Meta Silently Added Face-Recognition Code for Its Smart Glasses to Millions of Phones
https://www.wired.com/story/meta-smart-glasses-face-recognition-nametag-connections/Open linkView original on lemmy.world436
Comments95https://www.wired.com/story/meta-smart-glasses-face-recognition-nametag-connections/Open linkView original on lemmy.world
Only predators buy those glasses.
why do you know the android, zuckerborg is one of epsteins clientele.
I support smart glasses. Not from meta or Google or whatever the fuck.
The more cameras we point at cops and people in power, the better.
The moment an open-source privacy focused set of frames exist, I'm buying it.
https://github.com/BasedHardware/omi
Originating from:
https://github.com/BasedHardware/openglass
It should have to light up when recording. Like, at a hardware level.
Surveillance at critical points like arrests seems important in order to have basic accountability. Surveillance all the time if you know it or not is more of a slippery slope.
Have a light that beams out from beside the sensor through the same lense, no way to cover it without blocking the camera
Have a visible dot shutter that closes when it's not recording,
Require you to touch the temple on the frame the whole time it's recording.
There are ways
Now I envision cops just straight up jacking people's Rx glasses under suspicion of being recorded, like they do with phones already.
I agree with your premise, but only if it's stored locally and not sent to a corporation, who is likely going to share videos that help to convict other people of crimes but not allow access to video that shows cops doing something wrong.
But also, there should be a legal requirement to have a light visible when recording. If you're found violating this, it should at least be a sizable criminal offense.
Cop sees the recording light on your glasses. Cop slaps the glasses off your face.
Then someone links those glasses and facial recognition to the tea app, and those predators start screeching about privacy.
I've heard those sorts of glasses can be handy if you're visually impaired and, say, clothes shopping. You can ask the glasses "hey, do these items match?"
Still creepy in the wild, but there are some valid use cases.
edit to add examples:
Nah. My wife is legally blind without her prosthetics. She's rather stay blind than use these.
What do you mean she is blind without her prosthetics? Isn't she still blind with the prosthetics or do they help with vision somehow?
Glasses to help see are prosthetics. People can be legally blind when not wearing their corrective lenses.
I'm one of those people. Close to being legally blind if I have no glasses or contacts on. My dad is legally blind without corrective lenses.
Ok that's fair. I've just never heard of glasses referred to as prosthetics and assumed you meant some kind of artificial seeing device. Which is suppose is what glasses are but I was hoping for a more high tech answer.
(the account you just replied to isn't the account with the blind wife who uses prosthetics)
Oh wow maybe I need prosthetics too
While this is correct, I AM, in fact, someone who wears glasses and knows some stuff about them and their uses.
Sorry - she has keratoconus. Her prosthetics are essentially large, hard contact lenses, filled with saline solution, effectively reshaping her corneas. Also called sclerals.
TBH, I'm also not sure what they meant. The only visual prostheses I know of are things like glass eyes. Maybe "prosthesis" is their term for eyeglasses or contact lenses?
edit: or there are neat things that integrate into your brain to give you sight. So maybe one of those?
You don't need glasses for that, you could simply use an on-hand camera, maybe a special phone for those with vision problems
The glasses seem like a better form factor than a hand-held phone, for the use case where you're out and about and your hands are full, managing a service dog harness and/or cane, and trying to shop.
So, I guess you could mount your special phone for the blind on your chest or waist and have it talk to bone conductive headphones you're wearing. And pick up whatever you'd like described and hold it in front of your chest/waist.
(There's other options, the glasses just seem more convenient because they're on your face.)
You could carry a laptop and use it's webcam too
It's down to convenience. I'm already looking at what i'm what i'm trying to film, instead of just recording that, i'm looking at my phone screen to try to record the thing and not even witnessing it in real life. I'm at my kids track meet, any time i'm trying to record him running i'm experiencing it through a 5" amoled screen so i my wife can have a video instead of just being there.
We can figure out how to make them impossible not to notice they're recording. we just need privacy shutters or to have to hold the temple or something.
If they could make these glasses more privacy invading by making them useless for the visually impaired, they would.
Like an automated version of the Be My Eyes app.
My wife helps people with this app on a regular basis.
those are some fucking priorities. a little fashion over human rights
Yes, and anyone that buys these glasses to increase their independence is a predator, like the parent poster says. /s
to increase their independence? are you kidding me? then don't be surprised when that so very important function to give clothing advice will suddenly become a subscription service with ever increasing fee! all the while still trampling on the privacy of everyone near you
Yes, how dare someone want to buy dog food without asking for help.
while, yet again, trampling on human rights, out of convenience no less.
I mean! they could be even more convenient, and just order it online! and what do I care if that's what they do. this tech is really not so necessary.
but of course I am the scumbag if I don't like the blind person scanning my face with the Google Lens app just so they can politely greet me by my name.
Or people with a bad memory for faces and names, who find one of the most harrowing social situations to be when someone walks up to them and says "hey, how you doing?" With no recollection of who this person is or how they know you.
You described me, and I still find those glasses creepy. Itโs so much cheaper, easier, and less ethically fraught to just say โoh hey man how are you doing!โ and fake it for a minute. Or tell them youโre having a brain fart and keep wanting to call them [random name] even though you KNOW thatโs not it. Or, god forbid, just be upfront with people and tell them youโre face blind AF and struggle with placing faces to people outside context.
ITT: people trying to cover for their lack of social skills with the most nightmarish cyberpunk future ever put to paper.
So one should just sacrifice everyone elses safety and privacy because you're bad a recognizing faces? I get that it can be helpful, but you are literally uploading strangers faces and likeness to Meta's servers without their consent. It's creepy and predatory.
