this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2026
793 points (98.7% liked)

Privacy

10624 readers
260 users here now

A community for Lemmy users interested in privacy

Rules:

  1. Be civil
  2. No spam posting
  3. Keep posts on-topic
  4. No trolling

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
793
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by XLE@piefed.social to c/privacy@lemmy.world
 

Smart glasses equipped with cameras, microphones, and AI are a creeping privacy and security nightmare, prompting backlash.

And rightfully so.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 month ago (3 children)

There are plenty of legit use cases for a camera. Traveling in a foreign place the glasses could overlay text in your language. Looking at a transit table it could highlight the correct route and time. And anytime you meet someone new it could store their name and face in a database.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 21 points 1 month ago (4 children)

does that utility outweigh the privacy of the public though?

Shame it's meta because the answer will always skew towards invading privacy and shitting on the others.

[–] socsa@piefed.social 7 points 1 month ago

Exactly. Navigating a city isn't really that hard from a phone, even if you don't speak the language. You don't need to be staring at it the whole time if you learn how to just orient yourself on a street grid. Having a HUD for that purpose might be a neat trick, but not at the expense of being constantly recorded.

[–] JayGray91@piefed.social 1 points 1 month ago

Maybe antlion already replied to you (because I see two replies below your post but one is removed/deleted) but I didn't take antlion's comment as if it outweigh the privacy invasion.

Though, it is a shame that all the cool tech and legit use cases are for nothing because it's packaged with invasive spyware.

[–] edible_funk@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You have no expectation of privacy in public.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

WELL GOLLY GEE I GUESS THAT FUCKIN ENDS THE DISCUSSION HUH?

No, it doesn't. https://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.44.115

See, there's actually laws about this shit that you "no expectation of privacy" creeps love to ignore. And these tools are making it easier.

Why do you want to make it easier to creep on little girls?

[–] edible_funk@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

What the fuck is wrong with you? Now you're projecting pedophilia. Why are you thinking about fucking kids? What the fuck is your problem?

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

And anytime you meet someone new it could store their name and face in a database.

Enough of this dystopian bullshit! Or was that satire?

[–] antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It was a bit self-satirical. But it would be really helpful for me, if it existed. I’m not about to buy a face camera but I can imagine some people in sales might like such a feature.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If someone in sales is logging and recording my interactions with them, storing my name and face in a database and feeding it into facial recognition software, then I'm not buying anything from them.

[–] antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago

Me neither. In fact regardless of what’s on their face they can fuck right off.

[–] Meissnerscorpsucle@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

one of the leaked "test" features that everyone hated was the facial recognition...and i get it. lot's of opertunity for abuse. Shame though as that would be SO usfull to those with prosopagnosia or people like me who have an inability to remember names. It has hurt me profesionaly throughout my life. having the name and a few relivent facts about people pop up would just put me on the same playing field with those who can remember.