From Newsgroup: alt.privacy.anon-server

Profile Badge for the Achievement Top 1% Poster Top 1% Poster

I'm struggling to understand why there is no public outcry over Meta's
new Rayban glasses. All I see are major tech reviewers promoting them,
while barely touching on the privacy concerns. The problem isn't the
privacy of the user who buys them, it's the complete violation of
privacy for every single person around them. This isn't just another
gadget, it's a surveillance device being normalized as a fashion
accessory.

The classic argument "if you don't like it, don't buy it" is irrelevant
here. My choice not to buy them does not protect my privacy, anyone
with the glasses can record my private conversation in a park or a bus
without my knowledge or consent.

And remember who is behind all this: Mr Zucker and Meta. Every
stranger's face and every conversation can be used as data to train its
AI and improve its ad targeting. Given Mr Zucker's political influence
and the threat of tariffs, it feels like the EU won't do anything to
stop it.

edit: I wanted to discuss two different threats here. First, the user
itself. Because this isn't the same as a smartphone. People will notice
if you're pointing a phone at them, and a hidden camera gets terrible
footage. These glasses have a camera aimed directly from their eyes,
making it easy to secretly get clear video. While people talk about the
LED indicators, it's only a matter of time before a simple hack lets
users disable it. The second threat is Meta. We have to just trust that
they won't push a silent update to start capturing surveillance footage
to their own servers, using the camera and microphone to turn every
user into a walking surveillance camera.

edit 2: Something weird is happening. Many sensible comments are
getting heavily downvoted. I think Zuck bots might be real, won't be
surprised if the post get taken down in a couple of hours

Go to privacy
r/privacy
15 days ago
LbiyVFmn

https://www.reddittorjg6rue252oqsxryoxengawnmo46qy4kyii5wtqnwfj4ooad.on ion/r/privacy/comments/1nldj4m/why_are_we_all_just_accepting_metas_new_ spy/?rdt=56957

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.privacy.anon-server

On 04 Oct 2025, Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire- 202510.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> posted some news:ac508938e8e0d899c506f6a673689302@msgid.frell.theremailer.net:

Profile Badge for the Achievement Top 1% Poster Top 1% Poster

I'm struggling to understand why there is no public outcry over Meta's
new Rayban glasses. All I see are major tech reviewers promoting them,
while barely touching on the privacy concerns. The problem isn't the
privacy of the user who buys them, it's the complete violation of
privacy for every single person around them. This isn't just another
gadget, it's a surveillance device being normalized as a fashion
accessory.

California has laws against that. Get a class action lawsuit going
against them.

The classic argument "if you don't like it, don't buy it" is irrelevant here. My choice not to buy them does not protect my privacy, anyone
with the glasses can record my private conversation in a park or a bus without my knowledge or consent.

And remember who is behind all this: Mr Zucker and Meta. Every
stranger's face and every conversation can be used as data to train its
AI and improve its ad targeting. Given Mr Zucker's political influence
and the threat of tariffs, it feels like the EU won't do anything to
stop it.

edit: I wanted to discuss two different threats here. First, the user itself. Because this isn't the same as a smartphone. People will notice
if you're pointing a phone at them, and a hidden camera gets terrible footage. These glasses have a camera aimed directly from their eyes,
making it easy to secretly get clear video. While people talk about the
LED indicators, it's only a matter of time before a simple hack lets
users disable it. The second threat is Meta. We have to just trust that
they won't push a silent update to start capturing surveillance footage
to their own servers, using the camera and microphone to turn every
user into a walking surveillance camera.

edit 2: Something weird is happening. Many sensible comments are
getting heavily downvoted. I think Zuck bots might be real, won't be surprised if the post get taken down in a couple of hours

Go to privacy
r/privacy
15 days ago
LbiyVFmn

https://www.reddittorjg6rue252oqsxryoxengawnmo46qy4kyii5wtqnwfj4ooad.on ion/r/privacy/comments/1nldj4m/why_are_we_all_just_accepting_metas_new_ spy/?rdt=56957

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.privacy.anon-server

On 04 Oct 2025, Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire- 202510.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> posted some news:ac508938e8e0d899c506f6a673689302@msgid.frell.theremailer.net:

Profile Badge for the Achievement Top 1% Poster Top 1% Poster

I'm struggling to understand why there is no public outcry over Meta's
new Rayban glasses.

If you see them, ask them not to record you. If they persist, bust them
in the face and break the glasses.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.privacy.anon-server

Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

If you see them, ask them not to record you. If they persist, bust
them in the face and break the glasses.

And get locked away for it.
I won't miss you.

\o/
--
E i t h e r d r i n k o r p o s t !
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2