- cross-posted to:
- usa@midwest.social
- cross-posted to:
- usa@midwest.social
A New York subway rider has accused a woman of breaking his Meta smart glasses. She was later hailed as a hero.
You must log in or register to comment.
“You’re going to be famous on the Internet!”
Lol, he’s right but not the way he thinks.
In the meantime, eth8n claims to have “filed a claim with the police and it’s a misdemeanor charge.”
“What she did was assault, can get arrested for it if I see her again and felt like it,” he wrote.
This guy sounds like such an annoying little bitch.
Sounds like a mini trump
Who else would wear this shit?
I suffer from prosopagnosia (face blindness), so facial recognition would be legitimately useful for me.
Omg I have some kind of name-forgetfulness. Takes me fucking ages to learn a name. This would be so handy.
see? these glasses don’t have to be for creepy men!
Unfortunately it’s unlikely for this to be implemented in a privacy-respecting way. Arguably, even if it never “phones home”, it’s always going to be a more risky option—e.g. police can seize the glasses and see who you’ve seen, whereas they can’t seize your brain and see what faces you’ve seen. You might be fine with that risk, but will everyone you ever meet be fine with it?
There’s no privacy in public. End of story. There’s no privacy to respect in a public space.
You don’t just wear glasses in public. You wear them in private settings too.
ok, this isn’t a private setting though. If she had attacked him for filming her in private i’d %1000 support her. I dont support ppl being violent because they feel like it.
We’re not talking about the OP. We’re talking about someone suggesting smart glasses as an accessibility tool for facial recognition.
Cool, run a local tool. No harm in that.
But ifyou snitch on my location yo Facebook at all times, I’m gonna break the glasses and whatever you put them on, no remorse.
You do not get to surveil and put people at risk like that, your disability can get fucked if that’s your accommodatin.
Reasonably speaking, you have no way of knowing if smart glasses are local or remote processing just by looking at them.
reasonably speaking, there are no smartglasses today that are capable of doing that locally, and even if there would, that does not guarantee in any way that it keeps the data locally. youre a walking surveillance camera, and like it or not, if people don’t like that, that’s their decision.
I’m surprised teslas and other such surveillance trucks are not vandalized more.
The first assault on a cyborg using assistive glasses, that processed locally, happened in 2012 https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/countering-mcdonald-s-denial-cyborg-posts-new-photo-alleged-assault-flna895484
Meta glasses process in the cloud because that’s what meta wants, the technology is more than there for local processing.
People with the need for A/R overlays on their vision? I can see their use in very specific situations but IDK why you would constantly wear them.
This tech for blind people could become fantastic, ai in general should be great for people with disabilities.
Same for a lot of jobs. I’m colourblind and can’t be an electrician, but if I had AR labelling the wires in basically real time it would be a different story.
Jackasses making weird noises on the subway and filming people ruin the potential of this stuff.
This is not an accessibility tool, and you’d need to fuvk with it a lot to make it one, and it still sends everything to Facebook-respectfully: fuck you and fuck your disability if your accommodation is to be a corporate ur-snitch; I’ll kick your metaphorical crutches out from under you and laugh about it.
Agree w the fuck you part but not with the anti-disability imagery. Anyone can become disabled, and ppl with actual disabilities have it hard enough without that.
If your accommodation is to sell my soul to a megacorp that works with the death squads that are eventually going to come for me, I’m gonna kick your crutches out from under you and laugh at how you can’t get up in ways I wouldn’t dream of if someone who hadn’t chosen to violate my privacy and take what will in the near future be a risk with getting me put in a concentration camp, that person being hurt and suffering is funny in kind of a poetic way, where the same action on someone who hadn’t decided their disability entitled them to violate my consent would just be fucked up and concerning.
Just say break their Google glasses, and fuck. You.
Nah, because its the disability being leveraged to harm me with a total lack of ethics or concern by a spectacular piece of shit. The disability becomes the aggression, or a shield for it, here.
And so hurting them on that axis becomes funny and good.
I like her defiant smirk, she knows what she did.
“I was making a funny noise people were honestly crying laughing at,” he claimed in the caption of a followup video. “She was the only person annoyed.”
And then everyone clapped at the noises he was making, all the way to the next stop, and then President Obama got on the train at the next stop and gave him the Medal of Freedom for his bravery and letting the woman sit down.
