I see so many people (mostly men, this isn't random) talking about how Meta's Ray-Ban glasses are "incredible" or "still not ready" yet, I don't see anyone calling it what it is: Voyeurism.
This technology will increase voyeurism and stalking aggressions in unacceptable ways. These glasses are a voyeur's dream weapon. Also a doxxer's and stalker's dream weapon.
Why are our laws and cultures not protecting us against this?
This entry was edited (5 days ago)
Em
in reply to Em • • •To anyone with questions about Meta's Ray-Ban glasses and how this is problematic for privacy and consent, I highly recommend reading this excellent article from Janus Rose at The Verge:
"âOne way to think about it is protecting your community and the people you care about,â said Gilliard. âWhen youâre wearing these glasses, when you use your video doorbell, when you record everyoneâs conversations, youâre not just surveilling yourself. And thereâs no consistent and foolproof way to guarantee that information wonât be used against people you care about â to hurt trans and queer people, or hurt immigrant communities. I wish people would think about it in those terms instead of âdid my package get delivered.ââ
theverge.com/tech/807834/meta-âŚ
#Privacy #Meta #RayBan #Consent #Safety
Privacy laws canât keep up with âluxury surveillanceâ
Janus Rose (The Verge)