoEmpirically they've cost meta $0
- shakna 4mo agoHalf a billion tax, last time they tried it.
- teeray 4mo agoI fail to see how nonstop recording of every interaction with people in everyday life will pass muster in a two-party consent state.
- senordevnyc 4mo agoMy understanding is that those laws cover audio, not video.
- morkalork 4mo agoPerhaps the laws should be modernized
- munificent 4mo agoI'm sure our entirely functional US government will get right on that.
- ncr100 4mo agoNo, you must have signage posted that you are actively video recording. That's my understanding.
- Forgeties79 4mo agoIt gets tricky with 1) individuals not recording for commercial purposes in 2) situations where there isn’t “a reasonable expectation of privacy.” More importantly, you have to catch the person doing it. You’ll likely never know what they did or the harm they enabled.
- gherkinnn 4mo agoBlack Mirror was ahead of its time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Entire_History_of_You https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Entire_History_of_You
- GrinningFool 4mo agoAnother case of really cool tech done badly. Imagine a world in which you could use facial recognition, have an instant summary in front of you you reminding you of someone's birthday, the names of their kids ... Then imagine that it wasn't tracked, recorded, saved, or tied into anything at all. Just a useful service, in service to only you. Thanks Meta et al, for pushing forward with this broken (for people) model of business and ensuring we'll never be able to have that.
- Terr_ 4mo agoThere's this degradation over the last ~30 years from "wow it's like a kind of capital-equipment anyone can own that'll empower them with agency and serve their own individual interests" to "you're renting this product from a supranational corporation so that it can exploit you". The problem isn't that I'm being recorded by cameras everywhere, the problem is when those silos are broken down to create a panopticon.
- Gooblebrai 4mo ago> have an instant summary in front of you you reminding you of someone's birthday, the names of their kids "How much outsourcing of your mind do you want to give to technology?" "Yes" If you really can't remember all the details of people that you want to remember, you can always write those details on your phone or trusty Rolodex after you meet them and then check them out before you meet them again if you must.
- john_strinlai 4mo ago>If you really can't remember all the details of people that you want to remember, you can always write those details on your phone or trusty Rolodex after you meet them and then check them out before you meet them again if you must. i do not see any practical difference between the hypothetical device the parent proposes and this, except that your suggestion is more cumbersome. you're just "outsourcing your mind" to paper or whatever. (i will note that i agree with your general point. i try to make a concerted effort to remember those details, rather than rely on any type of note-taking)
- airstrike 4mo agoWhat a huge surprise coming from the company that records its own employees.
- wald3n 4mo agoDystopian
- altcognito 4mo agoIf Zuck could ship a set of 1950 x-ray glasses, they would. Never really grew up past middle school. I have dealt with high schoolers with better self control and moral compasses. The rest of SV billionaire class is so abhorrent that you figure they either enjoy being the villains or they figure "it's ok if you get away with it." Sociopaths.
- RobotToaster 4mo agoI wish something like this existed that was completely offline. I'm face blind (prosopagnosia) so being able to feed an offline database photos of friends so it can recognise them would be great. Accessibility shouldn't require giving up privacy.
- jjice 4mo agoHonestly, if any big tech would implement it this way, it's likely Apple. Their image face recognition in Photos currently is fully on device from what I understand and it is set by who you associate it with locally.
- true_religion 4mo agoI’m not sure why they don’t do it this way already with the meta glasses. Online comparison just adds latency.
- qsxfthnkp2322 4mo agoMeta is clearly harvesting all the data.
- polio 4mo agoApple will create a comparable device; it'll just take them five more years to get the product experience down.
- Gooblebrai 4mo agoSorry that you have to deal with this condition. What method do you use currently to help with recognising them?
- joshred 4mo agoUsually you talk to them and then you remember who they are or where you know them from. It's not like you can't tell your wife apart from your orthodontist.
- filup 4mo agoI can't think of one single practical use case for this that would benefit my life, because, right behind the glasses I have my very own locally available facial recognition built in.
- john_strinlai 4mo agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosopagnosia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosopagnosia (not that i think meta is doing it for accessibility reasons...)
