all 22 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 10 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

I appreciate the hidden camera adds a new layer but this isn’t anything new. Tik tok exists and behavior like this was already too common.

That being said, I wonder if there’s an answer in lower resolution. Is there a resolution low enough to create some privacy but high enough to be useful for AR? That would also make the glasses cheaper

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 33 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (4 children)

    Pervert glasses should not be in quotes. If humanity were mature enough to handle this technology without harassment of women or generally any human, it could be a boon - but with the way society works currently and the backsliding regarding womens rights worldwide this is something that should be removed from the market until society is mature enough to handle it. Not every technology should be available to the public if it leads to such results.

    Simple fix: make these glasses only work as recording devices when every person in view has said "I consent to this interaction to be recorded". Anyone else coming in - they shut off if they don't consent within 10 seconds or so. Also, make activation of recording a voice command a la "I will now start recording if everyone consents". If this isn't loudly voiced, recording cannot start. All of this would make sure that only the really criminal elements would be able to use their devices "the pervert way" - and this should be punished hard by law.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago

    Society mature enough? Lol. That would literally never happen.

    Just leave them on the market. At least these are recognized video glasses. There's plenty of other spy cams that aren't. Including other glasses. People doing something shitty with a product shouldn't ruin things for everyone else. Let every business ban them if they want. If everything that could be used for "bad" purposes got taken away, we wouldn't have a damned thing.

    Just fyi, I don't own a pair, and have no intention on owning a pair.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    any of that bs would be bypassed by perverts lol, they are the exact type to tinker for that purpose they already remove the lights

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    I'm pretty sad that people have to be perverts and glasses with cameras got such a bad rep.

    It is deserved and not surprising, and I'm not trying to defend them, but I was so looking forward to AR glasses with cameras, so I could finally get a working ad-block IRL, which should be easily possible with the tech.

    But, that requires a camera. It's a shame, and I'll definitely rather continue dealing with ads than support enabling perverts (or Meta, anyway), but it sounded like such a cool use-case.

    I hate how there are always groups who have to ruin everything for others :(

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Pretty sure the whole wet dream of the companies pouring money into this tech is to be able to put ads in your face all day long.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I was going to say, we barely have open-source cellphone OSes right now, and the most functional ones exist only because a surveillance company gave away their early code in a successful bid for market dominance. Something similar would probably play out for pervert glasses.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    So scientists are going around being perverts for fhe scientific cause. Jokes aside, who wouldn't have thought about this during product development?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I had an opportunity to converse with one of the people whose work resulted in those body scanners they use in the airport. He brought this up casually as a kind of boast, like he genuinely believed the product of his work was amazing and essential. He thought I was being an asshole for being unimpressed and that being unimpressed was a personal slight. He had no concept of the down sides of such technology, or the actualized potential for abuse, or the reality that the amount of abuse vastly outnumbers the successful intended uses.

    Maybe that kind of work takes a certain mindset, like how it's easier to get rich as a sociopath?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Minor downside to future ar glasses, pros outweigh the cons, only part of technology that still makes me excited for the future so yeah irdgaf that some ppl abuse recording when they can wear hidden cams and do the same sht

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    It's a shame there isn't a way to fry the cameras without also frying people's eyes.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    They needed research for that?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment