A New York subway rider has accused a woman of breaking his Meta smart glasses. She was later hailed as a hero.
I’m thinking this might have been a publicity stunt for either her or the glasses. If you see her launch a career from this then you know it was for her, meta wins either way.
Before facebook even existed a Canadian company was producing contact lens which trsnsmitted light onto the retina to create virtual reality interfaces. They of course had glasses form product as well.
So discussing big ugly glasses is 30-40 year old tech.
Keep in mind, VR investment scam has been around forever. But ok tell me why this time is different.
you continue living like it’s 2005 and tell me how that works out for you, mmk?
To be honest I’d like to go back to 2005 if I was given the chance.
Just because something has been around for years doesn’t mean manufactures don’t want you talking about their product. Cars…, it has special newer wheels. See how cool they look.
Phones… Look at the all new improved camera.
What’s that phrase ,any publicity is good publicity. People are taking about your product and its free and spreading.
Pretty sure this is going to be unpopular but …
Filming someone on a subway without their knowledge is often legal for video alone in the United States if you are in a public area and not focusing on intimate parts of their body, but it can become illegal depending on state wiretap (audio) laws, transit rules, and “unlawful surveillance” or voyeurism statutes. There are court cases and civil lawsuits touching on subway and public‑transit recording, but it really depends on purpose (e.g., sexual exploitation vs. news/photo use), location details, and whether audio is captured.
This guy is a creep and no he shouldn’t be able to record people like this. Then again you shouldn’t be able to destroy someone else’s property because you don’t like what they are doing with it. Would you feel the same way if he had his phone out and she did the same thing to it? What if it was a girl filming a man and he did this to her, would that be acceptable?
I hate to tell everyone we essentially live in a surveillance state and are constantly being filmed. Go look up Flock cameras or how easy it is to get Ring footage for example. I’m not condoning this in the least, but it is what it is. We honestly need better laws regarding this level of surveillance but as of right now we don’t.
Morally and ethically what she did may be applauded, but legally it’s not really all that gray.
In a more civilized society morals and ethics align closely with laws. That’s theory though, I think we ended up with a cabal of pedophiles and tech bros who just want dirty girl pics and fuck the masses. Good for her standing up (if it’s not yet another fake grandstanding event).
you are letting the rational-logical game theory elements of our society take over your willful intentions. Do you lack free will? No? Then act like it. Stop parroting the wisdom of the law when the law itself no longer reflects human intentions
Lol, meaningless.
Guess what, when you go in PUBLIC, your privacy decreases.
Those transit systems record you constantly. There is no reason to assume privacy on public transport.
There is every reason NOT to assume privacy on public transport. I’m not sure I love that, but it’s probably for the best. That doesn’t mean that people should be able to privately film you though.
Nah thats bullshit.
Intent is important. Being surveilled when in public doesn’t mean that its appropriate to record people on your personal device for your own use. Thats particularly true if you intend to publish that footage.
If some vapid insta bimbo was making an annoying noise, and recording people on her phone to get their response, and a guy broke her phone, I would absolutely applaud that.
Im aware that the law does not prohibit this behaviour, but the law ever was a poor indicator of “appropriate” behaviour.
Well she didn’t commit a crime and you violently assaulted her.
Intent is important yes.
The rest of your comment is just a bad take. You have absolutely no expectation of privacy in public. It doesn’t matter if I’m recording what I can see for reporting purposes, or to go home and furiously masturbate to the color of your lapel.
Now, if someone were recording upskirts, or in a private area? Different story completely. But my understanding is, that isn’t what was happening here.
Apparently, it’s a “bad take” I share with a great many people.
It’s true that I have no “expectation of privacy in public”, but I do have an expectation not to be a prop in someone’s content production hustle. If you can’t tell the difference I’m not really sure I can help you.
Apparently, it’s a “bad take” I share with a great many people.
Yeah, lots of people have bad takes on lots of stuff. Are you new to this planet?
Want and have are different things.
You might want that, but it isn’t reality. In reality, you do not have any kind of “don’t record me” rights in public outside of the extremes like upskirts.
Apparently, it’s a “bad take” I share with a great many people
Lol, what you got 7 upvotes there? WOOOOOWW
I hate this phoney “everyone’s on my side” arguments.
i agree.
The guy was acting as a citizen journalist. And he reacted like someone that lucked into a story. It’s a non-negligible risk that violence will occur on the subway in a lawless sanctuary state run by despots and inhabited by Karens and the third world. So wearing surveillance glasses is completely warranted in this situation.
Maybe he identified the threat? Turns out he was right. What if it turns out the footage is him doing risk assessment?
I just wanted to mention, this was a rollercoaster of a comment for me.
Thank you.
