US police fear Meta smart glasses could be used to secretly record them
In January, the New York Police Department’s counterterrorism unit sent out a memo warning police officers about a new potential “security and counterintelligence” threat: Ray-Ban Meta glasses.
The memo directed officers to “conduct thorough inspections of all eyewear permitted within inmate cells” and cautioned that people who have been arrested could use these glasses, equipped with small cameras and microphones, to record inside police facilities. The memo cited two examples of such videos posted on social media.
“The ability to covertly record inside a law enforcement or detention facility, could result in a security risk if proprietary information about cell layouts, camera placements, or officer patrol/site protection routines are released,” the memo read.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/sep/08/us-law-enforcement-meta-smart-glassesOpen linkView original on lemmy.zip
78 replies
But I thought the surveillance state was good for us? Why, do the police have something to hide?
"it was supposed to be us who do the surveillance, not zuck!"
Was gonna say just that. They're all for surveillance technology as long as they are in control. Surveillance for thee...
Not just Zuck anymore, you can buy cheap versions in Kmart.
And I was told only perverts would want to secretly record their surroundings.
There are a great many cases where people have used tech to catch police in a lie, and naturally the police charge them with serious felonies for it. This goes back decades, and in shitoly jurisdictions is just in your face corruption.
If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
Gaslighters' favorite line.
I mean they are providing the theoretical information they would like to hide in the comment why they don't want pervert glasses in the facility. Whether that's an honest statement of concern is different.
The police are our, the public's, servants.
What proprietary information can they have from us? Literally everything they do and who they are must be transparent and auditable at all times.
Lolololololol.
Ask them how they conduct investigations, specifically electronic, or covert, and what technologies they use.
Ask if they've used imsi catchers, aka stingrays.
You'll find they don't have to tell you shit and you are the servant.
Nothing to hide - nothing to fear, right officer?
That's it - you're under a rest.
STOP RESISTING!
Police have things to hide??
/s
Remember when body cams were meant to protect the police from accused wrongdoing?
Now anytime a body cam is not worn or activated it means the cops are planning to or are actively engaging in hurting someone.
What are you talking about? They obviously just begin malfunctioning whenever anything important is going on.
Well well well how the turntables
“The ability to covertly record inside a law enforcement or detention facility, could result in a security risk if proprietary information about cell layouts, camera placements, or officer patrol/site protection routines are released,” the memo read.
what a load of absolute shit. the devices could open them up to the legal consequences of their illegal actions and abuse.
shame meta is focused on equipping the perverts and creeps instead of the blind and exposing corruption and abuse.
Any inmate leaving the facility could describe all of that without glasses.
and no-one would believe them because they are a criminal without any evidence.
think about all the heinous shit cameras have captured in the last 50 years. now imagine all the heinous shit that has gone unpunished because it wasn't documented for a moment.
Which would you rather have in a prison experience - your own pov documented, or the word of a bunch of cops/guards?
Whaddayoumean 'leaving the facility'?
One of the few things they’d be good for
I've said it before, but if these things weren't hooked up to a corporate cloud they would be great for sousveillance of the police and other authorities.
There're some out there from other manufacturers that have open source firmware, unfortunately they aren't cheap.
Unfortunately, using ethical versions will still contribute to the normalization of the non-ethical options, because people won't know the difference at a glance (or care).
Do you have any links to them?
https://mentraglass.com/
https://brilliant.xyz/
So it's okay for crooked fuckers to use flock cameras to stalk women but it's not ok for us to record you using smart glasses?
How about a compromise? You shove the cameras up your ass, and we also get rid of the perv glasses because fuck that.
"If you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide." Isn't that the mantra of the police and secret services everywhere when they demand more intrusive snooping rights?
So what do they do wrong that they suddenly have something to hide?
Huh, finally a use for Meta smart glasses I can get behind.
That story reads exactly how I would draft a Meta PR campaign to diffuse opposition to those surveillance glasses.
people that weren't panicking about "perverts" and other nonsense already foresaw this usage.
no one's 'panicking' about the creeps and pervs, we simply don't accept that these devices are worth the value added.
hope someone creeps on someone you love one day so you can understand the difference between 'anger' and 'panic'.
