If it’s from Meta in any way: No.
Same, even though that’s my favorite color :)
This is still surveillance, just with audio instead of video.
But this actually creates a new problem: wearers of pervert glasses have plausible deniability. “Are you filming me?” “Who, me? Oh no, these ones don’t have cameras. Trust me”.
Don’t forget logging every Bluetooth and WiFi device (mobile and hardwired) with location and timestamp and sending it all to meta for “tailoring ads”
Kinda makes a body want to figure out some sort of RPi+battery+automated exploit doodad to throw in one’s backpack to confuse/brick/pwn the creeperShades
BLE spam is already a functionality of the Flipper Zero but I’m not sure how much it actually hinders the data harvesters
Yep, it’s just meant to muddy the waters. Pretty common tactic, especially from these big tech companies.
I think the new problem is exactly what they want to achieve.
I think so too.
No camera but it will six microphones.
And a camera!
Not a camera! A ‘digital imaging device’. With AI!. Thats constantly connected! And it all happens on device! Encrypted for your safety! Trust us bro!
“They ‘trust me’. Fucking idiots.”
-Mark Zuckerberg
It’s not even the glasses alone, it’s that it’s one more major part of the ENTIRE surveillance state that is growing around us. It is being sold to us as this great new future, but we are all very aware of what they really intend to do with it, which is enslave us in every way possible.
They are denying it, of course, claiming that this will make our futures easier, and more fun, but we KNOW these people, and they are not interested in making our lives easier or more enjoyable. Just the opposite, in fact. They want us working every second of our miserable lives to increase their personal profits. To them, that’s ALL we are good for.
To us, they have ALL the money and power. Let’s take that from them before they use it to kill everyone who resists them, because we all KNOW that’s what’s coming.
My favourite part of this is that Zuck was so out of ideas that he tried to reinvent Google Glass at great expense and is running into exactly the same social brick wall that project did.
To be fair, people have become more stupid / subservient, to the point I can see why someone would think “let’s try that again”.
So… Glasses?
Not unless your normal glasses do all this: “The camera-free glasses, code-named Luna, will still feature an array of six microphones to allow users to speak to the company’s AI chatbot and its recently-released AI assistant, called Muse. They’ll presumably pick up audio from users’ environments as well, where bystanders may not be aware of the eavesdropping.”
What I love about the internet sometimes is that the literal thought that I had - the literal comment, character for character - I wanted to make is already here.
No. Glasses with always-on microphones, internet connectivity and logging everything anyone is doing themselves + the people around them. So not much better than the current ones.
Any stupid mofo wearing them Zuck specs, meet this kid:
Great! A product for people who may not be perverts but like sucking the cock of an evil corporation!
You gotta admit that’s a huge market.
Went to get glasses and made a big point of avoiding Ray Bands for taking Facebook money to make pervert glasses. Hoping it’s not the first time they’ve heard that.
I do actually like the classic nerd look of their glasses, but yeah, fuck that.
FYI, Ray Ban is just a brand name owned by the same company that owns most well known glasses brands.
Once you realize how consolidated the eyeglass industry is its a lot harder to find truly independent brands.
Anyone reading this there is still value in undermining the investment the conglomerate made in purchasing raybans.
Noooo! Well, I tried. I can’t remember which I got, but not a brand I recognized. I’ll have to look them up
That’s why I cut out the middle man. I place a screen at a predictable distance from my face all the time and let the cameras autofocus. AI makes everyone hot too.
The ads are a bitch though, but the Ritalin I got from Hims helps.
I not only have to pay to see, but I have also to pay huge markups for it??? Fucking hell.
It was always weird to me how expensive glasses and lenses were, now I’m just pissed at being right.
Yep. I go to Costco now because I’m blind in one eye so the correction is only for the other eye. Costco only charges me 50% of the normal lens cost and the blind eye just gets a balance lens (weight matched to the other without correction).
I’ve walked out with a brand new pair of lenses and frames for $30 after my eye “insurance”.
I had to get glasses for the first time, and the first ones i liked, just by looking at 1000 glasses and being completely lost were ray bens. I made an audible eew and kept looking. The lady was probably a bit confused
Congratulations on joining Team Four-Eyes.
The camera-free glasses, code-named Luna, will still feature an array of six microphones to allow users to speak to the company’s AI chatbot and its recently-released AI assistant, called Muse. They’ll presumably pick up audio from users’ environments as well, where bystanders may not be aware of the eavesdropping.
deleted by creator
So how about those state all-party-consent wiretap laws?
One, there’s only a couple of two party states. Two, that only applies to telecommunications. You can secretly record audio and video anywhere that it’s legal to unsecretly record it.
