787
Women in Brussels 'filmed without their knowledge' by men wearing Meta smart glasses
(www.brusselstimes.com)
this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2026
787 points (97.1% liked)
Technology
85136 readers
4002 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There's degrees of privacy. People don't deserve to be recorded 24/7 just because they happen to be outside.
You might skip any trips to urban UK.
US cities are doing it too, but I just avoid urban areas as much as possible regardless.
They don’t “deserve” to, but it is not illegal if they are. If you’re in a public space you shouldn’t expect privacy…..because you’re in a public place. That’s pretty obvious.
Found the creep.
For simply stating the obvious?
In most of the world the law is pretty straight forward here - no expectation of privacy in public. Knowing this isn’t “creepy”. Not knowing this is hilarious.
Something being legal doesn't make it morally correct and the rest of us should oppose this shit in every way we can, not simply expect it.
Oppose what, that you can be filmed or photographed without explicit consent when you’re in public?
So if I go to the Eiffel Tower, I have to go and ask the hundreds of other people there if they consent to me taking their photo simply because they’re in my photo? Or if I see a criminal breaking into a house, I have to ask them if I can take their photo/video if I want to report them and hand over my photos/video to the police?
Snapping a photo or video of your family or a landmark for your personal memories that happens to have some other people in the background is a hell of a lot different than sending a constant stream of everyone you're looking at along with location data to Facebook, Google, the government, and whoever the fuck else. I shouldn't have to explain this to you. And yes if you're going to be uploading someones image online I do think you should have their permission.
That’s not what is being discussed though (streaming video to fb/google/government/etc).
That’s where it would start crossing the line into surveillance, which has strict laws around it.
creeps.
the same creeps who can't understand what the problem is. creeps filming women and girls without permission or consent.
creeps like you apparently.
I understand the “problem”, but I understand that if you’re out in public you’re giving up some privacy. This isn’t a hard concept to understand. It’s literally in the name - public. Public is the opposite of private.
Laws exist around where you can and can’t film, and on the streets you can film. What you do with the footage also has laws around it, but a creep walking around taking photos of fully clothed women in public so he can jerk off to it isn’t breaking any laws.
they're already modifying them to record without indicator.
https://leafandcore.com/2025/10/25/meta-glasses-creep-mod-gaining-attention/
What does that have to do with what I said?
A creep using them to record in a bathroom would be illegal, light bypassed or not.
I’m not sure if you’ve realised, but creeps have been finding ways to film women and girls illegally for as long as there have been ways to film women and girls. That doesn’t make everyone taking photos and videos in public a creep like you pretend it does.
if you don't understand the enormous implications on what that link means it's a lost discussion mate.
creeps have always been creeps. why give them a better tool with higher resolution and plausible deniability?
god it's like talking to a child
Perhaps your future camera could automatically fog any individual that you haven't received prior consent from.
And yes, I realise this idea has a number of technological requirements that may not exist yet, or cannot reliably exist ever, and requires the trusting of some authority in a world where noone of that esteem seem to be able to exist.