423
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Bluegrass_Addict@lemmy.ca 106 points 1 week ago

precisely why I won't talk to someone wearing a camera, or pointing a camera at me.. I'll stand there in silence the entire time, or just walk away.

put the camera down, talk or buh bye..

[-] sundray@lemmus.org 36 points 1 week ago

“But I want to document what you say!”

🤐🖕

[-] NotSteve_@lemmy.ca 33 points 1 week ago

Only time it's acceptable is in front of a cop since they can't be trusted to operate the cameras they should be wearing themselves

[-] pilferjinx@piefed.social 9 points 1 week ago

Any public servants, really. Private citizens in public should have a bit of protection from potential harassment.

[-] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago

The point is that she didn't even know she was being recorded. That's why this story is all about the smart glasses being used to covertly record people.

[-] GraniteM@lemmy.world 45 points 1 week ago

I got a tour of a military base with a guy who was wearing smart glasses and I couldn't fucking believe that someone didn't grab them off his face and break them in half. I was being VERY careful to ask if I was permitted to take pictures in some places (in at least one of which where the answer was No), and this dude was cruising around like Boris Badunov trying to gather secrets.

[-] derpgon@programming.dev 27 points 1 week ago

Might be a good time to tell someone.

[-] GraniteM@lemmy.world 37 points 1 week ago

I DID tell the guide what he was wearing because I didn't want us to end up in a military detention cell but the guide was like "Eh, it's fine," so I guess it was, but boy it didn't feel like it should have been!

[-] reksas@sopuli.xyz 11 points 1 week ago

it was fine because guide probably didnt understand the concept of glasses being able to record stuff, otherwise it would have been fine for you to take pictures too.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Maestro@fedia.io 33 points 1 week ago

If I ever see someone wearing smart glasses near me I will slap them off their face.

[-] littleomid@feddit.org 63 points 1 week ago

No you won’t.

[-] TheJesusaurus@piefed.ca 24 points 1 week ago

You think battery is acceptable but not illegal recording?

[-] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 27 points 1 week ago

you don't consider deliberately invading people's privacy a form of assault?

that's fucking cute.

load more comments (23 replies)

fwiw I think you are completely right for asking this. Violence-loving freaks around here, sometimes.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] NotSteve_@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 week ago

The right to privacy is important

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 1 week ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] UniversalRecord@discuss.online 21 points 1 week ago

Smart glasses are probably where the privacy debate around AI becomes truly mainstream. Phones are visible, wearable AI cameras are much harder for people to recognize in real time. It feels like society is heading toward a major legal and ethical adjustment period.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] neineon77 13 points 1 week ago

another reason to continue masking in public tbh

probably going to start purposefully looking away from people if they try to talk to me with those on and if they push it I'll ask them to take them off and if they refuse to disengage completely

I know none of this is foolproof but it at least is social pressure and signalling to anyone around that I'm trying to avoid them if it escalates

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

I'm not defending the tactic of recording her without her knowledge. But I am confused. The article said she was shopping. It never said she stole anything. It never said she did anything incriminating. It never said she did anything embarassing.

So I guess my question is....why did she care that a video of her grocery shopping was posted? Seems like a boring video that she really can't be blackmailed over. She's (assumingly) fully clothed while shopping. Not doing anything illegal.

I guess I'm confused over why this is a thing at all. A bunch of boring videos of women grocery shopping.

Is there some context I'm missing? I'm not defending it. I just don't get it. I don't get why guys are recording women grocery shopping. I don't get why the women care. They do know the store itself is also recording them from every angle right? And I also don't get who would watch the posted video.

What am I missing here?

[-] shweddy@lemmy.world 57 points 1 week ago

Why should she be ok with a random stranger recording her? Whether doing something illegal or not. Why can't people just not fuck with people? Why does she have to defend her peace?

[-] pennomi@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago

I think they must be pushing back on the term “extortion” in the title, when it’s really “harassment“. I don’t think they implied that it’s fine, just that the title was not representative of the actual story.

[-] saimen@feddit.org 14 points 1 week ago

Yes, the original bbc article this one is referring to is much less clickbaity:

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwy87wqz0q9o

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 week ago

It's extortion because he was refusing to take the video down unless she paid.

[-] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

Did you miss the multiple points in my message where I said I'm not defending it? I don't understand why the guy is recording. I don't get why these random people care. From the second you leave your house, 90% of your day is recorded. Between doorbell cameras, and red light cameras, and store cameras, and dash cams on other cars. You're being recorded pretty much everywhere except for the bathroom.

I don't understand the outrage because I don't get the hook.

Like if you said this guy was following just one woman, repeatedly, then I would understand. That's stalking.

If he were doing it at the beach, I would understand, because clearly there's a sexual element to what he's doing.

But I don't understand the hook, because I don't get why he's doing it. What's the appeal of watching random women at the grocery store? What's the point in posting them online? What is the cause of the outrage? You're being recorded from his glasses, yes, but you're also being recorded from like 8 other camera angles with or without him. And I don't understand posting them online. Who would watch these videos?

