• ɔiƚoxɘup@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      20 days ago

      “Never believe that anti-Semites people like this person are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites people like this person have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”

      Jean-Paul Sartre

      • FishFace@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 days ago

        Stop advocating violence against people who might be recording video in public, just because the device doing it is on their face.

        • Washedupcynic@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          20 days ago

          It’s easy to see someone holding up a camera or cell phone making it obvious they are recording. If you don’t want to be recorded, you can just stay the fuck away from them. You can’t avoid cameras/recording devices you can’t see. Fuck meta, and fuck anyone else wearing their garbage, privacy invading glasses.

          • FishFace@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            20 days ago

            Yeah, it’ll be really hard to spot the giant dorky glasses with the laser beam recording LED.

            Of course, in practice you don’t behave differently when you spot someone holding their phone up in the street, because you’re already behaving like you’re being watched because you’re in fucking public.

            • xtr0n@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              20 days ago

              People with legal issues, immigration issues or violent exes will absolutely dip if they see someone recording. I have none of these problems and I will always avoid gettIng recorded by randos if it’s easy to do so. I can’t reasonably avoid every Ring cam in my neighborhood but I will happily slide 10 feet to the left to avoid becoming collateral damage in some dbags insta reel.

              • FishFace@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                20 days ago

                So you can do the same thing when you see someone wearing the glasses, then. You won’t always be able to spot them, of course. Just like you can’t spot if someone’s filming on their phone all the way down a train carriage, or in a crowd.

                If your immigration and law enforcement agencies are so awful (I assume most people here are American, and so they are) that normal people recording videos risks harm to people who haven’t done anything wrong, then it seems like the focus should be on that first, and video recording in general second.

                People in this thread want to punch wearers of smart glasses because they hate Zuck. They all have issues if their rage comes out that way.

                • matlag@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  20 days ago

                  If I spot one in a public place, and I start filming them while shouting “Are you recording a video right now with these smartglasses?”, I guess that would be totally fine, right? No reason to make them uncomfortable, because they’ll be in their right.

        • Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          20 days ago

          A clear violation of the social contract deserves a swift response. Those glasses come off your face, and onto the pavement.

          • FishFace@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            20 days ago

            Who made this social contract? I certainly didn’t. You want to be able to tell everyone else what the social contract is, and assault them if they don’t comply.

            Fascist.

            • matlag@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              20 days ago

              When you say “fascist”, you do realize that fascism involves crowd control and these glasses are a dream for a fascist regime? All the speech about “cameras everywhere is ok” falls right in the authoritarianism thinking, that’s just a step from fascism.

              • FishFace@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                19 days ago

                Control of the public sphere is not a hallmark of fascism, no. Control of the private sphere is.

                Either way though, using violence to force your political views on others is more fascist and more wrong than any amount of surveillance.

                • Kurroth@aussie.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  19 days ago

                  Nah, I see someone wearing a nazi armband, they are getting decked. It’s still assault and against the law, but still the right thing to do in regards to maintaining the social contract.

                  Political violence is sometimes necessary unfortunately.

                  • FishFace@piefed.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    19 days ago

                    You might argue that someone wearing a Nazi armband is threatening violence due to the inherent violence of Nazi ideology.

                    The same cannot be said for wearing some dorky glasses, no matter how much you hate them.

          • FishFace@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            20 days ago

            You don’t have the right not to be filmed in public. Do you punch every person filming in public? and if you punch someone wearing the glasses, most likely they weren’t even recording.

              • FishFace@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                20 days ago

                I am aware. If the yanks want to copy it then they should

                1. overthrow the orange turd
                2. campaign for it democratically

                not go around punching people for violating a legal right they do not have. Your discomfort at maybe having your picture doesn’t entitle you to violence.

            • stylusmobilus@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              20 days ago

              If I see someone filming me, I ask them to stop. That will escalate if they don’t.

              I think what people are missing here is the intention. There’s generalised filming of your surroundings, surveillance cameras…these glasses are intended for use in a social capacity. That will move into privacy issues and perverted use.

              These peoples right to use these glasses, as far as I’m concerned, does not eclipse my privacy or lack of desire to be filmed and put on Metas platforms and if I find someone using them on me they’ll be fucking told.

            • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              20 days ago

              The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

              *Unless Facebook is the one doing the unreasonable search, and we simply buy their data

              most likely they weren’t even recording.

              Sweet summer child

              • FishFace@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                20 days ago

                You didn’t answer the question. You could just have said that you’re overreacting because it’s tech associated with Meta and you don’t like them, even though it’s basically the same as a phone, just on your face.

                You think smart glasses have enough battery to record constantly? lol.

                • SLVRDRGN@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  20 days ago

                  You mean you can’t tell the difference between someone visibly recording you and someone recording you with a hidden camera? You feel like both of those are the same thing?

      • lumen@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 days ago

        But violence isn’t the answer. And certainly not to people doing legal stuff in public. Wearing a Google Glass in private is different though.

        • Grostleton@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          20 days ago

          All I’m saying is last time this tech trend came around, enough people who had a problem with it took drastic actions that directly affected the popularity of wearing a spycam on your face.

          Wouldn’t surprise or upset me if history repeated itself.

            • yermaw@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              20 days ago

              Its not. I wish we lived in a world where we could be trusted with things like this, but we dont.

              I really want a camera on my face and a HUD so I can live life more like a video game with screenshots, but we as a species have shown time and time again that we can’t behave.

              Id rather nobody have one.

              • lumen@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                20 days ago

                Look, taking such glasses into a locker room is a problem. But someone wearing them in public is not. Anyone punching someone who does that should be taken to jail, simple as that.

                  • lumen@feddit.nl
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    20 days ago

                    And would you make an exception for journalistic purposes? Serious question.