[nomel]

> The ability to record without my knowledge or consent

All major brands have a clear indicator for when they're recording.

Someone could block that indicator out, but someone could also just go to Amazon.com and select one of hundred of available pinhole cameras or not-smart camera glasses.

These aren't enabling an ability that hasn't been enabled for decades. If anything, seeing someone with main brand smart glasses makes it more obvious.

[itishappy]

Existing alternatives also make me uncomfortable for the exact same reasons. I would prefer to avoid anyone who purchases a pinhole camera for public use, regardless of whether it came with an LED to indicate recording.

To their credit, smart glasses are an obvious signal for me to avoid. That doesn't make me appreciate them any more.

[nomel]

Every cellphone in every hand is a recording device, very often used in public. Where I am, you can look most anywhere, at any time, and see someone on a phone call, taking a picture/video, posing, etc. What's the significant difference that I'm not seeing, especially since the smart glasses have an indicator, and cellphones DO NOT.

[itishappy]

No difference. If I see your recording in public, either via cell phone or smart glasses or shoulder mounted news rig, I do my best to steer clear. I don't like Alexa or Flock or whatever else either.

I do not agree that the existence of surveillance tech justifies the expansion of surveillance tech.

[nomel]

I see. This is entirely reasonable. :)

[com2kid]

Not only that, but smart glasses have terrible recording time limits. A cheap $30 pinhole camera with a SD card will far surpass meta glasses in recording capabilities.

Hidden cameras have been a thing for a long time now. Stick one in a pair of glasses and give it a super short battery life and people freak out...

[nkrisc]

Wearing a hidden camera and recording people is also very socially unacceptable. If someone knew you were wearing they would probably also “freak out”.

[itishappy]

It used to be if you were caught wearing a hidden camera in a department store the police would be called.

Now they're being billed as fashion accessories.

Sorry, but "normalize hidden cameras" isn't a movement I can get behind.

[com2kid]

My point is the tech is nothing new.

Every person holding a cellphone up in their hands could also be pointing a camera around at people, a camera with much higher fidelity, computing power, and one that can take much longer videos.

This is just panic about a new form factor. The same thing happened when cell phones came along, with the exact same talking points.

[itishappy]

Totally agree, but that's not a justification. "We already do a thing you don't like so you won't mind if we do it lot more, right?"

The same talking points still apply to cell phones. I think people who record TikToks in public are similarly gross and I go out of my way to avoid them.

I watched a guy setup a cell phone to record his laps in a pool yesterday. He swam one lap right about a meter from the 15 year-old girl playing with her mom, then climbed out of the pool, shut off his phone, and walked away. The remainder of the pool was open. Should I have called him out? I couldn't decide, and therefore didn't. This is normal now.

[blharr]

I don't get the point of this argument. Yes, the people who buy pinhole cameras are creeps too

[Markoff]

why is someone protecting their property/children creep?

[thunderfork]

Pinhole cameras ain't for that

[Markoff]

why not? secret camera is sometimes better than letting others know they are being filmed

[itishappy]

For what benefit? A secret camera is not a deterrent as by definition it can only be used reactively.