- NewsaHackO 4mo agoA lot of people are face blind (including me), and it's extremely embarrassing, especially when I'm supposed to remember a person's name. Wouldn't wear survialiance tech to try to fix it though.
- filup 4mo agoI didnt know this was a thing, how severe is it for you? I have a similar thing with names when and I think it's just because my brain somehow decides that interaction meant nothing and the information was not important to save.
- reaperducer 4mo agoA lot of people are face blind 3.08%, according to https://hms.harvard.edu/news/how-common-face-blindness https://hms.harvard.edu/news/how-common-face-blindness
- NewsaHackO 4mo agoso 250 million people? Thats a good amount of people.
- FergusArgyll 4mo agoThat is a lot! Is it a spectrum? do some people recognize very close relatives but not acquaintances etc.?
- Bender 4mo agoDo these emit something unique that could be detected so that loud klaxon could let everyone know there is a glasshole approaching? Some unique bluetooth identifier perhaps?
- devmor 4mo agoYes actually. You can poll for nearby Bluetooth devices and cap the packets advertising the manufacturer.
- Singletail 4mo agoAdvertising packets only go out on startup and pairing, not during normal operation.
- devmor 4mo agoThis may be true for standard BT (I genuinely have not looked into it), but Meta's glasses are pushing out ADV frames every few seconds, paired or not because they act as a BLE beacon.
- supermdguy 4mo agoSomeone posted a tool that does this recently: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47140042 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47140042
- Bender 4mo agoWow, no idea how I missed that thread. Thankyou.
- wewewedxfgdf 4mo agoThe company feels like the corporate embodiment of its founder.
- joe_mamba 4mo agoUnscrupulous guy who stole the idea from other guys in university, then used tribal nepotism to make sure his fabric of society destructive platform is the one who gets big-finance VC funding in order to destroy society to make money? Pretty common pattern in the business racket if you look at history.
- guelo 4mo agoWhat does tribal nepotism mean here?
- ncr100 4mo agoFacebook.com, the OG first version, was access limited to certain higher education institutions. Like you couldn't get an account at Facebook in 2005 unless you were were a ... I don't remember ... Harvard student? Regarding nepotism: You know, "oh I remember that guy from my time at Harvard University so let's hire him" .. isn't that nepotism?
- Eisenstein 4mo agoNepotism refers to relatives, not acquaintances.
- joe_mamba 4mo agoFine, cronyism then, if that technicality was the snag. Zuck was very well connected in the academic, legal, tech and finance industry, that's how he got away with theft and got VC money thrown at his company and not other companies doing the same thing.
- Cider9986 4mo ago
- NoImmatureAdHom 4mo agoPlease God no
- righthand 4mo agoImagine being a POS that works for that company.
- mrcwinn 4mo agoPlease hurry Apple.
- kylehotchkiss 4mo ago_Frantically Tattoos "Do Not Sell My Personal Information" message under my eyes so I can lawsuit meta for ignoring my data privacy preferences_
- rebolek 4mo agoBy looking at my face you agree with EULA take explicitly says "don't look at my face"
- Havoc 4mo agoMaybe Meta, Flock and Palatir could team up? Create an evil combo stock similar to musky's
- swader999 4mo agoI'd rather be face forgetting self than wear this nonsense.
- Animats 4mo agoSo why not turn it on? At least in China, where face recognition is at building gates, subway gates, store checkouts...
- threwrfaway 4mo agoStart up idea: Ordinary glass (as in spectacles) frames that have a near IR LED on the bridge and on the side. PWM to be efficient, bright, but erratic clock of around 10Hz. Want a picture of me? Ask, or use film.
- emsign 4mo agoThis. Projects like this already exist to blind surveillance cameras.
- stebalien 4mo agoI expect cameras will start to come with built-in IR filters in that case.
- threwrfaway 4mo agoIf it's near IR, bright and erratic, enough will get through and it will mess up with the auto gain.
- King-Aaron 4mo agoTo combat this I'll release a set of glasses with a high output CO2 laser on it
- Starlevel004 4mo agoLuckily they don't come with a built-in fist filter.
- 404mm 4mo agoSurely there’s gotta be some narrow frequency band that disrupts it from working, right? I’m getting really tired of all the cameras and ALPRs around us.