Seriously did this motherfucker just move to the city, that he thinks anyone will believe that bullshit?
The name of one of the passengers? Albert Einstein.
I’m willing to bet the crying laughter from people around him came after his glasses got snatched off his face and snapped.
Classic bully behaviour. Provoke someone until they react, play the victim.
It’s amazing how often I see this in adults. I’m so disappointed with the world.
someone should have done this to robert scoble like ten years ago because it might have stopped the whole craze.
Maybe Japan was right
What part? not having trial by jury
Requiring phones to always make shutter sounds to prevent secretly violating people’s privacy
Any coder can decide what sounds are emitted from their phones. Simply edit out the line or turn off the audio output.
Welcome to a world that includes Linux. As justification of my actions, would argue these features of emitting sounds after every action is addictive and since i own the phone can choose what runs on it. The only sound want is from A/V calls. Govts ability to regulate everything is not unlimited and absolute.
Especially if there is a coder involved.
That sushi should be eaten fish side down.
Actually going to try that. But even then the fish is not designed to wrap the rice like a bag.
Moving a sushi and getting it into the mouth, with two sticks, without it breaking, consistently, is really a mystery.
I could coding anything. But sushi is challenging.
According to the vast majority of sushi chefs in Japan, sushi should be eaten fish side down using your hands. It wouldn’t wrap the rice like that, I don’t think.
There’s a disturbing number of creeps ITT arguing that they should be allowed to film people without their knowledge on the subway
That transit system must also be a “creep” because they’re recording you constantly while you’re there.
Oh that was your argument? No, that’s wrong. Do you really not understand the difference between a surveillance camera and an individual person’s camera?
No, I don’t. The subway company are a bunch of strangers and they didn’t ask if they could film me. They might as well be the individual person for all the difference it makes. Are you ok with breaking their cameras?
Do you seriously need someone to explain the difference, or are you just being contrary for its own sake?
Can we have local AI type of tech that does not save videos? Something without a wireless connection.
While Meta built in a small LED light in the front of its glasses to indicate when it’s recording a video, it can easily be covered by a small piece of tape, making it trivially easy to spy on strangers in public without their knowledge or consent. As Daily Dot points out, people are even selling stickers for this specific purpose.
I was under the impression that covering the LED would prevent the camera function from working. I guess it doesn’t.
There should be a short of noise that’s made when a video or picture is taken/recording, kinda like how all Japanese phones are legally required to have a shutter click noise. It’d be nice if the LED being covered disabled the camera though.
Of course it doesn’t. It’s the finest in modern creep technology.
projection much? Imagine your not from Canada so your base line is not to suspect everyone is a creep.
huh? people in public can be recorded without their consent. that’s what being in public is.
Depends on local laws.
Yeah, but usually you know you’re being recorded because you can see the recording device. I think it’s fair to film in public, but not secretly.
Why does secretly matter? Unless they’re peeping under a skirt. It’s not “spying” - you’re in public.
Why do you care if you have nothing to hide is a weak argument that’s been used to erode our rights. Fuck off.
Dumb fuck, you dont have a “right” to privacy in public. Also i never said that you fucking moron. Have fun fighting imaginary arguments in an empty room.
You absolutely do, and even the Supreme Court has sided that you have some expectation of privacy. Blanket “you don’t have a right to privacy” is why I’m calling you a dumbass. The EFF even agrees with me.
I don’t know what empty rooms you’re in, but I’m not surprised I guess given the kind of creep you are.
You should try reading that article yourself, which is about aggregated, long-term tracking (like GPS data or ALPR networks) and persistent surveillance over time, which is very different from the moment-to-moment visibility you have on a train.
Damn dude, you look really fucking stupid here, do you want to try again?
Please follow our instance’s Code of Conduct when engaging with our communities and try to avoid using insults. Repeated breaches will lead to temporary ban from our instance.
If you know you’re being filmed, you usually modify your behavior accordingly. You can actively participate in whatever’s being filmed, double-check your posture, cover your face and walk away, etc. Not everyone wants their image spread online, so it’s important to give people the opportunity to avoid being filmed.
Clearly she did know she was being filmed but thats besides the points. 1: you’re nearly always being filmed in public.
My point is you’re not being spied on if you’re in public. Grown ass adult crying “stop looking at me!!!”
