this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2026
317 points (97.3% liked)

Technology

88640 readers
2686 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 news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  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, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Archive: [ https://archive.is/7MXMZ ]

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 55 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Businesses need to start banning smart glasses with cameras or at least require the cameras to be covered with tape.

[–] thejml@sh.itjust.works 33 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I remember when you couldn't have camera phones a lot of business. Seems like these would be prohibited simply from a security standpoint. Harassment would just be another reason on top of that.

[–] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 month ago

Yeah, literal camera pointed at computer screens, with a view of fingers on the keyboard, and who knows what apps installed with access. Anyone who does that should be fired as they are a danger to the organization.

[–] MutilationWave@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I was working in a telecom closet on a military base and one of my coworkers called me to ask a question. I had already been told absolutely no photos. A camera in the room picked up the lens on my phone when I answered it and two MPs were dispatched to apprehend me.

[–] bluelabel@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

I was in the military XX years ago, camera phones were becoming a thing. We were allowed to bring it into camp, just not allowed to take photos. That was before Android time, I was on a dump Samsung flip phone with a 0.x MP camera. 😅

[–] nobodysreadingthis@quokk.au 1 points 1 month ago

So the apparatus exists to stop this, and they choose not to use it.

[–] nobodysreadingthis@quokk.au 17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

People need to start being more violent to gargoyles. You wear rayban, you risk getting popped without warning.

[–] orbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Love the Snow Crash reference. I use it a lot.

[–] Mediaburn@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 month ago

I'm so in for this. I am so tired and disgusted about how we let these influencers and content retards allow normal people to be turned into shitposts on the internet. If we started beating the hell out of these little shits a decade ago we woudnt have this problem. Luckely Ive never had anyone ever pull a camera on me in public. But I'm pretty sure I'd go to jail for whatever happens next.

[–] benjirenji@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Many places already do this with cellphones. It shouldn't be different for such glasses. Using recording equipment is rarely appropriate in a workplace.

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

requiring it already even with phones? can I ask what kind of places is it?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Hakuso@scribe.disroot.org 43 points 1 month ago

Meta is a menace.

Period.

Full stop.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 36 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

I hope the glasses break on their face. But:

The two customers were, in fact, recording Hinkle, and the entire exchange was turned into content for social media.

...Can people not see this is the root problem?

These asswipes make a living being asswipes because Google, Meta, or Tiktok pay them to. Thats the root incentive. Most wouldnt risk all that trouble unless it was their living.


In other words, I dont want the moral of the story to be "this wouldnt happen without Meta glasses." The platform subsidizing those glasses is the ultimate problem.

[–] JensSpahnpasta@feddit.org 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

There's also the root problem of employees having no agency to kick out misbehaving people. There's this whole "the customer is king" ethos in American commerce and this is enabling the worst people to harass people without any consequences. If you are getting kicked out and banned from most stores in your town because you are an abusive asshole, you might think again about your behavior and maybe even change. If everything that is coming from your bad behavior is that some random employee is getting fired, yes, this will enable even worse behaviour.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] stickyprimer@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I see a lot of honest YouTubers who break their backs putting together quality educational hobby content and over time I have followed some as their numbers climb and it turns into more of a full time thing for them.

And then I see these brainrot morons pulling down 1000x the numbers and it’s just crushing. I guess people would rather eat shit than vegetables.

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

I guess people would rather eat shit than vegetables.

It's not entirely their choice. The algorithm decides what's presented.

[–] stickyprimer@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It does so based on their inputs though. That doesn’t mean people are entirely in charge, but I think it’s wrong to say they have no involvement and just receive whatever the silicon genie dictates.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nobodysreadingthis@quokk.au 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

If it weren't for people being creepy weirdos the form factor of a camera really wouldn't matter.

There are plenty of legitimate useful uses for POV video. I suppose this is better form factor than having a GoPro strap to the side of your head.

[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 29 points 1 month ago (1 children)

What if we punished crimes instead of monetizing them? We've had a multimedia Internet for a generation now, we could do this.

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

"but you don't have an expectation of privacy! no!! you don't have and you shouldn't!!!! 😡😥"

[–] aarch0x40@piefed.social 29 points 1 month ago

Pervert glasses are also great for corporate espionage

[–] TIEPilot@lemmy.world 27 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

In my line of work you would be terminated on the spot if you wore these to work. I have sections of the facility that a fit bit would get you escorted off site and likely lose your job.

[–] imadethis@fedinsfw.app 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Lucky you. I literally get a camera pointed at my face for every hour I work, and it screams if it thinks I've lost focus. Hopefully our bosses would tell these cameras to get bent, but based on their little rich people concerns over how to pacify the 'lessers,' I'm not hopeful.

AI driver facing dashcam?

[–] HotsauceHurricane@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago (2 children)

My new go to is to stop the conversation, tell them to tell their glasses, out loud, to stop recording. If they dont then that conversation is over.
Period.

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

the problem is it was already recording you by that time

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

How many people have these things that you are running into multiple users? I haven't seen one yet

[–] HotsauceHurricane@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

3 or 4 people in the last month. People are buying them like crazy apparently. Bunch a weirdos.

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I was chatting with our CEO the other day and the topic of recording glasses came up. He said they are band in the company, and they've had conversations with their lawyers, that also say not to allow them. I was happy to hear that.

[–] SalmiakDragon@feddit.nu 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I like the image of a parade of glasses marching down the marketing isle, playing all kinds of different instruments, much more pleasing.

[–] some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)
[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 2 points 1 month ago

Thank you! (sincerely)

[–] Hakuso@scribe.disroot.org 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

There are legitimate uses for head mounted cameras that track your focus.

There are none for these devices that try to obfuscate their presence.

[–] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I hate that I had to retire my Raybans to home use only. They look exactly like meta glasses.

[–] Hakuso@scribe.disroot.org 2 points 1 month ago

Sucks to lose the investment, but better than being punched in the face for looking like a pervert.

Wonder if Rayban owners can sue them for their money back now that they're unwearable by anyone with sense.

[–] mangobanana@discuss.online 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

There is only ONE good thing the meta glasses are for and it's blind people. They are immensely useful to help the blind and low vision users to navigate the world. Other than that, they should not able to exist.

[–] chunes@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

As usual the disabled are the first to get hurt by all the bullshit people do. Guarantee one of these lemmy badasses who wants to run around hitting people is going to hit a blind person for just trying to get around.

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 month ago

let the downvotes rain but it does not matter who is uploading data to meta about its unconsenting environment.

[–] mangobanana@discuss.online 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'll never understand why Google Glass were so offensive but these are just fine

[–] MutilationWave@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 month ago

Timing. We are being shepherded into the surveillance state.

[–] UndergroundParking@lemmy.cafe 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Started a new job last Monday. Was pleasantly surprised by them having already banned perv glass.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

The bar my girlfriend works out has preemptively banned them. They haven't actually had an issue with them but management feel that banning them is good advertising. It probably is too.

[–] tigermountain@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

"A social internet cleansed of all content that takes advantage of others would be quite empty." I'm not seeing a problem here.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] desmosthenes@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago
[–] Zarobi@aussie.zone 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

This was a very good, detailed read, including interviews with real affected people. I recommend anyone skimming the headline to read the full article.

[–] Komatoes@discuss.online 3 points 1 month ago

Thanks, it was. And sad that in instances where the wearer could have been help accountable: Sprouts manager and comedy viewer, nothing was done.

load more comments
view more: next ›