28
A German city may soon ban smart glasses on public transport, pools (cybernews.com)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/privacy@programming.dev
1 comment fedilink hide all child comments

1 comment

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 3 points 2 months ago

Jawohl, so und nicht anders.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    24 comments in c/technology@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 12 points 2 months ago

    Just a city? How are these things legal anywhere else.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 8 points 2 months ago* (8 children)

    blind people are actually decently assisted by smart glasses. it's just a shame they're mostly used by perverts. there should be a state-sanctioned version only for blind people, with limited features, and an open weights AI model hosted somewhere in the same country with data not used for training and such.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (7 children)

    I’m still not convinced.

    Cameras have existed for decades, right? And it’s been legal in many places to take videos of whatever in public that whole time. But Y’know what’s not legal? Upskirts shots, down blouse shots, recording others in the bathroom, and more.

    Why does the camera being on your face somehow make this form factor worse than a GoPro on your forehead, or a phone in your shirt pocket?

    I quite seriously do not understand why every other previous hardware capable of recording was fine, but glasses are where we draw the line as perverted.

    I personally say jack up the repercussions if you feel the need, but don’t ban a hammer just because it can be used to break a window.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (6 children)

    it's much more innocuous, to the point that many people can't even tell you're recording or wearing anything special that's sending your image directly to facebook, especially if you drill out the notification light (which many perverts do do)

    generally here in germany there's a right to privacy if a person is your primary subject, even in public. you need their consent. there's a difference between people being in the background and only incidentally and going up to people and "appreciating" them with a recording that facebook sees and also the whole world sees because you post it online as a way to signify your power over innocent women

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (5 children)

    But there are many cameras that do this already. Cameras that go in your button hole, pen cameras, even your cell phone, and most of them have no indication they are recording at all.

    I’ve mentioned it before, but when I’m shopping for something for my spouse, i often FaceTime them and just put my phone with the camera facing outward in my shirt pocket, no one has ever given it a second look because it’s just a mundane thing to do, no one thinks it might be recording.

    Thats why I feel like this is the tech equivalent to banning hammers. If someone wants to smash a window, they can use any number of implements. Banning a hammer does nothing but hurt people who have legitimate need of a hammer.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (4 children)

    smart glasses are not hammers. aside from the disability aid angle, they are primarily used by perverts for perverted use cases, and facebook wants to double down on that angle with face recognition, so they know their audience.

    if these were prescribed by a doctor I would react very differently

    I'm staunchly against normalizing being recorded all the time in public

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (3 children)

    You can’t think of a single non-pervert, non-accessibility use for these?

    Meta bullshit aside, because they obviously know exactly who they are catering to and it’s unfortunate. Recording lectures, AI (not LLM) identification of works of art at a museum, to the meter directions in areas with bad GPS data, recording a protest, recording police interactions, streaming hardware demos, and more. Anything you can currently legitimately record, but it’s hands free so you don’t need to sit there and frame the image.

    Add in some lenses that can display instead of just correct your prescription? You’ve now moved past simply recording, and into augmented reality where information can be layered on top of your vision.

    Just because you can’t think of a legit use doesn’t mean one doesn’t exist. You can use a wrench to drive a nail in, but the proper tool is still the hammer.

    Edit: Hell, I’d love to be able to kick off a recording when playing with the younger kids in the family. They see a phone out in front of you recording and want you to show them things, but glasses are just glasses.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

    if violating privacy rights was so important then it should still not be done by facebook

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (1 child)

    Speaking as someone currently living in the US, around here you have zero right to privacy in public places, or places that can be seen from public places. Like, to a fucked up level. I could stand at the bottom of your driveway recording through your bedroom window, and it would be legal.

    Now, do I think that is good? No. In my opinion it’s taken things to an extreme.

    But I also don’t think I should have the power to run over to a tourist and demand they delete their photo because I happened to be in the background.

    Is there a middle ground? Absolutely. But that middle ground is where I think the majority of smart glasses users will fall when they hit critical mass.

