Post

And most people stopped dancing talking and going out because of ubiquitous sensors stalking them. So we gotta choose.

In the UK, there is something known as a certificate of vision impairment. I think you can also get a card which certificates you as a registered blind person. I wonder how long it will be before a blind person gets beaten up for wearing these glasses.

You're so close to understanding! Yes, we no longer use asbestos for insulation: it does massive societal harm, so we use the safe alternatives. Now: should we allow everyone to buy and use the Perv Panopticon Spank Bank Builder 3000 because some people with disabilities like the subtitles function?

Possession puts people on the wrong side of the dodgy/ok line

​We're all falling for the sensation-scoring media madness. Anyone can covertly film anyone, surely? Stalkers, rapists, racists, criminal profilers, who outnumber the 1-5% of paedophiles many, many times, but we don't class them as perverts... Gullible, aren't we?

All facial recognition and id tracking apps banned. Criminal penalties for importing and wearing unapproved devices and for jailbreaking approved devices. Wearers to be registered on purchase and licensed. Should kill the market outside actual valid users.

Also works.

Useful on construction sites, in labs, and such. No real use case for most people except pervs.

Campaign, take it up with a hearing based campaigning organisations, contact your MP. Join forces with other campaigning groups representing vulnerable parties. Don't expect other vulnerable groups to suck it up so you can benefit. This is new technology, now is the time to establish boundaries.

I'm sure it's not a Meta priority. Unfortunately, people who genuinely benefit from technologies are as prevalent as nasty, schemers. Sometimes, they overlap. But given that, how best to proceed?

Yeah mate it's too bad it's materially impossible to unbundle that functionality from the glasses currently on the market. If you don't want the Perv Spankbank Recorder Glasses to be ubiquitous you literally hate the deaf

Blue for ordinary people, feel free to punch those, orange for deaf and visually impaired people, black for perverts, am I missing any categories?

The information they get on their glasses is your kids school, his family name, his address... all provided by your Facebook account

It's a proper moral conundrum. 🤷🏻‍♂️

I’ve had multiple discussions with my (Labour) MP about X and he’s also concerned about the issues around social media. He thinks that legislation is failing to keep pace with technology change and is frustrated by this too. It really needs to be identified as a priority by Burnham

Very funny and bang on

You need a good internet connection, and these do upload the conversation to Even, but they also work: www.evenrealities.com

I am open to the idea that a wearable display could be useful to the deaf. It's just a completely different conversation to Meta Rayban Pervert Goggle collabs. An AR-15 might be a helpful crutch for someone with a broken leg but...

Think of the deaf perverts though. (Great punk band name)

I'm Security. I hate these so much. I have to run three apps on my phone now to detect people taking these onto the premises (industry espionage, prep for breakins, etc). It could be so easy - they could be made as headsets, only in front of one eye, not looking like glasses. Its the concealment.

But I have a terrible memory for faces...

The way resistance was mobilized the first time, though, was to go after how dweeby they looked, and people who want these things responded, so now we have ones that are approaching stylish. That simultaneously makes them much more dangerous and makes it harder to push back on them.

Our civic sense has eroded. I live in a low-trust country (France) where breaches of the social contract are unfortunately tolerated (sound-on smartphone on public transport, etc.); I hope we can still pressure glassholes out of existence but I'm not holding my breath.

The next step down from glasses-with-a-cam is glasses with a wireless connection to a cam, or a phone with a wireless connection to glasses with a display. Ultimately it's cams not glasses that are the issue and maybe regulation of all public photography and video is where this is headed

👏

@hypervisible.blacksky.app described them as "pervert glasses" and I recognise a good name when I see one.

What happened to the flashing red light we used to have on camcorders that indicated you were recording?

Ban the fucking things.

No, smart glasses can project useful information for the user without having CAMERAS. Having CAMERAS is a deliberate perv decision by pervy firms like Meta. Smart glasses can do whatever they want for all I care, except surreptitiously filming people.

Mark Zuckerberg is in the Epstein files.

> Look, on the one hand they allow perverts to covertly film your children and… [feed the images in to an AI which will generate fake nudes and] > …upload the footage to pedophelia forums ??

At least in the U.S., there is no presumption of privacy in public spaces (given the pervasive implementation of cctv in the U.K., I would presume a similar posture exists there)…although, I am certain there are myriad caveats to this general rule.

I can think of more proportionate solutions than a ban. - Prohibit all those on the sex offenders list from owning/operating the glasses; - as a default, camera LED to be on, and unobscured during filming in public places. - others… But hey, let’s have a moral panic, clicks & LOLs ahoy!

"But Dmitry, how could you suspect the nice people at Meta of catering to perverts?" bsky.app/profile/robe...

Controllers of public spaces should make the decision for the regulator. Ban them on public transport, in shopping malls, schools, workplaces. university campuses etc.

paedo goggles 🤓

Also it could make life easier for people like Chris McCausland. Clearly it needs regulating but much as I despise Meta this is groundbreaking.