783
Women in Brussels 'filmed without their knowledge' by men wearing Meta smart glasses
(www.brusselstimes.com)
this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2026
783 points (97.1% liked)
Technology
85136 readers
4879 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I am not a fan of this technology, but as far as I am aware there is not expectation of privacy when in public.
I am filmed constantly without my knowledge when in public in the UK.
According to google there are restrictions in the EU about publishing videos of people in public where you make them the focus of the video.
Germany is not "the EU", even if they think they are.
But they are in the EU.
"in the EU, journalism is oppressed and genocides can't be recognised without special consideration of which special people are doing the genocide" would be a useful sentence by your logic.
Um... Ok thanks for sharing. Lol
Psssst: Brussels is the capital of Belgium, you know that little speck that isn’t Germany.
I'm aware. I've been.
Belgium has the right of panorama, an essential right for journalism.
There is a difference between surveillance by a democratically elected government and some random dude though.
I.e. in Germany homeowners are only allowed to film their own property. The cameras field of view may not reach into public space.
Also while photography in public spaces is generally allowed, people may demand the deletion of photos showing their face.
Surveillance by a government used to mean they had a random police officer follow you because it was worth the time. Now it's on mass surveillence which is automated and fed into faulty AI systems flagging. A random dude with a camera doesn't compare.
So to be clear, you are okay with being surveilled by the government?
So to be clear, you are OK with disbanding any form of law enforcement?
FFS at least try to argue in good faith.
Being against public surveillance doesn’t mean I want to abolish ALL forms of law enforcement/ crime prevention.
My concern (living the UK, a country with a disproportionate number of cctv) is that a society with extensive surveillance infrastructure creates the capability for abuse tomorrow. Once cameras, facial recognition systems, vehicle tracking, and data retention systems exist, future governments inherit those powers regardless of their good intent (or not as the case may be).
It’s already happening here. These systems are being used for “behaviour analysis” and tracking of lawful activities like protests and political activity. They his kind of mission creep is a slippery slope.
There is also the question of effectiveness. The UK has one of the highest densities of CCTV cameras in the democratic world, yet evidence on their impact varies significantly. There is little statistical reduction in inner city crime as a result beyond drug crime (20%), which in my opinion could be handled in a much more positive way.
I can’t speak for other countries.
So yeah, I am anti government surveillance.
Oh, so a short sentence can imply a more nuanced opinion on a subject? /s
Maybe keep that in mind next time before jumping to conclusions.
On the subject: If you want to enforce laws you have to have a way of knowing about violations. This happens via surveillance. Having CCTV is obviously surveillance but so is to show a driver's license. Or compliance documentation. So the question is not whether or not you want government surveillance or not but how much.
Ah yes, because there is no space between a surveillance state and "disbanding all forms of law enforcement"
You should take your own advice
I didn't think I'd need an /s for this comment but here we go:
It's cultural I guess. In France you have an expectation of privacy in public. Same for Belgium I guess.
I don’t think this is correct.
Public photography is generally acceptable in law in France until you publish the images. You risk civil or data protection claims if you publish identifiable images without a lawful basis or consent.
I think there's a difference between a world where someone could be recording you at any time and one where corporations are recording you 100% of the time, using masses of willing and paying citizens, in order to exploit you.