Post

You can just ban socially toxic technologies! They were socially banned like twelve years ago with Google Glasses, we can do it again in more formal ways with this latest attempt to push the Pervert's Delight™ onto society. www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08...

abc.net.auPush for import ban on 'pervert' smart glasses amid privacy concernsSupport is growing for a ban on the import of so-called “smart glasses”, amid an influx of low-cost devices that are being used to film Australians without their consent.

1.3K reposts4.8K likes

Don't know if banning them will work , as the cat is out of the bag ,but I can see why this could be a problem . Maybe we should give a set to all the women , trans and people of colour . I wonder what we would learn.....

But let’s go further, and ban all covert filming in public spaces without a judge’s authorisation. This includes by companies, and no, signs saying they are doing it is not adequate disclosure. Time to end the creepy surveillance culture which has infested our society.

Have you considered the ridiculously heavy lifting the conflation of multiple different types of “privacy” you’re using there? And if you look at what I wrote, what I am proposing, I am suggesting we revisit that anachronistic structure in light of technological change.

The cold blooded lizard posing as a human. Would of course be over the moon, if everyone was wearing these nerdy glasses to look like poser that doesn't know how have a normal conversation without recording everything. Ideally I would love if he could shove these glasses up his ass.

Yeah why wait until things get bad with new technology? We test medications first as well to see if they are safe to use before unleashing them into the general population. They have to be tested safe before using these as well, and software as well. Like AI is already destructive.

The design will become less noticeable, less obvious, to the point of being indistinguishable from regular glasses. There wasn't any real pressure on design apart from making them less bulky before. Now there will be.

I see something totally different. I see senses: sight, hearing, thought, touch, taste, and smell. Smart glasses cover: sight, hearing, & thought. Life is toxic, choose wisely. Banning something suggests that you know best. Please explain and don't inflict pain.

We should ban cars, weapons, knifes because some assholes use them as weapons. What happens to the idea to punish the people who misbehave? Why not 5 years prison time if someone films without consent?

A Blind person was telling me off earlier for calling the makers crazy to think blind people would have a use for them so they can make videos they CAN NOT watch later? no one that isn't a spy would have any real use for them? and perverts of course

I can remember absolute yrs ago,on the back or inside back page,ads for 'X Ray Specs',of the Superman comics and spent years wondering if they actually were X Ray Specs... Guess I'll never know.

I don't think a ban is the right move. But more RnD and a push for accessibility devices for people with disabilities where these can genuinely help. There can be genuinely positive use cases for these devices. It's a shame both meta and the people using them have corrupted the good they could be.

Protesters need to start using these glasses. All these security forces are keyed up to target people holding their phones. Put the glasses on and get them that way. If protesters do use these glasses to good effect, they will be made illegal.

I saw an ad this morning where Meta was saying they were giving Meta glasses to every blind veteran. Nearly made me sick to think they would use veterans this way. Why don’t they just shut up and do good without making an ad 🥵🤬🤮

So, ban smart phones? They are kinda like smart glasses except perverts have used them for decades and they don't have giant lights that can't be disabled to let everyone know they are recording Smart glasses are the only camera we have even attempting to address creeps filming you without consent

in japan all cameras must legally make an audible noise when taking a picture to discourage creeps taking pictures candidly. There's no reason laws shouldn't exist to mitigate misuse of the tech, whether it be a noise or a bright flashing light or whatever you want.

This. The super-tiny digital camera is here to stay - the best we can do is probably try to make those lights difficult to disable. The more little robots in the world, the more tiny eyes. I don't know how we're going to curb that with a simple 'don't make devices with cameras on them'

I know that the use of these glasses by a large proportion of people is highly problematic but we need to be careful not to deny disabled people access to valuable accessibility tools. It's like banning white canes because people started using them as weapons.

I use mine to make sure I keep myself safe. When I travel to work its dark, my parking lot is dark, my works parking lot is dark. If anything were ever to happen at least I am able to have it recorded if need be. For me it is a sense of security. I hate people who ruin shit for everyone.

It's too gratifying to just say "ban the bad thing!" and then forget about accessibility and disabled people's quality of life and use cases.

i am sorry, but these glasses are not made to be accessibility tools, they're made to be smartphone v2.0 we don't have to allow shitty things to exist just because they have 1 or 2 good uses plus this boils down to the fact that nobody trusts mark zuckerberg, and nobody should

Thank you for being the only voice of reason in this entire thread. The only thing I disagree with you on is that a large proportion of people are being problematic. These glasses have sold millions of units and there’s probably only a few hundred TikTok trolls at best.

It's not even only about trusting the user: the data goes to zuc's datafarms to train ai. Even a perfectly innocent user is uploading peoples faces to zuc's surveillance network to be sold to nasty regimes, without even realizing it.

Why are people so adamantly against being seen in public by random cameras? What makes some cameras perverted?? Why accept the thousands of other cameras??

Something it took me a LONG time to figure out. I was roughly 40 when I did. But liars think everyone else lies. Thieves think everyone else wants to steal. Rapists think everyone else wants to rape. This list is long... But it applies to some of the responses in this thread. WTF people!

Soo funny I had a loaner pair of Google Glasses when they were new tech and wore them to a party for fun. Everyone was mad when they found out...

