this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2026

96 points (95.3% liked)

Technology

87190 readers

4698 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

L3s@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

L4s@lemmy.world

L3s@hackingne.ws

An Indian Trans Person’s Harrowing Encounter Fuels Backlash Against Meta AI ‘Pervert Glasses’ (www.techpolicy.press)

submitted 3 weeks ago by beep@piefed.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

19 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://piefed.world/c/tech/p/1284969/an-indian-trans-persons-harrowing-encounter-fuels-backlash-against-meta-ai-pervert-glass

all 20 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] XLE@piefed.social 45 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Meta enlisted cricketer Virat Kohli and a roster of content creators to promote its Gen 2 version of the glasses aimed at affluent Indians.

And it turns out affluent Indians behave the exact same as affluent Americans that go around like creeps to record people. In this case, it was to effectively mock and dox them. And it clearly worked, because the influencer gets to hide behind a pseudonym in the article, while the trans person does not.

[–] borkborkbork@piefed.social 24 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I'm so sick of this entire concept. And the fucking chuds that pop up and say "you have no expectation of privacy in public" fuck you, people do have rights in public when there's a voyeur recording up their skirts or down their blouses. people - women and kids especially - deserve to live in a world where they aren't recorded by every fucking sicko that walks by

[–] BlaestEgnen@feddit.dk 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

There's also laws in place if you're in focus, that requires permission.

Sure I can take a picture of a plaza and if you happen to be on that photo, that's bad luck. But I can't zoom in on you garbling down a spinach roll.

For your scenario of going too close and forcing their way to film voyeur stuff, sounds like harassment

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com -4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

<.< I mean, you’re as disallowed to stick you’re face in those places just as much as you’re disallowed to stick a camera. This feels like a “think of the children” argument.

If I stick my phone in my shirt pocket, I can record and live stream it, how is the camera being mounted to my head any different?

Like, I get it. People are assholes, and I 100% agree that is the case. But assholes have been recording themselves doing asshole things for decades, this isn’t new behavior, and it feels like its being used to vilify tech for existing.

[–] borkborkbork@piefed.social 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

your argument is garbage, ignoring the reality that hardware has - who'd have fuckin thought it - come quite a long way in last 20 years.

also, your old glassholes were exceptionally low resolution AND didn't have machine learning & facial recognition behind them

people are assholes and you're excusing their shitty behavior and defending their increasingly creepy technology

think it's gonna get better if we continue to ignore it?

[+] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com -9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Fuck man, you’re right. Let’s ban cameras in general, they can be used for creepy things. Ban phones too, those can be used for creepy things.

The tech is useful, and has potential to become much more useful in the future. Being a Luddite about the tech doesn’t solve the problem, it just ignores the assholes.

[–] borkborkbork@piefed.social 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

fuck man, I am right, but your churlish hyperbole is noted, do you need a nappy?

problem is people like you are perfectly willing to sacrifice the safety of others because you don't give a fuck.

Did you even read the article posted?

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

The article which does nothing to suggest meta glasses were actually an integral part to this? Again, cell phone in shirt pocket. Accomplishes the same thing. Or hell, a pen cam which is a thing that’s been around for decades and is a fraction of the cost.

The problem is that an asshole decided to ignore the “no recording” request. There are dozens if not hundreds of discreet ways the asshole could have done this, in the same way there are dozens of tools you can use to break a window.

[–] borkborkbork@piefed.social 1 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Why are you so willfully ignorant? Meta already knows it's a problem, why won't you acknowledge it?

https://www.businessinsider.com/instagram-meta-glasses-banning-pickup-prank-creeps-2026-7

The pen cam can't be pointed without making it obvious, duh. That this has to be explained out is moronic.

Pen cam is 1080p, specs are 1440x1920 with a wide FOV. These devices aren't remotely the same.

The problem is you're ok with the assholes, I guess because you identify as one.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Jesus dude you’re just comin at me with the insults, kinda ironic you’re calling me an asshole. 🤣

Your article explicitly states they are banning the assholes. Which is good. It’s a very weird choice of article to back up your “meta knows the hardware is a problem” claim.

Bottom line is, humans are assholes. This is known. They are assholes with all kinds of tech, according to you that includes Lemmy. They can also be creeps here. That doesn’t mean the tech itself is the problem.

I’ll spell it out this time, a hammer can be used to break a window, does that mean we should ban hammers?

[–] borkborkbork@piefed.social 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

sure thing creep

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 weeks ago

Have fun banning hammers dude.

[–] TIEPilot@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (4 children)

I wonder if I can sue Ray-ban for ruining my glasses? I wear the heavy frame Ray-bans and now all this negative shit comes out after. I get looked at like I'm a perv...

Maybe force them to replace them?

[–] Maestro@fedia.io 6 points 3 weeks ago

It's worth a shot! IIRC a bunch of French people sued Tesla for similar reasons in order to get out of their multi year lease contracts.

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Technically you can sue anyone for anything. Whether you're going to win a judgment, or be rewarded more than you spend winning is a different question.

[–] TIEPilot@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

It was more me venting as like everything meta/fb touches turns to shit... And this time its effecting me directly.

[–] yetAnotherUser@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 weeks ago

If I were you, I'd tape the glasses in the places where the cameras and microphones would be if they were Meta glasses. That way, people who look at the glasses would think that even if you actually had cameras and microphones in your glasses, you taped them. I'm not sure if this would work, but I think it's worth a try...

[–] Zamboni_Driver@lemmy.ca -4 points 3 weeks ago

Sure bud, you should go ahead and do that.

[–] const_void@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 weeks ago

Who are the creepy engineers that work on these products? They need to be shamed too.