• null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    23 days ago

    Yeah, well.

    It’s the functional equivalent of walking around recording video of everything on your phone.

    Even if you’re not actually recording anything, if there’s no way for me to know that I’m just going to treat you like you are.

  • audaxdreik@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    23 days ago

    I doubt they’ll ever manage to convince enough people smart glasses are inevitable enough to get the concept fully off the ground, but worst case if they do, I see this ushering in an era of cyberpunk dazzle makeup to confound AI and facial recognition, so it’s not all bad really.

    Dark spots, contour lines, anything to break up an accurate read of facial features.

  • PattyMcB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    23 days ago

    You know how people will get around the little light that shows they’re recording? A tiny piece of tape.

  • ramble81@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    23 days ago

    So at what point is the tech streamlined enough that anyone with glasses could be smart glasses? Is there going to be a general backlash against anyone with a physical deformity (needing glasses) because “you never know”?

    • Ildsaye [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      23 days ago

      There’s nothing inherently wrong with miniaturized computers with transceivers either, but companies managed to design one from the ground up to obscure and restrict its full functionality and covertly betray user data - the smartphone. The designs that get pushed under capitalism are biased in this way, and all the more so in late capitalism.