    It’s already illegal to do… illegal things. Why are we making them “doubly illegal” in the hopes that somehow the bad guys are going to listen this time? This isn’t like guns where we are talking about regulating every camera, it’s like banning a desert eagle and calling it a job well done.

    Edit: Last sentence is weird but I can’t think of how to reword it this late at night, I hope it makes some sense at least.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago*

    i personally enjoy my privacy rights. it's not like police here don't use for example dashcam footage. they do. so our privacy rights are already sometimes being ignored in favor of practicality. but glassholes go a step too far. i do not want to be surveilled by a private company 24/7. i do not want male-to-male transgender (a looksmaxxer) chad broski to record women without their consent and then post the video online as power signaling, and to goon over it. make it a free and democratic association using open source hardware and code, and open weights models hosted in the respective country with strong privacy guarantees, and I'm maybe on board again. roll it out very slowly, address issues as they come up and don't make the product even worse for privacy before regulations can step in, only to call it inevitable and the future and thus regulation-proof when the law has time to catch up. legal repercussions should be severe, as you are violating a fundamental human right.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] -3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (9 children)

    I had a debate about this the other day. I very much think these are creepy and look bad, but this kind of surveillance tech has existed for a long time, not to mention the prevalence of cellphones. I don't understand what banning smart glasses accomplishes. There is plenty of creeper tech recording stuff out there. Just seems like poorly thought out legislation. What if I wear my cellphone on a lanyard, would that be illegal? Isn't there surveillance tech on public transport already? What expectations of privacy do people have?

    I think that any laws being made should focus on the broader concepts such as surveillance, privacy, consent, etc. This just seems like policy driven by people's dislike of meta creeper glasses.

    *Seems spy tech is already illegal in germany so this ban doesn't matter much

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 26 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    From my perspective has to do with form factor more than anything else. These smart glasses at a glance are indistinguishable from regular glasses. A phone looks like a phone, so people know what's up at a glance.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 19 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    Other camera tech existing is not a valid argument that these should. These devices and such technology should be fought and opposed at every corner. Rather have the privacy/surveillance debate kickstarted with a ban on one than risk having them 'normalized within society' such that a ban would be unenforceable. Edit: spelling

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

    The thing is: I would get them too if I could afford it.

    For the headphone stuff which is quite cool tech actually, I don't like wearing in ear headphones and they basically work as headphones without going into your ears. The Ai stuff seems honestly creepy but I'm sure they legally can't force you to use it in Europe and the camera stuff seems okay.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    Yeah I do think there's real utility to these and they'll become more and more useful. These companies are working towards AR glasses that could completely replace phones.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [+] -11 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Thats so stupid....

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    What exactly is stupid?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago

    The filming is already illegal. Small Cameras exist. Phones with massives zooms exist. Smart glasses are not the Problem. Espacially as ther probably will be a generall ban meaning smartglases without camera will be banned too

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • 8 comments in c/news@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 8 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    Is it just me or should it be law that any private citizen can ask to not be recorded and they must stop. I understand the plain view and no expectation of privacy stuff, but it seems like harassment to me if you request not to be recorded.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago* (4 children)

    That is a law in Germany. You have the right to your image, be it photographic or video graphic. There are some exceptions like being in a crowd (i.e. unrecognisable).

    That means if a newspaper has you in it. They must remove you or make you unrecognisable. And if somebody is taking a video or picture of you, they have to delete it if you ask and are technically not allowed to do so in the first place.

    And believe me Germans do make use of that right.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Ah that sounds reasonable. How did the meta glasses get a hold up until now?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago*

    So the drawback of that law is that it is not explicitly/automatically enforced. One has to bring it up with the authorities themselves basically. So if you don't notice somebody taking a picture and/or distributing it. Nothing happens automatically.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • 1 comment in c/privacy@lemmy.ml view that post
    [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    And restrooms please.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •