It’s solvable if you take surveillance capitalism out of the equation, just as Valve are doing. AR with Meta behind it will never be something that is socially acceptable since their whole business model is selling out the user and everyone around them. With a company like Valve which has a pretty good track record regarding privacy (a.k.a the only things transferred regarding usage are what games you play to make store recommendations fit your taste and bug reports if you approve them) i can see a wider adoption taking place.
I don’t think that’s true, your personal privacy as the owner of the device is one thing, everyone else’s right to not be continuously photographed is another. Having Valve operate it over meta doesn’t solve that. Also, what happens when Gabe does and the investment bank that buys it decides they want to sell everyone data to maximise profit?
These things can be done in a privacy respecting way for other parties too. The computational power needed to realize a person is in the field of view and to process this person saying “i consent” is in everyones pocket nowadays.
I think if you can plan for somehow allowing concent for these things then you can also plan for bypassing it. Also it would need to film you to work out if you don’t consent and then it’s already breached the consent.
There’s a difference between passively waiting for a voice command by a person identified in RAM and storing these things. And sure, there will always be people breaking the rules, but if you actually try to make the product secure, the vast amount of people will NOT be fucking around with that.
Take Metas PervGlasses for example: There’s a LED that shows it is recording. You can remove that light with a simple dremel, and no one at Meta even thought about implementing a simple check like making the LED flash a OTP code to be recognized by the camera at the start of recording. It makes a whole lot of difference who is developing these things, trust me.
I think the problem is that shit manufacturers exist, so how do you regulate that. At this point you can only assume all AR glasses are sending everything they record to their manufacturer for on selling to the ir favourite data broker, because that’s literally the market. There severely limited options for ethical devices and those that do exist could be bought next week and their policies change on a dime.
We regulate that with laws with teeth. I know, that is a foreign concept for most of the US, but even there with California and lately NY there are areas who have started to hold corporations accountable (even if it is on a small scale yet). The GDPR is already basically making Metas glasses illegal in their current form, and they are currently involved into a record amount of lawsuits.
There is still a lot of work to do, but the basics have been prepared.
Yeah that’s fair. I’m in Australia so we get some of the benefits of European policy, but mostly we are slaves to whatever the US and China want to throw at us. Honestly I’m less concerned about China and more concerned about the attitudes of US corporations at this point. They’ve demonstrated time and time again that they will stop at nothing to make a line go up in the short term.
Honestly I don’t need a camera or anything integrated but I’d love to have an integrated screen for my glasses. Would be nice when putting things together to just sync it with my phone and just have it there, also maps. Look I have to wear glasses all the time might as well add a tiny bit more utility.
But are they intigratable in pre existing glasses? My prescription is non negotiable due to how bad my eyesight is without and I can’t do contacts. Also having them sync with my phone and having them do little to no processing would be my preferred method, rather than having them contain all the computational shit themselves.
GPS with accelerometers should be able to work out where you’re standing and where you’re facing, so you could have navigation with a floating marker over the turn you need to take instead of just having a mini-map, too.
Kinda depends on the definition on that one, personally I would consider a IRL HUD to be a low level version of that since it would be intigraing those systems in a pretty intimate way.
We’ve mostly been looking in to how it can be utilized in a production environment with detailed machine stats at a glance, live setpoints without having to be near the control panel, aids for maintenance…that sort of things
The meta display glasses would be cool if not for the whole meta part. You don’t even need to be able to access the camera. It should just be used for tracking.
That’s not really AR then is it, AR requires the overlay on reality, I guess it could be like a game OSD but a lot of that detail is probably more annoying than anything. A live map might be good sometimes, but do I need my heart rate showing all the time in regular day to day life? is it helpful to have a shopping list taking up space in my vision all the time? How do I interact with it if it can’t see my hands, do I then have to talk to it constantly to manipulate it? Can other people manipulate my OSD while I’m using it by saying the right thing? Seems pretty gimmicky …
The problem isnt your privacy, it’s everyone else’s. If there are glasses with cameras then some arsehole is running around photographing people without their permission. You might argue that if you’re out in public then you can be photographed but that’s a shit attitude, if someone is walking around photographing people they should at least have to make it obvious so people can have a say at the time or at least know about it before it turns out they are now an AI deepfake pornstar.
Legal doesn’t mean right. There are a whole host of situations where you shouldn’t be filming and if someone is filming you want them to be obvious about it. Schools, playgrounds, change rooms etc.
schools and changing rooms are already somewhat because they aren’t considered public, playgrounds are insanely public and have no reasonable expectation of privacy.
I think there’s an expectation that you can identify when someone is filming in playground. I’d be very fucking curious as to what someone thought they were doing if they were walking around filming my kids in a playground. If they are wearing AR glasses then there a reasonable assumption they are filming constantly and sending that data to whoever made the glasses.
AR has so many unsolvable privacy issues it’s wild …
It’s solvable if you take surveillance capitalism out of the equation, just as Valve are doing. AR with Meta behind it will never be something that is socially acceptable since their whole business model is selling out the user and everyone around them. With a company like Valve which has a pretty good track record regarding privacy (a.k.a the only things transferred regarding usage are what games you play to make store recommendations fit your taste and bug reports if you approve them) i can see a wider adoption taking place.