I’m not even legally allowed to aim a camera doorbell to the street
in the USA basically every third home as a doorbell camera these days. you are constantly being recorded everywhere you go, at least in urban areas. anytime i walk my dog at night everyone’s doorbell cams are lighting up.
Same here, no one gives a rats ass about privacylaws and no one enforces it
As Daily Dot points out, people are even selling stickers for this specific purpose.
From what I’ve heard the glasses have become popular among university students, and they’ve become yet another issue that has to be looked out for there.
The amount of precautions that have to be taken during exam time at universities keeps increasing. The testing rooms these days sound like they’re locked down as tightly as a jail.
making it trivially easy to spy on strangers in public without their knowledge or consent.
Hang on. I don’t need Meta glasses to spy on strangers in public. I can creep perfectly fine in my mirrored sunglasses.
and hidden cameras are a thing. The only reason the camera is worn is to know what target to focus upon.
Footage from cops cams are from chest level. These cop cams have been pushed upon cops because they lie 100% of the time. I enjoy their stories. The more absurd the better.
In the places where tech like this would be helpful, there’s no reason that “recording” needs to be a part of it.
Colorblind person needs help identifying colors…great. Doesn’t mean the video needs to be stored. Face-blind people need help recognizing faces, it can access a local database. If the entire point of AI is to do real-time computing, there’s no reason for any image/video to be permanently stored anywhere.
Frankly, make the fucking things illegal in public, and allowed only in private settings where recording a member of the public won’t be a concern. They’re useful for doctors who are performing an operation and interacting with another doctor via the internet at the same time. They’re useful for things like that. But there is ZERO reason you need to be recording strangers in public without authorization.
But failing that, at least scrap the ability to record to a server. Shit’s just creepy. It was creepy when Google tried it. It’s even more creepy when it’s from a company that is open about using AI to create “personalized” ads using the images of people in it’s servers.
These glasses do not have even a fraction of the computing power to do any of that on device. It’s a uploading everything to the cloud. The design is surveilance first ask questions later.
as it should be when going into a known dangerous situation.
These are not “safety” glasses for the benefit of the user, where they are the ones in control of the data. This is all for the benefit of the corporation.
Sure the guy wears the glasses gets some utility out of the glasses otherwise he wouldn’t have one. The evidence collected can be resold back to the user, but ultimately it’s the user that finds value in them. The corporation is unlikely to find utility out of the footage which they cannot use without violating copyright laws.
I’m not arguing that these glasses do not contain spy tech, the issue with arguing that is, so does smartphones.
huge difference. smartphones are not recording the street most of the time, and they have permission controls.
I’m not at all a fan of being recorded in public but all of your examples…
- identifying colors
- recognizing faces
- real-time computing
These are situations in which the camera in the glasses is technically being accessed, which in software means something is analyzing the feed from the camera. If it is generating any output anywhere, even just visually for the user, it is recording in my mind. It may not be storing video, but it might face match and store a list of every recognized face it saw on the subway. There is no way for the OS to reasonably know what the feed is being used for unless it has exclusive control over the camera feed… and I sure as fuck aren’t going to trust the smart glasses manufacturer to be honest about what it is doing with the camera feed…
So basically, if the camera is in use at all, an indicator light should be on.
i disagree with your sexual fixation on tiny LEDs. That was a dangerous situation warranting mitigation strategies including video recording.
You’re correct. I should have worded it better. I meant “Stored” rather than recorded. Much like streaming a video has a temp file in your hard-drive while you’re watching the stream, but which ceases to exist after a certain amount of time to prevent you from pirating the content by saving a copy.
Glasses should operate much the same way (if at all…as I said…I’d still prefer the not at all option.)
Think the issue is, practically speaking, we don’t have a good track record of modeling precisely where the camera feed goes to decide if it is stored or not. Mobile OSes do present a more sophisticated permission structure that gets closer, but things are still too flexible to really comfortably assure that nothing that was a party to the feed didn’t somehow store it.
Assuming the system ecosystem is locked down, one could conceivably indicate only for retained camera data. App has camera permission but no internet and no storage premission, ok.
Of course, realistically speaking they kind of tried that with camera modules having their indicators OS controlled, and the practical reality is that malicious use could independently operate the camera from the LED and so the lesson learned was to keep it simple and have the LED control inexorably linked to camera activation at the module level without any sophisticated OS control possible.
