this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2024
190 points (90.6% liked)

Technology

58424 readers
4654 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 74 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Clickbait warning. This has nothing to do with the Meta smart glasses. They're just a means of taking pictures of people without them noticing. But you could do the same with any internet connected camera / phone etc.

[–] Dorkyd68@lemmy.world 12 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Op has over 3800 posts in under a year. Yikes. Either bot or one smelly keyboard warrior

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Eh, they probably just have a feed and post a bunch all at once. I've seen other posters do something similar. Creating 10-15 lemmy posts/day isn't particularly hard if you're literally just copy/pasting links from an RSS feed.

[–] Dorkyd68@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Not saying it's difficult nor all that time consuming. If you are creating 10+ posts a days, rss feed or not you need to revaluate your free time. Essentially you're attempting to sway the opinions of strangers online, all day everyday there's no other reason for that many posts other than attempting to sway others opinions. And that's fucking lame dude

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 18 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

How does that automatically dox people? I have a load of photos of people who I got in the background. I don't magically know their names.

[–] hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 8 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

they do some reverse image search on the internet and find your facebook profile or similar things.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

Not that I have a Facebook profile, but even if I did, that would only give them access to information that I made public.

Doxing requires you to release information that you otherwise would keep private.

It won't let them know my bank account details or my home address or my medical history or anything like that.

[–] nutsack@lemmy.world -3 points 17 hours ago

so, reverse doxing?

[–] PrivacyDingus@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

it is annoying when they do that; i would, however, venture that these glasses probably give people a way of doing things more surreptitiously, even though this article doesn't explore that

[–] hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah, they mention that it's unsuspicious glasses by the look. We'll have to see what this comes to... When google introduced their Google glasses, people got yelled at on the streets, at least as far as I remember.

[–] nutsack@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago

I don't think anyone actually got yelled at for wearing them. they were pretty rare to see. I know people who wore them all the time

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 31 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Meta could build a set of glasses that lets me view Pluto, washes the dishes, and gives me a loving blowjob, and I wouldn't let them get within 10m of me.

[–] ouRKaoS@lemmy.today 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

What if it was an angry blowjob to sweeten the deal?

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] CrazyLikeGollum@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

With a sandpaper tongue and diamond studded grilles.

Nope cant do it without the powdered Carolina ghost pepper water.

[–] Azureumbra@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's wild to me that this hasn't become the news of the day.

If I were RayBan I would jump ship right now before brand image is tanked. Why would you trust anyone wearing RayBans after this?

[–] realharo@lemm.ee 31 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

You can do this with any camera, including the one in all the phones out there. The only thing specific to the glasses is that it's more convenient and inconspicuous to be wearing it on your face.

Might as well have put the iPhone in the title for more clickbait. Anyone dedicated enough can make or buy tons of different kinds of wearables that could do the same.

The key issue is that such a database exists and is so easily searchable.

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I have semi face-blindness, it takes several meetings before I can start recognising a person's face. Something like this would actually be a lifesaver for me, just so I can know who I'm talking to and whether I've met them before.

I don't have many issues, but my memory can sometimes suck, so I would also like something like this.

But not from Meta. I need to be 100% in control of the data before I'd ever feel comfortable wearing them in public.

[–] jeena@piefed.jeena.net 25 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Why do you need the glasses, can't you take the picture with your phone?

[–] SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Because people get suspicious when somebody is taking pictures of every stranger they come across, but people looking at passersby while wearing glasses is normal.

[–] realharo@lemm.ee 10 points 1 day ago

Just pretend to be a travel YouTuber, or a live streamer.

[–] Jesusaurus@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago

The glasses are just less obvious than me pointing my phone at you and snapping a picture

[–] Tyfud@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago
[–] rasakaf679@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago

It isn't as obvious as shoving phone infront to take photos, whereas glasses are more incognito

[–] Soup@lemmy.cafe 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Now just imagine AI being given this type of access.

[–] JoeKrogan@lemmy.world 7 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I imagine they have this stuff internally classifying photos and faces.

Sure, facebook has been doing it for years. They build shadow profiles on people, allegedly 'only' (massive air quotes around that one) so if those people ever join they'll have links and photos and such already waiting for them.

[–] yournamehere@lemm.ee 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

porn has driven every digital invention from vhs to web. metas stupid glasses will be sold out when you get a realtime nude-filter. coz then everyone would also accept ads in the fiel of view.

[–] wesker@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

The company behind Threads, which we've allowed to now infest the fediverse with little evident opposition. Cheers y'all.

[–] tate@lemmy.sdf.org 54 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I have not noticed any threads content in Lemmy.

[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 43 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Almost every Lemmy instance blocked threads.

[–] tate@lemmy.sdf.org 20 points 1 day ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

Exactly. In other words, they have not been "allowed to infest" the fediverse.

[–] wesker@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I forgot Lemmy is the only ActivityPub platform.

[–] TheTetrapod@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Only one worth using! Up top!

[–] LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 23 hours ago

This. Mastodon is better than twitter by the virtue of not being a neo-nazi hangout spot owned by a hack. But it's still a twitter which was always shit celeb culture circlejerk

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 25 points 1 day ago

They have no power here.

[–] dumbass@leminal.space 1 points 1 day ago

You're welcome buddy!

[–] IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

And yet the world goes on and cameras still exist.

load more comments
view more: next ›