That's not good as good news as the title makes it sound.

According to the analysis, anyone walking through the city with the glasses would have to inform passers-by verbally in advance or even wear high-visibility vests with inscriptions to comply with the rulings of the European Court of Justice. Particularly sensitive areas include doctor’s offices, demonstrations, women’s shelters, or playgrounds. The use of Ray-Ban Meta AI Glasses in public spaces is therefore difficult to make legally compliant from a data protection perspective.

Since it's up to the individuals to disclose, they're the ones at fault. So you'd have to know you were being recorded, and by who, and then hold them accountable. That's pretty much impossible.

But more importantly, meta is no longer held responsible, and they can just continue fucking up people's privacy.

Filming persons without their consent is not only BS, it's illegal and punished with high fines, more if it goes online, even Google in it's Street View is forced to blur faces and carplates for this reason.

I think these glasses are bullshit.

I think recording people in public without their consent or knowledge is bullshit.

Using them makes you a douchebag/cunt.

That said, I really don't understand the logic that says the act of recording or uploading videos makes someone a "data processor".

As far as I can see the household exemption still applies if you are using data for personal use. If you're uploading videos for some sort of gain then sure there's an argument you could become a data controller maybe.

But, even so, even if you accept the argument that people become data controllers, as with cctv being used by private individuals on their houses, there is no practical way of enforcing or preventing it.

Creepy tech needs to be phased out