He went out in public with the intention of provoking strangers, recording their reactions, and publishing it on the internet for profit. A stranger got a bit more provoked than he had preferred. It turns out that some people won’t be fine with being provoked, recorded, and published on the internet. How strange.
The headline doesnt even imply this. Fuck pieces of shit that do this.
trolls taking to the streets has taken a new timbre
I mean people could record you with their phones fairly easily and not look like they are.
A phone is easier to spot and figure it might be recording, not everyone is expecting the glasses to be recording
Tough. You ARE being recorded, all the time. Personal concealed cameras are totally okay.
Recording in public isn’t the issue, there is no expectation of privacy.
Starting shit for reactions and sneaking pics like upskirts or of kids is where people are going to get upset and fuck you up.
We have no reason to reach towards this conclusion or bring this up unless it’s to project this hypothetical situation for purpose of associating the subject as possibly being such a person.
Extreme accusations require extreme evidence.
Recording in public isn’t the issue, there is no expectation of privacy.
Is anyone claiming that recording in public for any reason is wrong? Otherwise, I don’t get why this needs to be asserted.
You mentioned public, I was just clearing it up. These threads always get comments about recording in public, which isn’t illegal in the slightest. But you can still piss off the wrong person.
Actually there is an expectation of privacy.
The argument that “if you’re in public and are filmed” it’s not an invasion of your privacy specifically relates to things that are considered “legitimate public insterest”,. If you’re tangentially caught on a news-report about a house fire, or an event, or something like that, for example. Of if you’re in the background on a cop’s dash cam during a traffic stop, etc…
Beyond that, no one can use your image without your consent. There’s a reason that members of the press need credentials and will usually walk around in a jacket that says PRESS on it; so that people know that they are in a place where they are likely to be recorded and can move away from it.
There’s a reason that, if a movie is shooting a scene and they catch a few background people, they have to send a poor production assistant running around with release forms so that those people can give their permission…other wise the film can’t use the footage.
Some incel recording a woman for his own personal spank-bank doesn’t fall into either of those categories. And anyone who is trying to claim that they’re all the same thing is a fucking creep.
because of the situation he is in, the barrier is even lower than the situations you cited.
All you has to say is been assaulted or threatened often on the subway and no longer feels safe.
A conservative from outta state could perceive the women living there as more of a threat than their cuckoid menfolk (no Canada jab intended).
The footage we are seeing make complete sense. Instead arguing we should be praising his assessment and preparation for the situation he’s finding himself in.
This State is not inhabited by the righteous. The morals, ethics, laws, and consequences do not match the ideal you are measuring this guy against.
That’s for commercial use. There are thousands upon thousands of cameras all over, there is nothing illegal recording you in public. Look at Teslas, cameras on all sides, I’ve got a dash cam front and rear. Nothing you can do about it in america, it’s protected by the first amendment in public.
On private property it’s a different story, but you cant trespass someone’s eyes, if they can see it, they can record it. Think of how many ring door cameras capture people daily.
Lmao. Press credentials are for specific events, almost always on private property. It’s just a badge to people know what/who you are. In public any joe can record.
NO, you can only film if you’ve printed out or written on a piece of paper “PRESS”. This makes you super duper legit and only then are you granted 1st amendment rights. If you don’t have a printer or at least paper and pen, then you’re shit out of luck!
This is because people need to be able to hide from cameras - this is also why it is ILLEGAL to film someone if they don’t know about it. Why do you think there’s bouncers at every business who make you sign a release form to enter any building? Why do you think people are forced to blur out bystanders when they take pictures at Disney? Why do you think that its ILLEGAL to film celebrities on the street? Check. Mate.
Lmao
Honestly the level of confidence and intelligent seeming approach that other guy had, while talking completely out of his ass, is unsettling.
It’s a common misconception until you’ve dealt with it or sat down and thought about it for a few moments.
And now because of all of the media attention being generated he’s getting exactly what he wants. Millions and millions of views on his TikTok. He will likely be able to afford brand new glasses in less than a week.
I hope someone breaks his next pair as well then.
The doubebag smile on his face in the left pic tells me everything I need to know about who’s in the right here.
pfft Canadian. Your jumping to conclusions based on projection is what would expect from a people who were surprised that using GoFundMe during protests might not end well.