- alehlopeh 4mo agoYeah they just need to route power from the shields.
- 4mo ago
- emsign 4mo agoAbsence of consent is abuse. Smashing your spy glasses is self-defense.
- ChrisArchitect 4mo agoTitle is: Meta's smart glasses app ships complete, dormant face-recognition pipeline
- aanet 4mo agoI'd like to wear an EXACT OPPOSITE of this... Namely, if someone is using Facebook's AI-powered glasses in my vicinity, I want to get a notification (of some sort) so that I can avoid those persons
- skizm 4mo agoWhat if these existed, but Facebook sold them?
- optymizer 4mo agoNearby Glasses on Play Store does this (not affiliated, I did a simple search before writing an app myself)
- aanet 4mo agoAh thanks. I think that would be very valuable indeed. Even more if there's an iOS version.
- conception 4mo agoThere is!
- tjpnz 4mo agoWhy should the onus be on me to avoid them? I don't want the default to be imagery of myself and family members hoovered up and exploited by an ad company (already made it clear to family that my kids pictures aren't to be shared on any Meta platform). I could even see some reacting violently should they be foisted upon unsuspecting members of the public. It's nothing like CCTV or videos recorded passively on a camera or smartphone which is generally accepted.
- jazz9k 4mo agoHow do these glasses communicate/upload info? Is it saved to the glassed itself? I wonder if there's a way to deauth them when they are near you.
- idle_zealot 4mo agoHow does HN feel about this as a general ethos: - Computers can do as much work as they want to automatically, so long as none of it touches a network boundary. - Any time a computer wants to touch the network it must be explicitly initiated by a human action. Sort of like how in browsers capturing the mouse or entering fullscreen mode requires a trusted user action and isn't something a page can do unilaterally, but broader. This also means that the extent of the network communication must be made explicit and clear with no chance of misunderstanding by the user. If what you're doing is genuinely complex beyond your ability to communicate to your target user then you shouldn't be doing it on the behalf of that user. Note that this only really applies to mass consumer products, not something built/deployed internally. I feel like if a hard boundary is not set around this we will end up in a Panopticon. Set aside governments actively pushing for it, it seems a simple profit motive in a digital era yields this outcome. Maybe nuanced rules would produce better outcomes in theory, but humans don't seem great at sticking to nuanced and fiddly rules when there's strong incentive to bend them beyond recognition.
- zaptheimpaler 4mo agoYes that would be great. Right now, there are many applications that use pinned certificates to communicate to servers meaning there is literally no way to see the data your own device is sending/receiving from the internet. It's an insane thing that should be banned.
- trumpdong 4mo agoThere is one way, you can modify the app or the OS to change which certificate is pinned, ignore all certificate failures, lie about the certificate in use, log encryption keys, or not even ask the app whether it likes the certificate. Not on iOS, of course.
- warumdarum 4mo agoAnybody else or does it all feel desperate? Like "here set this bubble play money on fire before it gets worthless" desperate?
- clickety_clack 4mo agoCreeper glasses.
- ncr100 4mo agoYep, everyone from children to all the people attending Democratic rallies, identities and social network profiles siphoned up just by Meta smart glasses.
- simonw 4mo agoWhen Google Glass first released back in 2012 I was running a conference technology startup, and since we had a database full of speaker and attendee profile photos the obvious thing we could build with Glass would be a "your glasses help you spot the people you are planning to meet in a crowded room" app. The Google Glass developer terms strictly forbid building that, and it didn't take more than a few seconds of deeper thought to understand why.
- bigbuppo 4mo agoYeah, but Meta is the stalker that planted the bushes outside your house so they can have a place to hide while they're fapping as they're getting more data from you so they can... I mean, they don't know what they want to do with the data, but they have it. They also said they like the way you smell.
- slim 4mo agoThey now what to do with it. They sell it to gov
- CSSer 4mo agoAnthropic (re-?)confirmed this.
- zdragnar 4mo agoAnd yet people with Google glasses were called the glassholes. What will we can people with Meta glasses?
