[epicide]

There is a subtle but important difference between trusting someone doesn't have a hidden camera pointed at you and recording vs trusting someone to not have the camera that is on their face and pointed at you currently recording.

Ultimately, yes, people have been able to take hidden photographs for a very long time. I think the concern is normalizing the removal of 90% of the steps involved in doing so.

[lordCarbonFiber]

As a thought experiment, what I'd like you to do tomorrow, is the first stranger you see spend 30 seconds staring at them. Not discretely, square on staring at them, keeping your head ideally still to prevent (hypothetical) camera jitter. You'll quickly discover why effectively no one that owns heads mounted devices has ever used them to take video of consenting people (ignoring the fact that why bother anyway, when there's essentially no social stigma for whipping out your phone to take a video/picture and it's considerably more comfortable to try to be discrete since your head doesn't need to be directly facing your subject).

I own a pair of glass, and while the thing has loads of problems (unergonomic , thermal issues, and terrible developer's experience being the main ones) nothing breaks my heart more than people just repeating back click bait about the end of privacy, because as wearables go I think there's a lot more potential in HUDs than smartwatches and the like.

[epicide]

I don't think the camera angle matters here. If I am talking to somebody with a camera on their face, wondering whether they are recording or not becomes a constant concern.

Having shaky or off-centered video of me is still video of me.