Not everyone is forced to think from the one perspective,
Uh she's hot so ... creep perv blah blah blah'. People thinking like this are doing so have the luxury of being in a safe place.Made 2-3 other rollercoaster commentary in this thread. Hopefully entertaining. Presented passionate believable arguments for both perspectives.
For the point of showing both positions could have well reasoned credible arguments. Based solely on the evidence presented rather than possible hypothetical situations that might be applicable given hypothetical evidence we don’t have.
https://www.freedomforum.org/recording-in-public/
yeah, it’s complicated to say the least
I like her defiant smirk, she knows what she did.
There’s a disturbing number of creeps ITT arguing that they should be allowed to film people without their knowledge on the subway
That transit system must also be a “creep” because they’re recording you constantly while you’re there.
Oh that was your argument? No, that’s wrong. Do you really not understand the difference between a surveillance camera and an individual person’s camera?
No, I don’t. The subway company are a bunch of strangers and they didn’t ask if they could film me. They might as well be the individual person for all the difference it makes. Are you ok with breaking their cameras?
Do you seriously need someone to explain the difference, or are you just being contrary for its own sake?
I’ve never been to America and even I know not to be a dick on a New York subway.
“Beautiful Woman Breaks Ugly Incel’s Creep Glasses”
“Violent assault is acceptable against men”
This is the correct headline.
someone’s cranky about it lol. won’t someone think of the downvoting incels
In the places where tech like this would be helpful, there’s no reason that “recording” needs to be a part of it.
Colorblind person needs help identifying colors…great. Doesn’t mean the video needs to be stored. Face-blind people need help recognizing faces, it can access a local database. If the entire point of AI is to do real-time computing, there’s no reason for any image/video to be permanently stored anywhere.
Frankly, make the fucking things illegal in public, and allowed only in private settings where recording a member of the public won’t be a concern. They’re useful for doctors who are performing an operation and interacting with another doctor via the internet at the same time. They’re useful for things like that. But there is ZERO reason you need to be recording strangers in public without authorization.
But failing that, at least scrap the ability to record to a server. Shit’s just creepy. It was creepy when Google tried it. It’s even more creepy when it’s from a company that is open about using AI to create “personalized” ads using the images of people in it’s servers.
These glasses do not have even a fraction of the computing power to do any of that on device. It’s a uploading everything to the cloud. The design is surveilance first ask questions later.
as it should be when going into a known dangerous situation.
I’m not at all a fan of being recorded in public but all of your examples…
- identifying colors
- recognizing faces
- real-time computing
These are situations in which the camera in the glasses is technically being accessed, which in software means something is analyzing the feed from the camera. If it is generating any output anywhere, even just visually for the user, it is recording in my mind. It may not be storing video, but it might face match and store a list of every recognized face it saw on the subway. There is no way for the OS to reasonably know what the feed is being used for unless it has exclusive control over the camera feed… and I sure as fuck aren’t going to trust the smart glasses manufacturer to be honest about what it is doing with the camera feed…
So basically, if the camera is in use at all, an indicator light should be on.
Assuming the system ecosystem is locked down, one could conceivably indicate only for retained camera data. App has camera permission but no internet and no storage premission, ok.
Of course, realistically speaking they kind of tried that with camera modules having their indicators OS controlled, and the practical reality is that malicious use could independently operate the camera from the LED and so the lesson learned was to keep it simple and have the LED control inexorably linked to camera activation at the module level without any sophisticated OS control possible.
i disagree with your sexual fixation on tiny LEDs. That was a dangerous situation warranting mitigation strategies including video recording.
You’re correct. I should have worded it better. I meant “Stored” rather than recorded. Much like streaming a video has a temp file in your hard-drive while you’re watching the stream, but which ceases to exist after a certain amount of time to prevent you from pirating the content by saving a copy.
Glasses should operate much the same way (if at all…as I said…I’d still prefer the not at all option.)
Think the issue is, practically speaking, we don’t have a good track record of modeling precisely where the camera feed goes to decide if it is stored or not. Mobile OSes do present a more sophisticated permission structure that gets closer, but things are still too flexible to really comfortably assure that nothing that was a party to the feed didn’t somehow store it.
we need a revolution. seriously!
Are you paid by the hour to post that comment on forums?
If George Soros is reading, I will gladly be paid by the hour to post whatever inane drivel you want.
Did that really make sense in your head? Or do you just blurt “revolution” randomly?
Maybe Japan was right
What part? not having trial by jury
Requiring phones to always make shutter sounds to prevent secretly violating people’s privacy
That sushi should be eaten fish side down.
The doubebag smile on his face in the left pic tells me everything I need to know about who’s in the right here.
pfft Canadian. Your jumping to conclusions based on projection is what would expect from a people who were surprised that using GoFundMe during protests might not end well.
Should’ve broken the phone and his nose too.