I don’t think that’s true, your personal privacy as the owner of the device is one thing, everyone else’s right to not be continuously photographed is another. Having Valve operate it over meta doesn’t solve that. Also, what happens when Gabe does and the investment bank that buys it decides they want to sell everyone data to maximise profit?
These things can be done in a privacy respecting way for other parties too. The computational power needed to realize a person is in the field of view and to process this person saying “i consent” is in everyones pocket nowadays.
I think if you can plan for somehow allowing concent for these things then you can also plan for bypassing it. Also it would need to film you to work out if you don’t consent and then it’s already breached the consent.
There’s a difference between passively waiting for a voice command by a person identified in RAM and storing these things. And sure, there will always be people breaking the rules, but if you actually try to make the product secure, the vast amount of people will NOT be fucking around with that.
Take Metas PervGlasses for example: There’s a LED that shows it is recording. You can remove that light with a simple dremel, and no one at Meta even thought about implementing a simple check like making the LED flash a OTP code to be recognized by the camera at the start of recording. It makes a whole lot of difference who is developing these things, trust me.
I think the problem is that shit manufacturers exist, so how do you regulate that. At this point you can only assume all AR glasses are sending everything they record to their manufacturer for on selling to the ir favourite data broker, because that’s literally the market. There severely limited options for ethical devices and those that do exist could be bought next week and their policies change on a dime.
We regulate that with laws with teeth. I know, that is a foreign concept for most of the US, but even there with California and lately NY there are areas who have started to hold corporations accountable (even if it is on a small scale yet). The GDPR is already basically making Metas glasses illegal in their current form, and they are currently involved into a record amount of lawsuits.
There is still a lot of work to do, but the basics have been prepared.
Yeah that’s fair. I’m in Australia so we get some of the benefits of European policy, but mostly we are slaves to whatever the US and China want to throw at us. Honestly I’m less concerned about China and more concerned about the attitudes of US corporations at this point. They’ve demonstrated time and time again that they will stop at nothing to make a line go up in the short term.
Honestly I don’t need a camera or anything integrated but I’d love to have an integrated screen for my glasses. Would be nice when putting things together to just sync it with my phone and just have it there, also maps. Look I have to wear glasses all the time might as well add a tiny bit more utility.
These exist
But are they intigratable in pre existing glasses? My prescription is non negotiable due to how bad my eyesight is without and I can’t do contacts. Also having them sync with my phone and having them do little to no processing would be my preferred method, rather than having them contain all the computational shit themselves.
GPS with accelerometers should be able to work out where you’re standing and where you’re facing, so you could have navigation with a floating marker over the turn you need to take instead of just having a mini-map, too.
Maybe but I’d personally prefer the mini-map, I’ve a built up hatred of floating way points.
That’s not AR though is it?
Kinda depends on the definition on that one, personally I would consider a IRL HUD to be a low level version of that since it would be intigraing those systems in a pretty intimate way.
We’ve mostly been looking in to how it can be utilized in a production environment with detailed machine stats at a glance, live setpoints without having to be near the control panel, aids for maintenance…that sort of things
That could be helpful, I think most tech and inlecs would find it more annoying than anything …
The meta display glasses would be cool if not for the whole meta part. You don’t even need to be able to access the camera. It should just be used for tracking.
That’s not really AR then is it, AR requires the overlay on reality, I guess it could be like a game OSD but a lot of that detail is probably more annoying than anything. A live map might be good sometimes, but do I need my heart rate showing all the time in regular day to day life? is it helpful to have a shopping list taking up space in my vision all the time? How do I interact with it if it can’t see my hands, do I then have to talk to it constantly to manipulate it? Can other people manipulate my OSD while I’m using it by saying the right thing? Seems pretty gimmicky …
No, not what I meant. I meant environment tracking, hand tracking, everything.
WE don’t need access to the camera for AR to work, the device just needs to be able to process the video stream.
The problem isnt your privacy, it’s everyone else’s. If there are glasses with cameras then some arsehole is running around photographing people without their permission. You might argue that if you’re out in public then you can be photographed but that’s a shit attitude, if someone is walking around photographing people they should at least have to make it obvious so people can have a say at the time or at least know about it before it turns out they are now an AI deepfake pornstar.
Yeah, that’s why you block user access to the camera.
Yeah because hacking devices isn’t a thing or anything …
at least in the US you don’t need permission to record people in public spaces.
Legal doesn’t mean right. There are a whole host of situations where you shouldn’t be filming and if someone is filming you want them to be obvious about it. Schools, playgrounds, change rooms etc.
schools and changing rooms are already somewhat because they aren’t considered public, playgrounds are insanely public and have no reasonable expectation of privacy.
I think there’s an expectation that you can identify when someone is filming in playground. I’d be very fucking curious as to what someone thought they were doing if they were walking around filming my kids in a playground. If they are wearing AR glasses then there a reasonable assumption they are filming constantly and sending that data to whoever made the glasses.