- pj_mukh 4mo agoHow about Dad! I use them to film my toddler doing cute things without having to pull out the phone constantly and being more present. It'd be nice if people didn't call me names for doing so :)
- 4mo ago
- Findecanor 4mo agoMeta had taken its name from the virtual world "Metaverse" in Neal Stephenson 1992 novel Snow Crash. The novel is the earliest known use of that word, so if it wasn't directly then it was indirectly. The book also describes "Gargoyles": people using headsets with cameras and sensors to spy on everyone around them for the "Central Intelligence Corporation" while being also simultaneously in the Metaverse. Funny, how the gargoyles are described in the book in a somewhat derogatory manner, and the villain of the story is an billionaire who owns a large Internet corporation. At least the gargoyles in the book got paid.
- ncr100 4mo agoYour last point is making me laugh, sardonically.
- glitcher 4mo agoMy mind immediately went to the scramble suits in A Scanner Darkly! Is this where we’re headed?
- jpalomaki 4mo agoNot sure if this is the future I want, but I've always thought the main idea of smart glasses is to automatically bring up information that is relevant in your current context. One part of this is to recognize who you are staring at.
- dylan604 4mo agoIt worked well for the Terminator, so why shouldn't it work for us too? Being able to identify target/foe is of course how this will be used. However, I'd be much more inclined for the Black Mirror use of being able to block someone literally not just a number in your phone.
- rightbyte 4mo agoI have some vague recollection of a sketch where the user walks around and gets popups and ads in his glasses and later removes them to discover there is a calm city life around him. Was that Black Mirror?
- dylan604 4mo agoThat sounds like the Chappelle sketch "The Internet in Real Life" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4WuNU_0e5c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4WuNU_0e5c
- asdff 4mo agoICE contract coming soon!
- ncr100 4mo agoYep, there's a anime called I think it's the Eden of the East, which explores this as a key motivating technology in the story.
- yalogin 4mo agoThis is terrible but inevitable for privacy. Meta is going to exploit this and hoard all the data all the while claiming they conform to all the laws of the land. I just wish this doesn’t take off but they are targeting sub $500 and it’s bound to get all the instagram influencers and heavy users to buy.
- gspr 4mo agoIt is absolutely not inevitable. Please don't spread this defeatism. It is absolutely possible to ban the use of these things in public.
- yalogin 4mo agoI am not sure of that, may be in Europe, cannot see the U.S. banning. May be some states but highly skeptical there. Better chance of it flopping or doesn’t get to a good enough threshold to matter.
- gspr 4mo ago"Maybe" for Europe, "highly skeptical" for the US. Fine. That's far from "inevitable"!
- NuclearPM 4mo agoThats a w’eird apostrophe
- redbell 4mo agoIMHO, Meta is the prime example for privacy intrusion in tech history and with this new smart glasses device, they've leveled their game too far by recording people in their home, sometimes even naked, without their consent. This was already discussed here about a month ago: Meta in row after workers who saw smart glasses users having sex lose jobs (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47961838 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47961838)
- ToucanLoucan 4mo agoIt should be socially normalized to eject people wearing these from your premises and/or life. I don’t care what convenience feature this possibly has, if you’re wearing a data miner you have no place near me. Fuck off.
- thin_carapace 4mo agohaha maybe you are down voted for the crass expression but I do agree with the sentiment - I never gave consent to be filmed in public, let alone for the express purpose of assisting zuckerbergs torture nexus (or for filling his minions' spank bank apparently). however I don't know of any precedent that considers physical violence as a valid response to being filmed without consent
- none2585 4mo agoWe are beyond precedent in so many respects, violence is likely the only way back to a more sane timeline.
- thin_carapace 4mo agothe powers that be will always quash discussion of violence as it threatens their monopoly on such behaviour , all that can be said here is that a good god is vengeful. otherwise, imagine being a child or elderly during a time of forced precedent rejection .. it must be very scary
- 4mo ago
- peteyPete 4mo agoThe more impactful and positive an invention is, the more harmful it can be in the wrong hands. Sadly, AI is being developed at break neck speeds and everyone is trying to extract something from it which also means the powerful will seek to increase their power through it. Feels like we're juggling with ball sized nukes these days... So amazing... until someone eventually drops a ball.
- li4ick 4mo agoNot the point of this article, but that schema design is quite bad.
