I see so many people (mostly men, this isn't random) talking about how Meta's Ray-Ban glasses are "incredible" or "still not ready" yet, I don't see anyone calling it what it is: Voyeurism.
This technology will increase voyeurism and stalking aggressions in unacceptable ways. These glasses are a voyeur's dream weapon. Also a doxxer's and stalker's dream weapon.
Why are our laws and cultures not protecting us against this?
Attached: 1 video a $60 mod to Meta's Ray-Ban AI glasses mean you can never really be sure if someone wearing them is filming you or not https://www.404media.co/how-to-disable-meta-rayban-led-light/
@SnowyCA @madalex Yes exactly, the owner needs to be identified (likely easy from serial number and collected data) and the abusive material needs to be seized by the authorities.
This is similar to how the monster Dominique Pelicot got caught by the way. These predators sometimes have more to reveal on their home devices, so an investigation is important: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelicot_rape_case
Oh that creep!
Indeed they need to be prosecuted!!
edit: and you're correct, home devices are often the key to investigation's success. I know of a child accusing a parent of SA, and when the father's laptop was examined it was loaded with child porn.
@[email protected] @[email protected] Yes exactly, the owner needs to be identified (likely easy from serial number and collected data) and the abusive material needs to be seized by the authorities. This is similar to how the monster Dominique Pelicot got caught by the way. These predators sometimes have more to reveal on their home devices, so an investigation is important: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelicot_rape_case
A whole new twist on spyglasses.
We have phones that can take photos of peepers wearing Ray Ban Glasses...those men better beware!
edit: How comfortable will they feel when the situation is reversed.
@Em0nM4stodon @skoombidoombis @ppaluchowski64
Nothing will change in America until billionaires are outlawed.
@ppaluchowski64 @Em0nM4stodon its not just the law. Technology is moving faster than our (as a species) maturity to use it although I suspect the more seedy aspects of these glasses may also be by design
They are from a company that started out as a platform for it's incel owner to sleeze over and objectify young women
It's horrifying and it is going to cost people their privacy and their safety.
Our laws and cultures aren't protecting us because, IMHO, we have allowed corporations to have the rights, and the people to be the product.
I was about to come back with some ostensibly well informed comment agreeing with you, but it was already completely unhinged by like step 1 of that process, so anyway… ANYWAY.
Okay, so, all seriousness ass-side:
Recording Video in Public Places
Recording video in public is generally permissible in places like public parks, city streets, and sidewalks, where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. This means that if something is visible to the naked eye in a public space, you can record it. This principle extends to filming government buildings and the actions of public officials, like police officers, performing their duties in public.
This right does not extend into areas that, while publicly accessible, are considered private. The key determinant is the “reasonable expectation of privacy,” meaning you cannot use technology to see through the walls of a private home from a public street. The legal framework protects what people can plainly see, not what can be captured with invasive technology.
The Legality of Recording Audio
Capturing audio is governed by stricter laws than recording video alone, due to federal and state wiretapping statutes. The federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), often called the Wiretap Act, makes it illegal to intentionally intercept any wire, oral, or electronic communication. A violation of this act can lead to both criminal penalties and civil lawsuits.
The federal law, and the laws in a majority of states, operate under a “one-party consent” rule. This means you can legally record a conversation if you are a party to that conversation, as your participation implies your own consent. Most states and the District of Columbia follow this standard.
A number of states, however, have enacted more stringent “all-party consent” laws. In these jurisdictions, you must obtain permission from everyone involved in a private conversation to legally record it. States with all-party consent laws include:
If a conversation involves participants in different states, the best practice is to adhere to the strictest applicable law, which is the all-party consent rule.
Source: https://legalclarity.org/are-camera-glasses-legal-video-and-audio-recording-laws/
Obligatory: I'm not a lawyer.
It seems to me like, at least most places in the U.S., the fact that it records video is a non-issue while in public, but also like the fact that it records audio could very easily make it illegal public.
It was "public outrage" that killed goofle glass.
There seems none of that now.
A Public Outcry stopped the goofle Lens in its tracks.
We need to speak up !!
@joe_vinegar @labbatt50 @Em0nM4stodon a vendor at a large co-op mall was creeping everyone out with his Ray-Bans, constantly taking photos of people and telling his friends that he was trying to disable the tell-tale LED when videoing.
He was evicted from the mall after refusing to stop recording with the glasses when interacting with customers and vendors.
As expected, he started a negative review campaign against the mall. What was shocking was the number he managed to rope into helping him - all very conservative folk in their late fifties to seventies, all slamming the managers for "stifling innovation".
@AbramKedge @joe_vinegar @Em0nM4stodon
Funny that I am in that age group and ...
@Em0nM4stodon I do not disagree with any of your points - all very valid. I saw an advert in the local shopping centre today and they do nothing to change my position on Meta.
The organisation that tried to introduce me to Facebook by telling me I had no friends, that seems to be creating this mandatory need for WhatsApp, is now shipping covert surveillance gear to the average citizen.
They have the ability to do so much good, and yet they decide to do this.
I think the relative stealth factor is the issue. It makes it easier to do and harder to notice.
Also, loudly inform everyone within line of sight that the creep is doing so, and call them glasshole or other non-marketing-created descriptive term.
Social opprobrium killed Google Glass the first time around. Let's do it again.
@iamtheworkingman_1 @Em0nM4stodon Oakley has a Mac prefix registered to them, as does Facebook, i have yet to find a relevant one for "Meta" or "Meta AI". Once you know the mac It shouldn't be too difficult to "war drive" for them
https://maclookup.app/macaddress/a468bc/mac-address-details
https://maclookup.app/search-mac-by-vendor/result?vendor=facebook
@ErsatzLogic My own prescription glasses have a thick black frame similar to Meta's RayBan and now I'm mortified people might think I'm one of those assholes.
I may need to change my frame fashion. One more thing Meta has destroyed for me I guess.
@Em0nM4stodon @ErsatzLogic Maybe you could get away with a 3D printed frame cover?
Yeah, it's plastic, but it would make it very clear that your glasses do NOT have a camera that could be pointed at them.
Em 
Kevan
Mad Alex
❄️SnowyIn🇨🇦❄️
M.S. Bellows, Jr.
su_liam
Kinene⭐🐻
cognitively accessible math
Richard W. Woodley ELBOWS UP 🇨🇦🌹🚴♂️📷 🗺️
Lars
Ron Jeffries
Estarriol, Terrorist Dragon
Coach Pāṇini ®
Pablo Majster 
David 🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️NB they/them
Dan, the US is the threat!
Nicky🦨✌️
R3dactd
Viral Obscurity
Chalk Outline Hieroglyph
🌈☔🌦️🍄🌱🍉
Shoe Bill
Sabrina Web 
📎
theHastyOne
labbatt50
Joe Vinegar
Abram Kedge🏴🇨🇦
Paul
Justin Macleod
James Britt
VoidZeroOne 
Ω 🌍 Gus Posey
Local Sadboy
C.
iamtheworkingman
Epic Null
sleepfreeparent