No, again, this is not what I was addressing. I responded to a comment saying these would only be of interest to "predators". You yourself say that you get how they can be helpful, that's all I was saying too. All the rest of this is arguments that are being imagined.
Oh yeah, that's a good reason to aid the expansion of global surveillance. Let's all be complicit with the police state because we can't acknowledge our social anxieties with a bit of honesty.
Not what I was addressing. I was addressing a comment that said "only predators buy those glasses" by pointing out an obvious alternative motivation.
that kind of motivation is a bit like "its winter and I'm very cold, lets set the city to fire". I guess it won't be cold anymore for you! It's not for wanting to harm other people, it's just an obvious alternative motivation.
Even if there is some legitimacy to this motivation, it is very myopic and selfish.
I don't think violating peoples' privacy and paying big tech to extend their mass surveillance network so you can avoid looking awkward to them for a second carries the weight you seem to think it does
What "weight"? I think you're imagining an argument I'm not actually making.
As someone like that, the key is to be affable, apologize, and ask how you know each other. It's not a big deal, most people aren't offended
affable? who am I, Chris Broad?
that's a perfect argument for trying to justify total and complete invasion of privacy on the streets
Man, some of ya really need to learn how to socialize
Normally I'd agree but that can just come with being on the autism (and other) spectrums sometimes.
Oh I'm quite aware, but state sponsored surveillance tools are not the answer to that
Oh yeah no arguments here.
Meta execs deserve the woodchopper and all.
Though it gets difficult when its someone's only available answer. I get why some people would choose it, but also agree as a whole its detrimental to society.
Yep!
And as cameras get smaller, pretty soon any glasses will be suspect, meaning that those that need vision correction without being able to wear contacts for whatever reason will also end up lumped in with the creeps.
This is like Batesian mimickry but stupid.
Oh don't worry. Google filed for a camera contact lens patent years ago. It's coming as soon as they can figure out the tech.
All this cybertech looks cool as hell until your eyeball cooling drivers crash and your optic processing unit hits 100C like my GPU.
optic processing unit lol. it will run in the cloud "and you will be happy"
This sounds like a bigger underlying problem that can be addressed with a long term solution that does not leave you reliant on a second fragile, expensive battery-powered device with planned obsolescence and social stigma as likely risks.
How do you even protect yourself and your kids from this? Maybe I can mask up, but I can't expect my partner or her kids to do the same.
Apparently quite a few people are developing ways to defect facial recognition https://www.stratecta.exchange/fashion-that-can-beat-facial-recognition-systems/
I was pleasantly surprised to find out Zenni now offers a near infrared blocking coating for their glasses.
are the prices from Capable a joke? who thefuck pays $6-700 for a pair of joggers or sweater. privacy wear should be affordable, not a luxury. itโs the wealthy class thatโs making this a problem in the first place
I had no idea there were so many methods
Has Zenni gotten rid of the polarized lenses? I checked a few sunglasses and couldn't configure them with polarized lenses....
If youโre wanting to block IR maybe look for a pair that uses the Zenni ID Guard thing? Edit: just double checked and thatโs where the option is now.
I thought all but the cheapest sunglasses were polarized nowadays, but I could be wrong.
Unfortunately, none of the local eyewear companies sell polarised sunglasses. The only exception is bicycle glasses, but I have no wish to look like wicked pepe
How does this "anti-papparazi" thing work?
Read the linked article. It goes through a lot methods.
I did read it but still can't grasp it.
reflective particles in the garment nullify flash photography by fucking with the exposure to wash out other elements of the subject
here's an example photo of Trevor Noah wearing one of these scarves without and with flash:
So it only works with flash on. Not that helpful, then?
yes but these are designed to deter a specific type of intrusion from paparazzi, hence their popularity with celebrities. if it was effective at all times, it would be blinding to the naked eye, which would limit its usefulness to most people.
There are already cameras everywhere. As you walk down the street you're probably on and average of 3 ring cameras at any time. Cars have cameras, stores have lots of cameras (the fake ones you see, and the real hidden ones). There have been pen cameras and tie clip cameras for decades. Glasses cameras aren't really a big step.
Youre telling me Meta didnt have this from the start?
Premature release has been the norm for decades. Evil corps apply the same software development methodologies.
And yet, people keep using Meta stuff...
The networking effect in action.
If you've got a dedicated group of friends on a platform and you can't figure out how to move them all at once, you're unlikely to socially isolate yourself just because they ratchet up the enshittification another rung.
Yeah.
At the same time, I think people donโt really understand how toxic Facebook is. Itโs a physical health hazard for one relative of mine, a mental one for some others. Iโm not exaggerating when I say it would be better for their health if they drank and smoked cigarettes.
Plenty of people do both.
I don't think Facebook, strictly speaking, is the problem though. In my experience, it's the social isolation and poor quality of care that is all too common among Americans young and old alike.
Facebook is a lampry on the neck of a dying man.
Vast majority of people are really stupid.
*idiots
This is going to be so illegal in EU
I can't get facebook off my phone. I can put the app to sleep but it's always going to be there. It's such an invasion of privacy but I don't know how to deal with it.
adb commands
Some manufacturers mark bundled crap as essential system apps you need root to get rid of, but usually you can disable them which effectively uninstalls it in every other way except it will still take storage space. I wonder if your ROM just used the word "sleep" for that functionality?
Get a different phone
Can you use ADB to remove the app? Look it up
It's not an android so I don't think so.
It's not an android and it's not iOS, what operating system are you running?
Huawei maybe? otherwise I don't see how this would be a thing.