all 91 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[+] 92 points 8 months ago (8 children)
  • [–] 49 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    being sent to offshore contractors for data labeling, a widely-used preprocessing step in training new AI models in which human contractors are asked to review and annotate footage.

    From another article I read about this, seems like it involves a lot of drawing precise boxes around people and objects, stuff like that. Terminators gotta learn their sex moves from somewhere.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 8 months ago

    In a certain nihilistic dreadful sense it's hilarious how these AI advancements are built on the backs of exploitative manual labor. On the surface the AI models are so utterly impressive at how "smart" and advanced the tech appears to be, but the truth of it is just slave labor building a catalog of labeled data sourced from mass surveillance. The aliens should really intervene soon, before we build something that can threaten them...

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Oof imaging being employed to do captchas all day.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago

    I actually did data labeling work on amazon mturk for a while, it does kind of suck, the main saving grace was I could largely do it on my own schedule but I assume these people don't really get that benefit.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 8 months ago

    Read the article??

    “You understand that it is someone’s private life you are looking at, but at the same time you are just expected to carry out the work,” the employee said. “You are not supposed to question it. If you start asking questions, you are gone.”

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 76 points 8 months ago (7 children)

    Yet another surveilance tool marketed as a cool tech gadget.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    I remember when cool tech gadgets were cool and not undisguised spy tools.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 69 points 8 months ago

    The absolute tone-deafness of not seeing that meta seeing the things is the disturbing part.

  • source
  • [–] 160 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    Frankly humanity does not need this invention one bit.

    It may have legitmately sounded interesting and futuristic to some people a decade ago, but with the way tech companies are trending this type of tech will become an absolute surveillance and privacy nightmare. I mean it aleady is really, but it will get so so much worse.

    Regulate and legislate these into oblivion. At the very least tech companies need to be punished financially for trying to speed run dystopia but I fear we're already sliding down that slope and it's too late

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 45 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Frankly humanity does not need this invention one bit.

    Yah. Unfortunately, we've got it though. :( :( :(

    People I know, some friends, they are completely oblivious to how much it will surveillance them. Or how much Meta already does, in other ways. "I don't care, I'm not doing anything wrong".

    Constant surveillance erodes a society. It erodes democracy.

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

    It really doesn't matter if facial recognition is enabled or not today, it can always be done later on. This is a huge invasion of privacy.

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

    I don't think even George Orwell could have predicted that one day they'd put the cameras inside glasses, it would be common knowledge that they're in there and the they're spying on you and everyone you look at, and people would still voluntarily buy them with their own money and wear them around.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    How long until Meta starts blackmailing people with this shit?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 8 months ago

    Marky Z is watching you pee and calling it "streaming."

  • source
  • [–] 36 points 8 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 26 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Well that's what you get for spying on people. Duh

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 8 months ago (7 children)

    Orwell got it wrong with the wall mounted screens - 'they' want us to wear the screens. What was that album title? 'If you accept this,your kids are next., ' Can't remember which band

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Orwell also got it wrong not predicting people would not want to turn of their telescreens

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

    Absolutely. IIRC, the option of turning them off was only available to very high ranking members and even then only for relatively short periods of time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    'I have nothing to hide."

    /s

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 8 months ago

    Who could have guessed…

  • source
  • [–] 29 points 8 months ago (7 children)

    God I wish they'd stop putting cameras in these and just make a nice pair of prescription glasses with good integrated headphones, a heads of display, and some basic touch controls on the stem.

    I would genuinely enjoy this for easy listening and maps.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago

    Right? Make a product that a majority of people could find useful and not have any backlash at all...but then again, they've never been a product company. They've always been a personal information broker.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Kathryn Bigelow's most under-rated film is almost upon us....just 30 years later than we thought.

    Also...if you haven't seen that movie...go watch it. It's low-key one of her best.

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

    I know this is off-topic, but Kathryn Bigelow is just an under-rated director in general I think. So many bangers. Also from a quick search I just found out she had a new movie out last year that stars Idris Elba, Rebecca Ferguson and Jared Harris? Somehow I missed that entirely.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 8 months ago

    What a surprise

  • source
  • [–] 42 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    So you're telling me that the creepy motherfuckers who would wear something like this around in public do creepy things?

    Never would have guessed that. 🤔

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

    Also why is Meta watching that footage?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 child)

    But this is not the problem but a symptom. Of you having no right to privacy (and if, it can be overwritten by some ToS).

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 18 points 8 months ago (10 children)

    One could make a decent bit of $ on "I do not consent" knitted balaclavas on Etsy.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 8 months ago (9 children)

    Dont they make glasses that blind cameras with infrared to obscure facial recognition? Im thinking a whole line of accessories (necklaces, earings, hats, etc) that fuck up these glasses ability to record you without consent. Not sure how technically feasible that all is but would love to see something like it to counteract these.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    I think the problem with mass adoption of that kind of anti surveillance tech is that most people will not trade the convenience of being able to take pictures of themselves for the privacy of other people not being able to take pictures of them. Even if it's a toggle switch.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Also wearing them identifies you as "a person wearing anti-spyware" glasses.

    It's like not having a Facebook account, your shadow shows everyone you aren't, leaving the only person you could be.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 9 points 8 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

    I think you're unfortunately right on that point. There's probably a higher chance of those types of devices being outlawed than Meta glasses and similar products being outlawed, knowing how our legal systems love to defer to corporations.

    Theres also the whole deal with being able to legally film and photograph in a public space, which I support for sure, but this is very much not the same as that when a whole team of people overseas are reviewing everything along with AI analysing it, and with these glasses still operating in not-public spaces. Even the act of having to pull out a phone and physically hold it up to film is a small protection of privacy, because at least others can recognize that that person is filming. The passive always-recording nature of these glasses is truly frightening.

    At least they are chunky and kinda stupid looking enough to be recognizable.... for now. It will be scary when there are dozens or hundreds of variations that look no different than any style of regular glasses.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    I think at least some are scams. I would think there are ways to design cameras to mostly mitigate this too. I'm guessing ALPRs have the ability to see license plates at night even though headlights are emitting a large amount of light over a broad spectrum (including IR).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    I wonder what would be the power consumption of a device that sits on your head and emits IR light in all directions until you turn it off, instead of just over your eyes. Similar to how microphone blockers work.

    What would jewelry and hats do about cameras?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago

    Now I'm chuckling at the thought that the view from these glasses is likely to be used for training AI, so you could have a bit of fun just aiming them at the most horrifying but legal porn you can find and plonk them down aimed at the screen while you go do other stuff.

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 8 months ago

    Ahh yes, another reason mark zuckerberg needs to get luigi'd

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago

    Wow, what an admission. Peeping META?

  • source
  • [–] 21 points 8 months ago

    These glasses and the people who wear them are disturbing.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago*

    Definitely not a Sony Walkman, which was cool and the foam headphones were comfortable to wear. I miss the simple analog days.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago

    We get to return to the verbiage “glasshole” right

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    Oh man! A friend just sent me this earlier today, I completely forgot to sign, but seeing this reminded me! Sharing the love.

    https://c.org/BVqdM4SGS2

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    There are other similar ones that have more awareness, but one was focused around New Orleans as there was an incident. I didn't hear about it. Another is taking about banning at beaches which also make sense so voyeurism isn't so creepy and make people feel awkward

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 4 points 8 months ago

    Tesla was like 'we could use lidar, but instead we'll use CAMERAS'

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    Why and who's buying those?

  • source
  • 18 comments in c/privacy@programming.dev view that post
    14 comments in c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world view that post