this post was submitted on 20 Feb 2026
1053 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

82855 readers
3804 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
[–] eleijeep@piefed.social 275 points 4 weeks ago (5 children)

Judge Carolyn Kuhl, who is presiding over the trial, ordered anyone in the courtroom wearing AI glasses to immediately remove them, noting that any use of facial recognition technology to identify the jurors was banned.

"This is very serious," she said.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 149 points 4 weeks ago (3 children)

Holy shit.

Kudos to this judge for knowing their shit and acting on it. I love it.

[–] Eximius@lemmy.world 50 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I mean.... That's their job... But yes!

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 21 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

That’s their job

Is it though? In Donald's America?

[–] Eximius@lemmy.world 44 points 4 weeks ago

Oh sorry... I guess I was projecting...

[–] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

She didn't do anything though. Each and every individual should have been immediately charged and arrested. It's a felony to film in a court room without permission. Every dipshit wearing those glasses should spend a month in a cell before the trial continues.

[–] RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Acting on it? I mean, I guess opening and closing your mouth is technically action.

[–] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 70 points 4 weeks ago

Each and every individual should have been arrested then and there. Imagine walking into a major criminal trial with a film camera on your shoulder.

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 60 points 4 weeks ago (3 children)

Isn't it usual procedure that everyone else enters the courtroom and takes their places before the judge walks in? So the team would have had ample opportunity to film, record and facially-recognize the jury before Judge Kuhl made them take off the spyglasses.

[–] RhondaSandTits@lemmy.sdf.org 19 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

The Judge also ordered them to dispose of anything they had already recorded.
No way of actually checking that they did delete anything, but the possibility of footage or photos being leaked by a disgruntled worker, etc would be a massive liability for those two idiots.

[–] Kissaki@feddit.org 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

No way of actually checking that they did delete anything

Not a random individual, but I would expect a court to be able to do so. Hold them, get an expert, verify.

[–] kureta@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 weeks ago

Yep. They should have been arrested.

[–] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

The judge controls when the jury is in the room. So the jury enters last, only after the judge orders them in. And the judge can order them out at any time to have discussions outside their presence, too.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 33 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

noting that any use of facial recognition technology to identify the jurors was banned

For that reason alone, she should have held them in contempt and declared a mistrial before wasting anyone else's time.

Zuck and his crew should've been arrested on-site for such an egregious breach of privacy and mockery of the justice system. And the next set of jurors should've been immediately informed of why there was a mistrial, and the very obvious danger of the defendant having even one frame of video with a jurors face in it.

Instead, he got free viral marketing.

What a fucking clownshow.

[–] PokerChips@programming.dev 5 points 4 weeks ago