this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2025
255 points (95.4% liked)

Technology

75406 readers
1642 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zak@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Smart glasses also raise many privacy concerns, as their cameras and microphones may be recording at any given time, which can be unnerving to people.

This reaction has always struck me as, at best ill-informed. If I search for spy camera glasses on Amazon, I can find much cheaper and less obvious options to record people without their knowledge. If glasses are getting extra scrutiny lately, maybe I'd be better off with a spy camera pen or something like this which can be disguised as part of a button-up shirt.

Of course actually using any of these to record people without their consent in most situations makes you an asshole, but that capability already existed and is continually expanding.

[–] JustTesting@lemmy.hogru.ch 28 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

sure, but there the spying is the purpose, whereas with the glasses it's incidental.

you don't buy such gadgets if you don't intend to spy, but people would buy meta glasses for other reason, and meta being able to spy on you is just a side-effect. Plus it' a matter of scale, this has the potential of being much more prominent than some spy camera.

[–] Zak@lemmy.world 10 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Meta spying is its own issue, and I think a very legitimate concern.

I'm understanding the concern the article mentions about smart glasses in general (independent of who manufactures them) being the user recording people. That's what people seemed to be upset about when Google Glass launched as well.

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 6 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

I think the reason this is a problem with smart glasses but not with spy pens is that smart glasses are more accessible. I mean, you don't just keep a spy pen on your person, or even buy one, in case it will be useful, right? but the smart glasses are just there, on your head. and why not take a few stealthy photos if I can just click and its one, nobody knowing? or even just that you take a photo of something, but there are others in the field of view who have no idea.

and not just with Meta. I don't think other companies either can be trusted with tech like this. Certainly not in this age.

[–] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 0 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Whoever exhibits that mentality you describe hasn’t waiting for meta to be a creep.

Yeah, they do. You never heard of a crime of opportunity?

Why do you lock your doors at night? You know that anyone who wants to get in can just rake the god damn lock, right? Most people don't want to get into your house, and the ones who do will be able to enter anyway, so what pathology drives you to waste your time like this?

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

"Incidental"—this is Meta we're talking about, and you can exchange them with any other technofacist and it still applies.

But I wholly agree with you that they know exactly what they are doing. This is how they get people to "participate" in their platforms and algorithms, whether they want to or not.

[–] JustTesting@lemmy.hogru.ch 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

I don't disagree. I meant for users it is incidental. Most users probably wouldn't buy them with spying as the main purpose(they just also don't really care that it can spy). making them much more widespread than something where spying was the main use-case, making the problem worse.

And as someone else mentioned, once you did get it, the temptation for using it for spying is there for a user. Making it worse than e.g. a spy pen imo, as with that you'd need the intent to spy first, and then buy it, but with this, you buy it for whatever reason and then think "oh, I could just spy now" since you already own the device, which I'd argue leads to more overall spying, so to speak. Maybe you see a video online and go "oh, I can just do that, right now, no effort on my part, since I already own this device".

And for Meta it's like tracking cookies on crack

[–] bufalo1973@piefed.social 1 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

Not spying other people. Spying the owner of the glasses.

[–] Zak@lemmy.world 9 points 21 hours ago

This was never the concern that caused people to call users "glassholes".

[–] FishFace@lemmy.world 4 points 22 hours ago

If the last fifteen years have shown us anything it's that very few people care.