But violence isn’t the answer. And certainly not to people doing legal stuff in public. Wearing a Google Glass in private is different though.
Comment on Dumb glasses
Grostleton@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 hours agoStopped this bullshit for a decade or so
lumen@feddit.nl 21 hours ago
WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 1 hour ago
Violence is SO often the answer.
Grostleton@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 hours ago
All I’m saying is last time this tech trend came around, enough people who had a problem with it took drastic actions that directly affected the popularity of wearing a spycam on your face.
Wouldn’t surprise or upset me if history repeated itself.
lumen@feddit.nl 20 hours ago
Wouldn’t surprise me either. But it’s a hugely illogical reaction.
yermaw@sh.itjust.works 20 hours ago
Its not. I wish we lived in a world where we could be trusted with things like this, but we dont.
I really want a camera on my face and a HUD so I can live life more like a video game with screenshots, but we as a species have shown time and time again that we can’t behave.
Id rather nobody have one.
tjsauce@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
How is it illogical if it worked? It might be immoral, but there’s a clear through-line of cause and effect.
Grostleton@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 hours ago
Humans are illogical in most cases. It’s something you have to put up with when living in a society.
Mac@mander.xyz 9 hours ago
You can make the claim that it’s immoral or something, but you cannot claim it’s illogical.
InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world 20 hours ago
doing legal stuff in public
Just because its legal doesn’t mean its right
lumen@feddit.nl 20 hours ago
See, what’s “right” is a (shared) opinion. One of the consequences of living in a free country is that other people can have their own opinions.
petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone 19 hours ago
Amid a second Trump presidency that is going very poorly is truly a wild time to start crowing about a person’s rightful freedom to be dumb on purpose.
FishFace@piefed.social 20 hours ago
If you think something is wrong then, unless that risk places you at actual risk of harm, you can have that conversation - in public forums, at the ballot box, with your political representatives. If, rather, you want to dictate what you think is right on everyone, with threat of violence then that is something else.
InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
Surveillance is a form of violence that those wearing the glasses are imposing on us.
baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de [bot] 19 hours ago
nothing is being dictated. surveillance is violence. if you harm me, maybe i will reduce that harm, also using violence. fuck around and find out logic.
WoodScientist@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
If you wear this, you’re an agent of the gestapo.
baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de [bot] 19 hours ago
violence is the answer against people who already commit violence. reducing your sense of privacy and safety is violence. not to mention that this data could be used for ICE’s benefit, which would even add physical violence.
StarvingMartist@sh.itjust.works 18 hours ago
I agreed with you up to this statement, no Karen, getting filmed in public is not violence, even if it’s concealed, Jesus Christ
lumen@feddit.nl 19 hours ago
Filming in public is not a form of violence in and of itself. Have you ever noticed that the public is called “public”, which is the opposite of “private”?
baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de [bot] 19 hours ago
sharing that information with facebook is the violence
WoodScientist@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
When the law abandons the people, the law of the jungle returns.
FishFace@piefed.social 20 hours ago
Stop advocating violence against people who might be recording video in public, just because the device doing it is on their face.
starman2112@sh.itjust.works 20 hours ago
You actually should advocate for violence against people who are violating your rights
lumen@feddit.nl 20 hours ago
What right would be violated here exactly?
baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de [bot] 19 hours ago
facebook knowing my personal information against my will goes against my right to privacy. there are also the ethics of recording people in secret instead of making it very obvious. no, a blinking red dot does not count, and it can also be covered with a special purpose-made made black sticker.
now that i think about it, I’m just not comfortable being filmed by strangers at all, in any way, regardless of where the images end up.
i don’t think people should get used to it either. it’s incredibly creepy, even if no law is broken where you live.
and yes, i do understand that in many places just being in public reduces your right to privacy so that you’re legally allowed to be photographed as long as you’re not the focus. i don’t care. still creepy.
starman2112@sh.itjust.works 18 hours ago
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
*Unless Facebook does the unreasonable searching and we pay them for any data they collect
Soulphite@reddthat.com 19 hours ago
Funny how people think they have a “right” of privacy in public… there is absolutely no expectation of privacy in public. Besides, there are cameras EVERYWHERE always filming.
lauha@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
Quite many when used anywhere except in public space.