We live in a surveillance state, where was this attitude when corporate America and the government uses every device we own to surveille us? If you’re fine with the most powerful recording you, why do you care if the least powerful do? The only line that can’t be crossed is when we surveille each other? Or maybe if it’s not obvious you’re cool with it? Y’all deserve the incoming re enslavement you been supporting all these decades.
One is easy and one is hard, duh. If you want this nerd to stop recording you you smash his dumb facebook glasses. If you want the us government to stop surveillance of you through shit like whatever Pegasus has evolved into, Cambridge analytica, and palantir, you do what exactly? Install Adblock? Do linux? Tor? News flash: you’re still getting profiled, just not as well. Move into a Unabomber style shack and eschew technology all together? Sounds expensive. Violent uprising against the most powerful military in the world? Good luck with that.
we need a revolution
You know that word isn’t a magical incantation, right?
i think that under socialism, we WOULDN’T have ai-enabled smart glasses that have cameras. seriously!
luigi never said that ;-) Check your device it’s obviously been hijacked. Totally uncredible you would have written such a comment.
my pc is NOT even hijacked. that said, i think that if this were a socialist country, we WOULDN’T have any ai-enabled smart glasses that have cameras. seriously!
Meta is funded by govt. A Canadian company created the original tech. A UK bootlicking socialist country of yes men.
Most open source software coders form foundations hoping to attract gov’t funding.
So tell me again how socialism had nothing to do with why/how these glasses came into being.
what i’m saying is that under socialism, we should NOT rely on privacy-invading surveillance a lot - these smart glasses would probably lead to mass surveillance use. seriously!
Wait a sec! Why wouldn’t socialism rely on privacy-invading surveillance? They’d even be more inclined even after getting caught and told no.
From govts POV, The People are not making sufficient efforts, to protect our own privacy so it’s not a problem.
Gov’t corps will do whatever they can get away with. We live under “Rule of Lawyerism”, not “Rule of law”.
Unfortunately we need to make efforts to protect ourselves rather than continue not protecting ourselves.
The State will never protect you nor does it represent you. We are just marks.
are you an anarchist?
Are you, are you
Coming to the tree?
We live in a surveillance state, where was this attitude when corporate America and the government uses every device we own to surveille us?
You know how to stop that? Turn “location” off on your phone. Instead of taking that simple step, you’ll bitch and moan about corporations controlling you when in reality, you enjoy using their services,
Take some personal responsibility for once.
It is off, along with strict permissions access for all my apps. Location permissions doesn’t stop surveillance through the variety of other means though.
If you are conservative. That means being ineffectual and whine alot but do nothing.
If these people had any intention at all to act to mitigate the situation their comments would look quite different:
Don’t want to bleed metadata so please switch the conversation in the future over to Simplex, not Matrix/Element and definitely not Signal. And if you suggest WhatsApp i’m never speaking to you again. To prevent censorship prefer a forum where the comments have a non-zero barrier to entry thus adding a real cost to spam or gestapo activities. And to avoid being taxed into extinction i ask clients to pay in Monero. You can see exchange methods off kycme.not
Instead we are subjected to paranoia commentary that always lacks any discussion of privacy knowhow. How to actual mitigate risks based on your risk profile. It’s so fucking obnoxious why do we have to take this nonsense seriously like it’ll ever lead anywhere except in a circle.
Professing to be conservative is as close to being nonexistent that i’m surprised to find out not talking with a Buddhist.
conservatives pfft that’s not even a thing. In the US, they don’t even have their own party. There is the MIC party and the good intention that end in grift party. Which is like MIC with benefits. Doing nothing but whining and calling it right is nonsense as we learned post-2009 as they keep the same narrative and didn’t adapt to changed realities. It was their Biden moment where all doubt was removed and became obvious to all they are completely full of shit.
Btw have consistently and publically voted for bitcoin since 2014. Not cuz price up price down cuz math. I use the term bitcoin so those not in the know recognize the term, i actually mean Monero.
As long as someone doesn’t slap my AR glasses off my head because I’m watching reruns of Green Acres while I’m in a waiting room.
I’ve never been to America and even I know not to be a dick on a New York subway.
“Beautiful Woman Breaks Ugly Incel’s Creep Glasses”
“Violent assault is acceptable against men”
This is the correct headline.
someone’s cranky about it lol. won’t someone think of the downvoting incels
