This App Warns You if Someone Is Wearing Smart Glasses Nearby - 404media
3mon 23d ago by piefed.social/u/mesamunefire in technology from www.404media.co
The creator of Nearby Glasses made the app after reading 404 Media's coverage of how people are using Meta's Ray-Bans smartglasses to film people without their knowledge or consent. “I consider it to be a tiny part of resistance against surveillance tech.”
more at: feed@404media.co
Admittedly, this is cyberpunk as fuck.
Should not be needed… but it’s a fucking cool solution.
Install this on kali nethunter and make glassholes pay for their crimes.
Next step is for someone makes a version that hijacks the Bluetooth headphones and makes them play a loud shrill noise that makes the glasses too uncomfortable to wear in your pressence.
Should be expanded for IP cams
Wasnt there a ton of outrage and such incl people not being allowed on planes, back when google glass was released?
Why is it all OK now?
Same reason our governments suck ass. Something unpopular tries to get passed again, and again, and again, and again, and eventually people get desensitized and worn out from trying to fight against it. That or it hits on the right time when people are distracted by something else bigger or more important.
I remember Google Glass itself receiving a ton of outrage actually: People hated it and anyone wearing one was made fun of ("glassholes" was a popular insult at the time).
I’ll still use it for the meta garbage, but I think the reason is that the glasses are just inconspicuous enough for most normies to not notice they are being recorded. Till the moron wearing them starts staring off into space while reading tweets at least.
Many years of indoctrination. When Google glass was introduced, it was just 'a neat idea'. Now it's a product, and therefore it's clearly more trustworthy because someone is profiting from it. (/s)
Years of privacy violations going deeper and deeper under pretend of "progress" and "pRoTeCt the cHiLdReN". I am glad that people started rebelling against Flock, and some removed their Amazon cameras following the Superbowl's ads, but that's not even close to how much we should be mad at these mass surveillance actors.
Years of privacy violations going deeper and deeper under pretend of "progress" and "pRoTeCt the cHiLdReN".
There's a window of attention for public discourse and there's fatigue. We, as a group, can only be upset about so much. It's a tried tactic to just try to distract us with some crazy shit, like Trump did with the alien files. If one crazy thing comes up in the news, other stuff will drop from our radar. And that's why people try shit again and again and again. Always in the hope that this time people are distracted by other stuff or are finally worn down enough.
Windows Recall has re-entered the chat.
It still isn't OK.
It is just that the technology became so small, you can't differentiate with regular sunglasses anymore.
I mean you kind of still can. Wire frame sunglasses are still too small to have recording hardware.
They should be only with transparent plastic a flashing LED that signals CREEP in morse.
Paywalled article. Here's the link to the app: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ch.pocketpc.nearbyglasses
Edit: it's licensed under a license I never heard of. I'm curious, I don't understand why it was needed.
"Why draft new licenses? Until now, there has been no standardization of this kind of source code license, even though it has become increasingly common. This has resulted in confusing and overlapping licenses, which need to be analyzed one at a time. Lack of standardization has used up the time and resources of many in the software industry, as well as their lawyers. The objective of the PolyForm Project is standardization and reduction of costs for developers and users."
Seems like that exact XKCD about standards.
That license looks like Creative Commons Non-Comercial, which is not an open source license.
This is an unpopular opinion, but using licenses to actively prevent commercial exploitation of voluntary communal labor is not a bad thing. I would even argue that allowing commercial exploitation of free, communally-maintained software is downright unethical. I don’t tolerate this pejorative “it’s not open source unless the rich and powerful can exploit it” bullshit.
This is not a remotely unpopular opinion, sharing is awesome and corpos can suck it
Thank you, I see this so often and it always irks me.
"oh but you're limiting your reach with this license because companies won't want to us— boo fucking hoo, maybe not everything is about market-share and having a morbillion downloads.
If you dont want corpos to exploit it, you go with GPL. Then they are forced to share back.
I like AGPL in theory, but in practice it never works like that. They are protected by a smoke screen — you don’t know if they are using something, how they are using it, or what they’ve built on it — and even if something did leak about their usage they are protected by money — the vast majority of FOSS projects won’t have the resources to pursue any kind of legal enforcement or reasonable remedy. In practice, they will use and build on A/GPL software while contributing nothing back in blatant violation of the spirit and intent of the license, because who is going to find out or enforce it?
