And that’s also the main reason I don’t want these to exist. I don’t want to be identified by random people, and I especially don’t want police to have access to something like this. People I spend time with know who I am, and I’m fine missing out on random same place/same time coincidences with people I knew from high school or something.
Prosopagnosia, also known as face blindness, is a cognitive disorder of face perception in which the ability to recognize familiar faces, including one’s own face, is impaired, while other aspects of visual processing and intellectual functioning remain intact.
I’m talking about recognising people I’ve met and know.
I don’t see how that could realistically happen without whichever company is behind the glasses taking all that juicy biometric data for themselves though.
It’s up to the govts to protect the rights of the people. If you’re in the US, you’re already on the verge of losing all rights anyway. For the rest of the world, there’s no reason to think we couldn’t regulate it in a reasonably privacy-friendly way. Local face tagging and recognition could work without cloud access, so that you’d only have access to information you keyed in yourself about somebody.
For the rest of the world, there’s no reason to think we couldn’t regulate it in a reasonably privacy-friendly way.
You’re totally right in principle.
But the conversation for this pair of glasses is different, because of Meta.
If anyone believes that Meta obeys their local laws, please refer them my way for a pyramid business opportunity…(I believe I could easily rip them off, because I believe they are suckers.)
You act like America is the only place in the world where tech is being used for mass surveillance.
Your own governments are doing it to you too, whether or not it’s legal.
Wake up, they don’t give a single fuck about you.
Sure. My point is that same technology can and will be used to violate peoples’ privacy, and in some cases could create dangerous situations (e.g. domestic violence victim being recognized by their attacker).
(e.g. domestic violence victim being recognized by their attacker)
Not sure how or why the attacker wouldn’t be able to recognise them normally.
My point is that same technology can and will be used to violate peoples’ privacy
Every technology can be used to do shitty stuff, and in most cases has been. It’s up to the govts to protect the rights of the people. If you’re in the US, you’re already on the verge of losing all rights anyway. For the rest of the world, there’s no reason to think we couldn’t regulate it in a reasonably privacy-friendly way. Local face tagging and recognition could work without cloud access, so that you’d only have access to information you keyed in yourself about somebody.
Joelk111@lemmy.world 23 hours ago
I’d want them to use a local database that you’ve created. After you’ve met someone, the glasses could be like “remember this person?” and you could choose to save them or not, or something like that.
Lfrith@lemmy.ca 21 hours ago
Its meta so they’ll their hands on that data the way peoples numbers end up in metas hands despite not having a Facebook account because people gave the app permission to contacts.
Joelk111@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
I’m not talking about a Meta made pair of glasses. I would never buy those due to the privacy issues. I’m talking about a potential pair of glasses that are open source, or at least privacy focused, and don’t phone home.
Lfrith@lemmy.ca 20 hours ago
Average people will have it phone home for convenience. Just how things play out. I think the tech is cool, but not looking forward to how it’ll be utilized in the end.
pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip 18 hours ago
Yes. I’m all for an open specification, local only version of this.
But I don’t think Meta releasing a set of smart glasses leaves anyone (other than possibly Zuckerberg) better off.
Joelk111@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
One could argue that without Meta’s investments into the technology, we might never get an open specification at all. With something like Valetudo, it wouldn’t exist without the privacy nightmare that is off-the-shelf robot vacuums.