NONE of it makes sense to me. You seem to think I'm attacking this woman, when in fact what I'm asking is "What the hell is any of this?" Either the article left out some key piece of context that explains everything, or I just don't get it. But I'm not attacking her.

[-] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 week ago

I don’t understand why the guy is recording.

For "content".

I don’t get why these random people care.

Because creeps can stalk and harass you online.

What’s the appeal of watching random women at the grocery store?

There's a video on YouTube of a guy counting to 100,000. That's it. Simply counting out loud in a droning voice. It has over 33 million views. What's the appeal of that?

You’re being recorded from his glasses, yes, but you’re also being recorded from like 8 other camera angles with or without him.

Sure, but the store isn't posting those videos on social media for people to comment on. If they were, they'd probably get sued, and for good reason.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The first unmistakeable clue was that it was a man doing this to a woman. The BBC article that saimen@feddit.org posted in this thread removes all doubt as to the purpose (emphasis mine):

Alice was walking into a London shopping centre when she was approached by a man wearing smart glasses. She says she had no idea she was being filmed.

"In the moment I just thought 'OK this guy is just trying to talk to me, to chat me up'," she said.

"I was hoping that he would leave me alone eventually but he did actually follow me."

The video was posted on social media and viewed about 40,000 times, though Alice only found out about it after a friend sent it to her.

"My initial reaction was complete shock," she said. "He had no phone, he did not have a camera directly in my face."

The videos are often posted on social media under the guise of giving dating advice to other men online.

That last line . . . think about what's going on in that area of the internet, use your imagination, fill in the missing blanks.

That said, I appreciate that your character is such to have not instantly jumped to this conclusion. But in the world we now occupy, there's generally not a whole lot of innocence in a dude filming a woman without her knowledge or consent.

[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 week ago

Grok, undress her, render this entire scene as if she had no clothes.... or was only wearing cellophane, whatever.

... Its still wild to me that people will do something like that, when you can literally just go to a strip club and look, or look at the vast, uncountable amount of erotica or porn that people freely post of themselves.

... Oh dear god.

Somebody is going to wear these things into a strip club and sell it like a fucking virtu in cyberpunk 77.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 week ago

You can record a video of someone shopping, and then feed it to a visual AI.

Blamo presto, now they're a shoplifter, or at least everyone on social media thinks they are.

The possibilities are endless.

[-] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/more-than-a-dozen-wrongful-arrests-due-to-police-reliance-on-facial-recognition-technology

Not only possible, then they'll share that data with other vendors and you'll be pre-crime-prohibited from shopping anywhere using the same stuff. It's fucking gross.

[-] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

What am I missing here?

a healthy sense of self respect, for starters

[-] valar@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 week ago

It's a candid video of her being shared publically online to creep on her. Probably focused on her body. Imagine it happening to your sister or daughter.

load more comments (1 replies)

Literally black mirror

[-] Bebopalouie@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 week ago

Need some of those things movie stars use against the paparazzi.

[-] turdburglar@piefed.social 37 points 1 week ago
[-] toynbee@piefed.social 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I suspect they meant the patterned clothing that confuses cameras.

I am against constant surveillance and these are huge privacy violations, especially because it seems very unlikely they're storing the media exclusively locally. Also, the fact that they can be more discreet than many other options for recording is concerning.

The first two ads I ever saw for these were of a guy using them to quietly cheat at, IIRC, a board game; and of someone having a conversation, only to realize the other party was recording it. They looked like legit ads, but I'm not sure how anyone could think that was positive press.

All that said, the number of people advocating violence in response is alarming. Depending on the environment, I feel the appropriate response is to ask the wearer to remove them and then, if they refuse, remove either yourself or them from the situation. Obviously no one solution fits all situations and there may be situations where violence is warranted, but it is surprising to me that it seems to be the default.

edit: Recently started using a new keyboard on my phone, had to correct a word it chose for me. The meaning I was trying to convey was not altered.

[-] Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 week ago

So WW2 dazzle camouflage? As a bonus, you are also protected from packs of roving U-boats!

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] MrsDoyle@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 week ago

BBC News - Woman covertly filmed for 'humiliating' social media content - BBC News https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cdxpqg22q34o

Video version of the original story. He comes across as a creep.

[-] prenatal_confusion@feddit.org 7 points 1 week ago

What were the victims doing that would incriminate them? I am not saying that it isn't enough to just not want to be filmed, but most people don't seem to care about privacy so I am wondering if they had some leverage.

[-] mathemachristian 13 points 1 week ago

probably being a woman while naked

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] NihilsineNefas@slrpnk.net 7 points 1 week ago

I swear if someone approaches me with these glasses they're going to find out just how fragile those frames are.

[-] mokey@therock.fraggle-rock.org 9 points 1 week ago

We have a real baddy here. So tough.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 08 May 2026
423 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

84769 readers
3587 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