Can we have local AI type of tech that does not save videos? Something without a wireless connection.
Technically possible. You’d just need to connect your glasses to a backpack computer with 5kg of batteries if you want more than 2 hours of battery life.
Now that my toxic boss is gone, I can make AI tell me insults instead! (and have the glasses destroyed by mistake, because people will think it’s the ones that do record)
While Meta built in a small LED light in the front of its glasses to indicate when it’s recording a video, it can easily be covered by a small piece of tape, making it trivially easy to spy on strangers in public without their knowledge or consent. As Daily Dot points out, people are even selling stickers for this specific purpose.
I was under the impression that covering the LED would prevent the camera function from working. I guess it doesn’t.
Of course it doesn’t. It’s the finest in modern creep technology.
projection much? Imagine your not from Canada so your base line is not to suspect everyone is a creep.
making it trivially easy to spy on strangers in public without their knowledge or consent.
Hang on. I don’t need Meta glasses to spy on strangers in public. I can creep perfectly fine in my mirrored sunglasses.
and hidden cameras are a thing. The only reason the camera is worn is to know what target to focus upon.
Footage from cops cams are from chest level. These cop cams have been pushed upon cops because they lie 100% of the time. I enjoy their stories. The more absurd the better.
As Daily Dot points out, people are even selling stickers for this specific purpose.
From what I’ve heard the glasses have become popular among university students, and they’ve become yet another issue that has to be looked out for there.
The amount of precautions that have to be taken during exam time at universities keeps increasing. The testing rooms these days sound like they’re locked down as tightly as a jail.
huh? people in public can be recorded without their consent. that’s what being in public is.
Yeah, but usually you know you’re being recorded because you can see the recording device. I think it’s fair to film in public, but not secretly.
Why does secretly matter? Unless they’re peeping under a skirt. It’s not “spying” - you’re in public.
If you know you’re being filmed, you usually modify your behavior accordingly. You can actively participate in whatever’s being filmed, double-check your posture, cover your face and walk away, etc. Not everyone wants their image spread online, so it’s important to give people the opportunity to avoid being filmed.
Clearly she did know she was being filmed but thats besides the points. 1: you’re nearly always being filmed in public.
My point is you’re not being spied on if you’re in public. Grown ass adult crying “stop looking at me!!!”
Why do you care if you have nothing to hide is a weak argument that’s been used to erode our rights. Fuck off.
Dumb fuck, you dont have a “right” to privacy in public. Also i never said that you fucking moron. Have fun fighting imaginary arguments in an empty room.
You absolutely do, and even the Supreme Court has sided that you have some expectation of privacy. Blanket “you don’t have a right to privacy” is why I’m calling you a dumbass. The EFF even agrees with me.
I don’t know what empty rooms you’re in, but I’m not surprised I guess given the kind of creep you are.
You should try reading that article yourself, which is about aggregated, long-term tracking (like GPS data or ALPR networks) and persistent surveillance over time, which is very different from the moment-to-moment visibility you have on a train.
Damn dude, you look really fucking stupid here, do you want to try again?
I’m not even legally allowed to aim a camera doorbell to the street
in the USA basically every third home as a doorbell camera these days. you are constantly being recorded everywhere you go, at least in urban areas. anytime i walk my dog at night everyone’s doorbell cams are lighting up.
Same here, no one gives a rats ass about privacylaws and no one enforces it
Depends on local laws.
We live in a surveillance state, where was this attitude when corporate America and the government uses every device we own to surveille us? If you’re fine with the most powerful recording you, why do you care if the least powerful do? The only line that can’t be crossed is when we surveille each other? Or maybe if it’s not obvious you’re cool with it? Y’all deserve the incoming re enslavement you been supporting all these decades.
If you are conservative. That means being ineffectual and whine alot but do nothing.
If these people had any intention at all to act to mitigate the situation their comments would look quite different:
Don’t want to bleed metadata so please switch the conversation in the future over to Simplex, not Matrix/Element and definitely not Signal. And if you suggest WhatsApp i’m never speaking to you again. To prevent censorship prefer a forum where the comments have a non-zero barrier to entry thus adding a real cost to spam or gestapo activities. And to avoid being taxed into extinction i ask clients to pay in Monero. You can see exchange methods off kycme.not
Instead we are subjected to paranoia commentary that always lacks any discussion of privacy knowhow. How to actual mitigate risks based on your risk profile. It’s so fucking obnoxious why do we have to take this nonsense seriously like it’ll ever lead anywhere except in a circle.
Professing to be conservative is as close to being nonexistent that i’m surprised to find out not talking with a Buddhist.
conservatives pfft that’s not even a thing. In the US, they don’t even have their own party. There is the MIC party and the good intention that end in grift party. Which is like MIC with benefits. Doing nothing but whining and calling it right is nonsense as we learned post-2009 as they keep the same narrative and didn’t adapt to changed realities. It was their Biden moment where all doubt was removed and became obvious to all they are completely full of shit.