Not trying to be argumentative or pedantic, but:
- There are eleven states (California, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington), covering around 1/3rd of the US population with all-party-consent wiretap laws.
- States have slightly different wording, but like hidden camera statutes, it typically applies to electronically recorded communications and not just telecommunications.
- That isn’t really correct. I assume you’re talking about the exception where there is no expectation of privacy. There are separate hidden camera laws that require disclosure at times even in public places, and even for wiretap some statutes are written in such a way that even public places with semi-private areas (e.g., a separated dinner table at a restaurant where your conversation may not be heard by others) may still support an expectation of privacy.
In all, since wiretap statutes are criminal statutes and Meta executives in theory could be charged if Meta is not only enabling but also directly receiving recordings from users, it’s a pretty crazy risk they’re taking.
All totally fair, I appreciate the correction.
People this fucking stupid shouldn’t have this much wealth and power
Why do you need glasses at all for a version with no camera? Can’t someone just wear earbuds in that case? Can’t someone’s regular bluetooth (or even tethered) earbuds just talk to the phone in their pocket to do everything?
A glasses with a display were always my dream. But with actually good controls, which it looks like the current iteration of pervert glasses actually have, it’s more than I ever dreamed for. You can display a minimap there, you can do some media control, display relevant info if you’re working on something, speaker’s notes when you do the presentation, the possibilities are numerous.
If there will be a distinct version without a camera I might actually consider overcoming my hate for Zuck’s bullshit (but more probably I’ll wait for zuckless version)I know it is your dream. But, doing a presentation while wearing sunglasses indoor doesn’t exactly transmit humanity, connection nor empathy. I would nope out of that presentation. Everything else is just an app. They are all non-critical things, they don’t require a HUD.
Anyways, that’s irrelevant because meta glasses don’t have screens. So, no AR functionality.
They don’t have to be sunglasses. Google glasses worked how many years ago.
They are all non-critical things
I mean, nothing strictly speaking is. But having hands-free screen actually opens some nice possibilities that holding a phone in your hand doesn’t afford.
Anyways, that’s irrelevant because meta glasses don’t have screens. So, no AR functionality.
Wait, they don’t? What the fuck is the point then.
To be a creepy perv. It was obvious since first revealed.
Also, Google glasses were just as creepy. Thy worked in the technical sense. Complete social and market failure though.
Also, Google glasses were just as creepy.
I mean yeah, but again, remove a camera and it’s actually a very useful product for a very specific purpose.
Wait, they don’t? What the fuck is the point then.
To make things worse.
I will say the point, it is an extension of your phone essentially. A very expensive, pointless, and ultimately creepy extension.
It’s like buying a smart watch, so you can ask it stuff, and not use anything else it can do. When your phone can probably still listen to you perfectly fine.
These Meta glasses do have screens: https://www.meta.com/fi/ai-glasses/meta-ray-ban-display/
So if there’s no hud, and also no camera, Zuck is now just in the ugly sunglasses business?
They’re just impractical Bluetooth headphones.
I like to think my version is the truth. Like Zuck is trying to convince everyone that they look cool for real you guys, so that he can put the cameras back in later.
Bad news, Apple is trying to figure out how to add cameras to airpods.
No no no no. You evil tech bros are supposed to be endlessly re-inventing trains. Did you even study in evil tech bro school, bro?
To be fair, this is not that different from the always-on, always-listening phones in everyone’s hands now.
It’s drastically different, wtf are you on about
In what way?
Are we assuming that phones aren’t listening all the time and glasses are?
Or that you can theoretically turn off always listening on phones but not on glasses?
Or that the phones are Apple / Google / Samsung, etc, but the glasses are Meta, so that’s different?
Or just that phones are already out of the barn, and one listening device per person is bad enough, but glasses we will have a chance to regulate with common sense data privacy laws?
I mean, your phone isn’t constantly pointing his cameras at other people’s face and using meta’s database to gather information on the people you’re filming, that’s already a big difference.
Then you have different options to deGAFAM your phones. I personalky use graphene but I get most people are not there yet.
Don’t get me wrong, phones are obviously the most common spying devices out there, but jt’s definitely not to the level of these dystopian glasses.
That is a good point about having graphene as an option on some phones.
I was talking about the version of the glasses that will be sold without cameras.
Other folks covered it better than I can
Where? Are you talking about the camera version or the mic-only version?
One other argument i can think of is that with phones, it is suspected that they are passing what they listen to up to cloud servers for ads and stuff, but hard to confirm.
With the glasses they will definitely be sending data from microphone to Meta’s servers.
And at least the pervs are advertising their spy cams so you can punch them.
Literally anything could be a hidden camera.