FishFace@piefed.social 18 hours ago
You don’t have the right not to be filmed in public. Do you punch every person filming in public? and if you punch someone wearing the glasses, most likely they weren’t even recording.
srestegosaurio@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 hours ago
Uhhhh, you actually do.* I am not sure if you know, but different places have different laws.
starman2112@sh.itjust.works 17 hours ago
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
*Unless Facebook is the one doing the unreasonable search, and we simply buy their data
Sweet summer child
EisFrei@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
You do in Germany, except during events/gatherings/marches.
matlag@sh.itjust.works 16 hours ago
Most likely either the glasses are in a state of recording, or the wearer has no idea what it’s doing. Damned! After so many scandals, people still assume Meta will do what it claims and not trick its users! Fool me once, shame on you! Fool me twice, shame on me! Fool me 42 times, more, please MOOOOORE!
WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca 1 hour ago
Nah. Violence against them is okay.
Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 20 hours ago
A clear violation of the social contract deserves a swift response. Those glasses come off your face, and onto the pavement.
lumen@feddit.nl 20 hours ago
No they don’t. I might actually go film on the sidewalk just outside your home, and there would be nothing at all you can do about it.
Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 19 hours ago
Using “nearby glasses” set to 20m to detect the glasses’ Bluetooth signature (plan on making that a module I can attach to the front doorframe), I can easily detect the presence of your classes. Then, you shall have two options after I speak to you. Surrender the glasses, or speak to my personal attorney. Or if I’m not at home, my drone, which will ram into your face to destroy the glasses.
nile_istic@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
I think the real problem is that you don’t seem to realize/care how gross and rapey you sound. That’s… maybe something to work on.
xtr0n@sh.itjust.works 16 hours ago
This may be perfectly legal but it is absolutely a dick move and people will HATE you for it. The are so many scenarios where perfectly reasonable people will find this behavior extremely unsettling, at best, and possibly threatening.
And you are incorrect in assuming that “there would be nothing [the subject] can do about it “. In the real world there are plenty of people who will risk an assault charge to deal with someone being a disrespectful dick, and many more who will act if they feel threatened.
Now, might doesn’t make right, but are you right? Going against social norms and risking extrajudicial retaliation to fight injustice is commendable. But this isn’t sitting at a lunch counter during segregation or protesting at Stonewall. In a world where 1 in 3 women will be stalked in her lifetime ( in the US according to the Justice Department), why is this the hill you want to die upon?
FishFace@piefed.social 17 hours ago
Who made this social contract? I certainly didn’t. You want to be able to tell everyone else what the social contract is, and assault them if they don’t comply.
Fascist.
matlag@sh.itjust.works 13 hours ago
When you say “fascist”, you do realize that fascism involves crowd control and these glasses are a dream for a fascist regime? All the speech about “cameras everywhere is ok” falls right in the authoritarianism thinking, that’s just a step from fascism.
jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
This account ^ is going very far out of its way to make very bad points and overlook obvious gaping privacy violations, which are things that can be both identified and stopped.
The takeaway of massively privacy invading glasses is they can always be stopped at both the individual and the systemic level.
Washedupcynic@lemmy.ca 19 hours ago
It’s easy to see someone holding up a camera or cell phone making it obvious they are recording. If you don’t want to be recorded, you can just stay the fuck away from them. You can’t avoid cameras/recording devices you can’t see. Fuck meta, and fuck anyone else wearing their garbage, privacy invading glasses.
Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 15 hours ago
Really? I routinely keep my phone in my breast pocket whenever I wear a shirt with one, and enough of it sticks out for the camera to see above the top of the pocket. I’d look no different recording or not, let alone it being obvious if I’m doing it. It’d be shaky body-cam style footage, but that’s not the point.
FishFace@piefed.social 17 hours ago
Yeah, it’ll be really hard to spot the giant dorky glasses with the laser beam recording LED.
Of course, in practice you don’t behave differently when you spot someone holding their phone up in the street, because you’re already behaving like you’re being watched because you’re in fucking public.
xtr0n@sh.itjust.works 16 hours ago
People with legal issues, immigration issues or violent exes will absolutely dip if they see someone recording. I have none of these problems and I will always avoid gettIng recorded by randos if it’s easy to do so. I can’t reasonably avoid every Ring cam in my neighborhood but I will happily slide 10 feet to the left to avoid becoming collateral damage in some dbags insta reel.
Onyxonblack@lemmy.zip 19 hours ago
If you wear the video glasses, expect to be fucking punched or worse. Jackass.
FishFace@piefed.social 17 hours ago
I’m not going to wear the video glasses. But if I see someone assaulting someone over some stupid gadget, I’m going to try and help that person. Take your violent fantasies elsewhere, sicko.
Onyxonblack@lemmy.zip 17 hours ago
And then we will beat your fucking dumb ass too. Loser trash fucker.