Comment on An Indian Trans Person’s Harrowing Encounter Fuels Backlash Against Meta AI ‘Pervert Glasses’
NihilsineNefas@slrpnk.net 3 days agoIf you require LLM powered glasses to show you what to do next in a maintenance job you should not have a maintenance job. That’s what training and officially accredited qualifications are for.
This is without even going into the finer details of fault finding, diagnosis, risk assessment, personal safety (pervert glasses are not impact rated and pose a significant hazard in hazardous atmosphere environments, let alone the distraction of having a clanker chatting in your ear and flashing popups directly in your line of sight.)
If you want to know about the historical significance of an area while you are on holiday, then read about the area you are going to before you go, or buy a travel guide and support a historian or a writer that has spent their life researching the topic.
These glasses pose no purpose than harvesting data and recording people without their consent for the sake of the techbro panopticon.
sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 3 days ago
Dang, why so antagonistic? I wasn’t thinking professional workers. I was thinking about fixing stuff around the house where the person doesn’t have the expertise. Of course you could just look at a book, but that’s always been true. There is no need for almost anything, if you want to be super pedantic. I thought that I had made my views pretty clear and they aren’t too different from what you wrote, aside from the weird looking-for-the-worst-possible-interpretation of my unclear wordsmithing. Sorry if I am replying too strongly, just had flashbacks from my second marriage.
NihilsineNefas@slrpnk.net 3 days ago
I’m not a mindreader, just don’t like it when people try to defend multimillion dollar corporations known for disrespecting any and every notion of privacy to shill their newest piece of shit tech that serves no purpose but to harvest data by saying “but everyone already [imorally uses a tangentially related piece of technology] so what’s the problem with giving corporations the power to do this without restrictions?”
Feel free to try and fix a piece of equipment using a language model without expertise, nine times out of ten you’ll break it beyond repair or hurt yourself by doing something unsafe.
My condolences to your last marriage.
sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 1 day ago
I said everything is recorded by cell phones all the time. I wasn’t endorsing it, just stating the facts. I wish people concerned about privacy were more consistent. One of the many facts that I don’t like of modern life. And I certainly wasn’t trying to defend any existing company, just trying to see a possible beneficial use of technology.
NihilsineNefas@slrpnk.net 1 day ago
And I wasn’t saying that isn’t a problem, merely addresing the issue at hand, which is that having cameras diguised as glasses (and provably used by perverts) is a very pressing matter.
I entirely agree that shady agencies having the ability to access personal device’s cameras and microphones is an issue, one which can and should be solved by having the right to not be recorded without your consent put into law.
I appreciate that there are potentially benefits to technology, but the reality is these technological advancements are being used by people with ill intent, no matter what the company that benefits from them being produced markets them as.
Youll have to forgive my ire and hopefully understand the reason behind it, since (to me, at least) the argument of “There are benefits to these technologies” sounds a lot like the arguments for the use of ‘AI’ while in the same way ignoring/understating the vast number of downsides and documented cases of its misuse.
GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip 3 days ago
Not op, but i would say there are definite use cases for smart glasses/“eyes”. Yes, corporations are pushing it without restraint or common sense because capitalism, but the technology in principle is not necessarily evil.
We as a society are just struggling with the implications and long term effects that start to show now of omnipresent surveillance capitalism, and the people with a camera on their face are the most obvious and easy target. That is not to say that humans are not scum who use these for creepy stuff, but there are cameras everywhere, location data, metadata, microphones, GPS, wifi, comms towers, not to mention the software on all those devices.
We are being crept on all the time, but the geek wearing one on their face is too far. Understandable, but also hypocritical.
Given technological development, eventually we will have actual, invisible implants for these things. Smart eyes, enhanced ears. How will we cope with that? When you cant even tell that you are being actively livestreamed or recorded, or algorithmically analyzed for personal information?
NihilsineNefas@slrpnk.net 3 days ago
I also have an issue with these, and vehemently oppose them at every turn.
The human scum that develop, market and sell these things are also deserving of equal ire. The only difference is that they are the creators, not the direct end users, so they are harder to target with lawsuits due to the sheer size of the corporations and the amount of money being pushed into lobbying for their use (the “but its in the name of public safety!”/ “won’t someone think of the children!” Crowd are always used by these companies to astroturf public opinion through browbeating etc)
Where’s the hypocrisy? I’ve never suggested that these companies get a free pass to spy on people. Just because I’m verbal in my opposition to the use of permanently active cameras disguised as glasses does not mean I am not opposed to the panopticon we’ve been forced to grow up in.
So by that logic, just because it might happen in the future, we shouldn’t fight against it and work towards getting the rights to walk the streets without surveillance by unknown agents written into law that protect our privacy against it?
To me that reads the same way as “Why should we do anything to stop climate change when the air we’re breathing is slowly becoming toxic? We’ll all be dead in a couple of decades anyway.” (Hyperbolic but along the same line of a defeatist “what’s the point in making things better now when they’re going to get worse?” arguing.)