all 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 5 points 1 week ago (4 children)

May? Zuckerberg will be creaming himself over the content hoovered up from the physical offline world.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    Haha I think they just try to not get sued by his self pleasuring corp ;) He even made people in Kenya watch it so he isn't the only one: https://techcrunch.com/2026/03/05/meta-sued-over-ai-smartglasses-privacy-concerns-after-workers-reviewed-nudity-sex-and-other-footage/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 6 days ago (1 child)

    WTAF.

    Grateful for the second link, it explains the staff were shown content to review and sort as part of their job and they spoke out about the privacy issues, rather than them seeking out nudes for fun.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 19 comments in c/technology@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 70 points 1 week ago (3 children)
  • [–] 38 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    There's no 'may' to it.

    If your local jurisdiction isn't regulating pervert glasses, they are harvesting every megabyte of data they gather.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Funny to think they care about regulations. Until they start getting jailed for it they don't care. Even the large fines from the EU and Australia are less than they make from ignoring the regulations.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 1 week ago (2 children)
  • may

    I think it’s a fair bit more deterministic than that.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 week ago

    If you're a content creator that uses that shit in public, fuck you. At least the people who still use cameras/phones are obviously filming and you can avoid them.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    It's basically flock glasses, but also perverted.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago
    [–] 7 points 1 week ago

    Oh how far we’ve come from people saying “oh no my Alexa and Google home aren’t listening unless I say the word, it’s a totally nother chip and they’re for sure not spying on me it’s impossible”

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago

    Well of course they do

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago*

    Face absolutely - and the location, and nearby devices, some of which are running the Meta apps. Then they try to link it all to an identity on Facebook. Which links back to the advertisers who upload their customer lists and purchase history for advertising purposes. Facebook knows you’re not at Starbucks today, because you only go there with your coworkers.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    So we need a wearable device that detects camera lenses and blinds them with a small laser. That should be doable, but the street then becomes a weird technological race.

  • source
  • 4 comments in c/privacy@lemmy.ml view that post
    [–] 23 points 1 week ago (1 child)
  • [–] 10 points 1 week ago*

    Oh ya don't say

    • sips coffee
  • source
  • how is this news.....

  • source
  • 2 comments in c/news@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 7 points 1 week ago

    Ah, they’ve reached “The Point.”

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago

    "may"...? Sure, sure, there could be doubt, sure... 🙄

  • source
  • 2 comments in c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 19 points 1 week ago

    What do you mean 'may"?

  • source
  • Please don’t post blog articles from AI company websites in this sub

  • source