My god... I was raised to not hit people with glasses. I feel this ancient social more will soon be abandoned. My problem with banning cams of any kind is that we're already walking in front of 20 cameras a day. Where is the rage there? Pervs can also just attach a cam to a shirt or bag.... yknow?

Well... there's a massive genre of exploitative pornography called "upskirt porn," where cameras are affixed to things on shoes or bags or what have you, so I'm not sure they're really interested in your face to begin with.

Condemn the MF that made the technology to put in glasses. This is ridiculous. We have to ask dirty old men to stop it.

I was much more active on technology boards when the "glasshole" phenomenon was going around. Google wasn't forced to concede, they realized nobody would bite on their shit. They were still arrogant enough to try. Meta said "fuck it" and didn't even think about it before deploying these bricks.

For clarity I'm not one to cry much to the government about personal devices and banning everything because I don't like it.

This is really disrespectful to the blind community and to the women harassed by pervert glasses. It's not just a boogeyman tale! This actually happens. This is the same argument I had with someone over "but ai can help color blind people draw!" They can still live without.

bsky.app/profile/stij... Actually, no. I was informed I don't need to support evil billionaires who use glasses to upskirt women to "help the blind." Also, a blind alphabet does indeed exist as well as audio books

stijn123.bsky.social@stijn123.bsky.social

Your disabled aunt can get an approved version that doesn't send all data to Zuckerberg and is recognizable. She'll have a permit. Sorry that you won't be able to use her as bad faith excuse for creepsimping and billionairesimping.

‘Disrespect’ wouldn’t have got me far, and when I was employed by the Royal Blind Society, now Vision Australia, who sell the glasses. I await your apology

bsky.app/profile/tame... Read my second post. You might be waiting around forever. Get comfy.

TamelaRedfin@tamelaredfin.bsky.social

Also to assume vision impaired just stumble around is fucking disrespectful! I knew someone who was viaion impaired. Only had the little cane and not even the cute dog. He did just fine. What? Do you think blind people live like Mr. Magoo and just bump into everything?

Also to assume vision impaired just stumble around is fucking disrespectful! I knew someone who was viaion impaired. Only had the little cane and not even the cute dog. He did just fine. What? Do you think blind people live like Mr. Magoo and just bump into everything?

Bad news for vision impaired folk, who were just getting excited about how helpful they were. The ‘perverts’ will still have their phones of course

In OZ and other countries, you do not have a right to privacy while out in public, on public property. Anyone can record you if they want to. There's nothing you can do about it. There's nothing perverted about recording people or places in public.

Twelve years ago Barack Obama was president. A lot changes in twelve years, including any social pressure assholes might have felt from the rest of us. They need to be banned. This Laissez-Faire bullshit attitude we have toward basic regulations is what put us here in the first place.

As someone who is deeply face blind, it would be great to have a device to clue me in on who is approaching me on a sidewalk, or find a group of friends in a busy restaurant. But I recognize this as a niche use that doesn’t justify the downside.

Back when the original Google Glasses came out, I kind of wanted facial recognition to remind me “this is Alice and Bob, you met them at that thing last year”. Doing this in a non-creepy way would be a challenge (only from contacts? geo-fenced? opt-in?) and I absolutely do not trust Meta with that.

I don't know about banning per say, but there needs to be strong regulation about secretly recording someone. If you want to record an interaction with someone, you need to be obvious about it. It is not the technology, it is the use. A valid use would be assisting someone with a disability.

You know nothing about abusive relationships and it fucking shows! As if a partner wouldn't see as expensive purchase like Meta glasses or their partner WEARING THEM FOR IT TO WORK! But hey, at least you could use men to shut up women. Great job, buddy.

What about the way cameras were used in the gyms to falsely accuse men and make those environments toxic? What about ppl that vexed others to get them to behave upset, just to film them, to change public opinion of that person.

I think the way ppl behave with cameras in gyms for example is just the tip of the iceberg of how ppl will act with this tech. A lot of gym videos showed ppl minding their business but being accused of minding others when they are just being normal.

Cameras are often abused as ppl think they know it all from what they see, But scenarios are used to catch ppl off guard etc to make them act out of character on video or they will just record the part that makes them look good. Also ai generated video make it hard to trust videos altogether

What upsets me is this can genuinely be a tool to help the visually impaired. It can help identify things in front of them such as money they are given as change. Instead, like most technology, it's used to pirate movies, spy on people and for even more nefarious things.

In a casino playing blackjack, guy comes up wearing Meta glasses, pit boss immediately tells him to take them off or he is out. Not messing around when it comes to money

Part of the problem is the data is being sent to the cloud as it is being recorded. For vision impaired people I don't think that aspect would be necessary. Also, banning them in hospitals is in the works as they present HIPAA non-conformity and can create lawsuits against healthcare facilities.

I've reached a point where I feel filming in public needs to generally be 2-party consent to be legal, barring situations where something is being filmed for like... evidence of a crime or some major breaking news catastrophe. We just... do not need to be filming strangers and posting them online.

And while we're at that we need to cancel notify software and prosecute the software engineers and their CEO that thought creating an app that strips people naked without their knowledge and consent was a good idea. Warped morons.