Btw have consistently and publically voted for bitcoin since 2014. Not cuz price up price down cuz math. I use the term bitcoin so those not in the know recognize the term, i actually mean Monero.
We live in a surveillance state, where was this attitude when corporate America and the government uses every device we own to surveille us?
You know how to stop that? Turn “location” off on your phone. Instead of taking that simple step, you’ll bitch and moan about corporations controlling you when in reality, you enjoy using their services,
Take some personal responsibility for once.
It is off, along with strict permissions access for all my apps. Location permissions doesn’t stop surveillance through the variety of other means though.
we need a revolution
You know that word isn’t a magical incantation, right?
luigi never said that ;-)
Check your device it’s obviously been hijacked. Totally uncredible you would have written such a comment.
And you’re welcome
Are you, are you
Coming to the tree?
One is easy and one is hard, duh. If you want this nerd to stop recording you you smash his dumb facebook glasses. If you want the us government to stop surveillance of you through shit like whatever Pegasus has evolved into, Cambridge analytica, and palantir, you do what exactly? Install Adblock? Do linux? Tor? News flash: you’re still getting profiled, just not as well. Move into a Unabomber style shack and eschew technology all together? Sounds expensive. Violent uprising against the most powerful military in the world? Good luck with that.
Fixable by constant streaming to cloud. Which would be a needed feature for those at protests where it’s expected to encounter censorship by the State. One step beyond that is the relay off mesh network until reach a few nodes with web connections.
The guy likes collecting evidence. Both against himself and others. Discovery is a bitch.
An unprovoked attack is an unprovoked attack. In this case, the guy choose not to beat her senseless. How kind of him. That’s a gambling women. People laugh cuz she got away with it. And after losing a few teeth they’d react to that too. Some would laugh even harder. At which point who’s the hero?
The woman, the man, or the guys laughing even harder?
Someone comes up to me and breaks my reading glasses or laptop, i’m gonna be thinking which arm was used? OK that is the arm i break. i’m a coder FAFO
Disclosure: in the subway a Japanese guy, no provocation, intentionally kicked my shin hard. Oh that’s interesting, i’ve never been kicked by a chihuahua (i’m twice his size). Lets see how this plays out. So i choose to stand directly in front of him. And he continued to kick my shin and i continued to ignore the pain. Pain is temporary and it’s also a choice. i’m not Christian, so turn the other cheek is a foreign concept. I deemed him too small to bother with. He had no where to retreat to. I’m leering over him, he’s sitting. I could use overhead metal railing to brace against while kicking his head in. He was in a disadvantaged defensive position. I choose to pick my battles. To my knowledge to this day he doesn’t have to eat thru a straw.
If at the time, had laptop and instead he kicked the laptop, that might have swayed me to take that challenge. Beating up a chihuahua is beneath me, but someone attacking my livelihood maybe needs to learn a lesson. In which case it’s not violence, it’s a teaching moment.
Now wear reading glasses. Breaking those glasses prevents me from coding. As does breaking the laptop.
My point is the risk she took was real. It was a dumb move unless her intent was to become a statistic. Celebrating a dumb move or crime is expected from legacy media and morons.
I’ve trained myself not to laugh or take pleasure from other people’s pain or discomfort. See it as an indication of NPC.
I’ve trained myself not to laugh or take pleasure from other people’s pain or discomfort. See it as an indication of NPC.
But say shit like
I deemed him too small to bother with. He had no where to retreat to. I’m leering over him, he’s sitting. I could use overhead metal railing to brace against while kicking his head in. He was in a disadvantaged defensive position. I choose to pick my battles. To my knowledge to this day he doesn’t have to eat thru a straw.
Definitely feels like you’re getting pleasure from the idea of that person’s pain and discomfort.
Let you in on thinking during this situation as struggled to assess the situation under duress, rather than in a court room. And why choose to react the way i did. Figured the reaction might come off as unbelievable or highly improbable. The entire situation is absurd.
Like with all the mixed reactions to all things that never happened in the article, can see how there could be a rainbow of reactions. Without the explanation there would be a sea of even more wild reactions. From the outset would rather nip those in the bud.
You are welcome to reach the conclusion you have. Although the two comments are mutually exclusive, pain is a theme in both. So that drew your attention. In some parallel universe where i’d be standing over this guy laughing while he’s kicking me while encouraging others to also laugh while disparaging them for having laughed. Gotta say your talent is being wasted here. Safe to say Netflix is hiring.
You definitely used a lot of words there. I don’t really think you said anything, but you certainly used a lot of words.
Removed by mod
*woman
*who’s
And I agree with ↓
thank you. I made the edits