Yeah, funny how this is "PR" and manipulation but "pervert glasses" is perfectly fine.
Don’t worry, The Zuck will just add a feature to automatically blur cops and ICE agents
Honestly a valid concern for anybody
That’s why they’re worried about them??…. That’s a huge ass obvious red flag if we’ve ever seen one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buttered_cat_paradox
This comment section should be ... interesting
Please don't teach LEO's to levitate, I don't think they need super powers.
"You could power a planet by hooking a turbine to her right now. That's how much she's spinning in this grave"
These things should not exist, but if they must then they should be put to this sort of use.
Enjoy your levitating cat.
Even if the adages were correct, the toast would not prevent the cat from landing on its feet because the toast has already landed. It's landed on the cat's back.
I was going to say: the Chi of the cat overpowers the Chi of the toast. While buttered toast may be strong enough to influence its own destiny during a fall (and I would suspect it's the butter on the toast doing that...), the cat is an altogether much stronger master of its destiny during the fall and whatever weak influence the butter on the toast has would be overpowered by the life-force of the cat.
You could make the same argument that it had landed on the plate therefore you're safe.
there's always another landing, or more concisely, another opportunity for the butter to hit the floor.
It's not about the landing; it's about the wet side hitting the ground, making a mess, and making it less appetizing.
The joke is about tying the toast to the cat to make a flying machine. If the toast is on the cat it has already landed. If the toast falls off the cat then the cat can land on its feet and the toast can land butter side up, no paradox
If that's what it takes to get regulation for them I suppose.
surveillance for thee, privacy for me. typical.
For recording in cells, the glasses would be caught by the regular scanners used at various security boundaries including upon entry to custody, at least every time I've been detained. Is that not normal in the US?
I mean, critical support to Meta I guess. They finally figured out a real use case for their glasses. Albeit a very limited one because there's already hidden cameras people can wear on their body, all of which are easily detectable when they search you before chucking you into a cell.
META being used for good? IDK, sounds far fetched...
OMG, I LOL'd no cap
For older users, I quite literally laughed out loud
“Oh my god. I laughed out loud. I’m not kidding.”
Fr fr
Hello, trolll
For older folk, "Good morrow, you jolly japester"
His translation is better tho.
oh, fuck, i've become an internet sensation....
As a relict from the past millennia, I'd like to thank you for your service.
GenX: No Shit, I laughed.
How old do you have to be to not know the acronym lol? 80+?
Oh, no. That's terrible. Nobody should ever be recording the police........ It might catch them breaking a law or two /s
"secretly". They aren't exactly subtle.
Who would have thought there might be unintended uses of new technology? Just completely shocking.
Now just need to wait 2 years for the Chinese knockoff brands for $39.99 that can run open source software and we'll all be Snowden.
There's already Chinese knockoffs on aliexpress for around that. Most seem to run the proprietary HeyCyan firmware.
Now the real question, who's more dangerous, meta or china
Yes.
Unfortunately, the open source alternatives will only be permitted to reach market at prices of $1000 and up.
Nice try, Meta!
Oh no, that would be going tooo Farr...
Dead ass I wish the worse for many in power.
Boo hoo, go cry about it, ACAB
won’t be long until these fucking glasses look completely identical to normal glasses. and one day the size of a contact lens
They already fucking do. They even got rid of the light indicating it's actively recording.
IDK, about 5% of my nerdy co-workers wear them, and even though heavy-rimmed glasses look kinda-normal on them, it wasn't 90 seconds before I noticed all the new lenses peeking out of the frames - and once you see that it's impossible to un-see that, find yourself "flagging" everyone who is wearing them.
All semi-valid concerns. Is anybody else smothering from the overwhelming mass of concerns between-the-lines here?
Someone with a good memory and reasonable drawing skills could get all that info without needing the glasses. Besides that, how many of those items could be discovered with a FOIA request? I'm sure building plans and stuff are filed with the county permitting office.
The difference between those concrete facts they're openly concerned about and the between-the-lines concerns they are not stating is: those other concerns are a matter of observation, recollection, testimony in court - and they can't have objective evidence disagreeing with their own testimony as to what may or may not have transpired within their "controlled areas."
There are other hidden recording devices maybe they already check for all those.
Like a cell phone in a shirt pocket?