- neilv 4mo agoIdeas for what individuals can do about this and related awful tech: 1. Ask your local and state governments to completely ban "stalkerware" and "Big Tech surveillanceware" (like will use this and other face recognition), as well as ban using hidden cameras (including in these glasses) to photograph/video people. 2. Tell everyone, before their buy the glasses, what a "glasshole" is. 3. Social negative feedback to people who wear these. Tell your friends if they're being inconsiderate. Tell coworkers it's inappropriate in the workplace. Frown at strangers who do it. Tell apparent creepers to stop, and/or consider calling the police. 4. Social negative feedback to people who work at the companies pushing this tech. There's plenty of tech talent on the job market. Why consider someone who continued to work for one of the companies, in some cases after years of sociopathic abuses of society? 5. Be skeptical of influencers and astroturfing shills promoting the products. Other ideas?
- ncr100 4mo agoAs a programmer, I 100% support this. I have the knowledge to compellingly argue, to legislators who do not have the knowledge, all these points.
- mrcwinn 4mo agoThe shame of this is that even if you as a consumer choose not to buy them, others will. And while anyone can take a photo of you in public, you’ll have glasses taking pictures of you and transferring your identity and location to Meta servers (who by the way contract with the government).
- petterroea 4mo agoMeta are making the glasses something you could be punched for wearing. I live in a big city and I love it because i feel anonymous - nobody cares who I am. It's a stark contrast to where I grew up, where if you were out in public with someone unusual you could hear about it at school the next day. I think the age of anonymity in public is getting to a close. First government mass surveillance and now private mass surveillance (which will surely be funneled into government surveillance over time)
- bicepjai 4mo agoWhat can go wrong with :)
- nerdyadventurer 4mo agoHeading towards surveillance economy, paid by our foolishness.
- totetsu 4mo agoIn case anyone missed it. Michel Foucault the face tested in this article talked about the mechanisms of surveillance and the Panopticon.
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]
- ncr100 4mo agoKnowledge is power, I believe? And Leadership is likely to be involved in saying what is "true" and what is "false", which are key elements of knowledge to be clear, in order to manage the strength of their own power.
- thisisthenewme 4mo agoi feel like ai would be very beneficial here. use ai to create massive amount of fake facebook accounts with fake picture and fake friends. meta wants all the data so we give them more than they would ever care about. make it impossible for them to really know real from fake.
- tarcon 4mo agoUsing makeup and decoration to escape facial recognition: https://www.dazeddigital.com/beauty/article/48030/1/anti-surveillance-cctv-beauty-cv-dazzle-facial-recognition-technology-joker https://www.dazeddigital.com/beauty/article/48030/1/anti-sur...
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]
- kittikitti 4mo agoThank you for sharing these insights. One of my main purchase factors was the facial recognition concerns. I now understand that this is very important and that they aren't disclosing everything. I cannot buy any of Meta's smart glasses and someone would likely break mine even if I did.
- pj_mukh 4mo agoHeadline should be modded, these models aren't actively wired in anywhere. No idea why they'd be shipping these but the HN headline doesn't even match the blog headline.
- iAMkenough 4mo agoI think it’s accurate. Facial recognition has been shipped to devices, and is all wired up, just not exposed to the average user. It’s on your device, you just haven’t been granted access to it.
- pj_mukh 4mo agoAuthor has the word "dormant" in the headline and HN doesn't. Critical word. Let's not just support headlines when they confirm our biases.
- iAMkenough 4mo agoI don’t think it’s factually inaccurate without “dormant” in the headline. It shipped to public devices.
- niemandhier 4mo agoThat makes them illegal in Europe afaik.
- comandillos 4mo agoArticle fully written by AI.....
- metalman 4mo agocomming full circle means there will be a facial smash feature where an AI can create a smashed face overlay on command,or even automaticly every time certain people are in view
- aanet 4mo agoWell, well, well... Guess what? Shaming FB seems to have worked (for now). https://www.wired.com/story/meta-removes-face-recognition-code-meta-ai-app-smart-glasses/ https://www.wired.com/story/meta-removes-face-recognition-co...
- g8oz 4mo agoIf and when this becomes a deployed feature it will absolutely be used by creepy men to dox and harass women they are interested in.