I know, and yet the code is open source. Confusing.
No, the code is available, which is not the same as open source.
They do call it "open source" in the docs though.
True, but I have no issue preventing commercial use. I view that as just as good if not better than traditional open source.
That's called "source available". FUTO basically did the same thing with their stuff after the community rightfully got angry over their use of "open source" in their docs.
Proudly powered by WordPress.
Say no more
Yeah I noticed it in the favicon too. Bad aftertaste.
You know what sucks?
In that AR glasses, in theory, are such an interesting technology with lots of potential, and certainly a piece of tech I would love to have and work with and on. Not to secretly record people, but to, well.. augment my field of view with whatever digital tools or displays I would like. It would be so useful
It's honestly kinda saddening to me that it most likely will get completely ruined by our current toxic relationship to technology. A step towards our ever increasing cyberdystopia, and not towards enchanting our limited lives
Obviously either way I don't trust Meta, but an open-hardware device running a FOSS AR system? It would be nice..
I still hold out hope that this somehow could be resolved, and I would love to contribute to open software for these devices. Maybe one day soon-ish I will. My expertise should be well applicable, after all
It would be incredibly useful in construction. Having a digital overlay telling you exactly where to put up the framing for a separating wall, or an overlay showing the correct distance between screws, or where wires and pipes are inside a wall? There are so incredibly many awesome possible uses for AR in construction.
I always wanted to build an AR app for inside data centers. Imagine looking at a server and being able to open a terminal or desktop that you can immediately interact with on the floor. or have it display resource information like hardware utilization, temps, network throughput and configuration, etc.
it would make a difficult job just bit more manageable.
I really like the special tagged tape that could bring up AR tags and details about it. Organization and directions are so more useful.
It would be so cool to have something like this integrated into your monitoring platform. Imagine being able to "tap" on a switch in a rack and be able to view it's mac table or port assignments
Pretty sure that already exists.
But it is mainly used for solving hardware problems where a technician can film whatever they are working on with their phone, and a remote technician can "draw" in AR on the image in real time to point towards the things that need manual interventions.
I'm in the AEC industry. Almost any implementation of on site augmentation sucks ass most especially because the tech nerds making them have a really hard time truly understanding the needs OF tradespeople and installers.
Almost all of them are top down implementations meant to assess tooling and field quality rather than actually acting as an overlay aid in construction (which, like, 90% of tradespeople worth their salt don't actually need FYI).
Also, I've found, most of these tech nerds making this shit don't know how to actually put a building together and are constantly flummoxed by the methodology.
I've worked in construction, and now work as a CAD specialist, so I know your pain, but the problem with "how to actually put a building together" is a very wide issue, also present with engineers and architects.
It's already used in construction as a documentation device. Photos are big as a documentation tool and some inspectors already use wearable cameras as a tool.
ok, but they don't try and hide them do they?
I know one engineer who bought the Meta glasses due to the form factor. For others with the Go Pro, they usually mount the cameras on their hard hat, which makes it easy to see since black hard hats are rare.
Or playing Pokémon GO
Sure, that creepy 48 year old on the subway is just looking for a Charmander.
They are used for that kind of applications already. You put one of those on, and some technician remotely guides you in doing some maintenance while looking through your eyes. They can mark things in your fov, show you diagrams, whatever. Pretty neat actually.
Unneeded. We already have a tool for that it's called blueprints, they haven't failed in over 3000 years.
Blueprints don't fail, people really really often do though. People measure wrong, or build on the wrong side of the line they've drawn. It's not a question about "Is it essential", it's a question about "Will it make it easier, faster and less errorprone".
Drop the cameras and microphones and replace them with a couple accelerometers and gyros. Paired with your phone's GPS tracking, the glasses can tell where you're looking without actually seeing anything. You can get handy features like a floating 'turn here' sign over your exit while driving with GPS navigation without recording anyone or anything at any time. Better battery life, too.
Tbh I don't even mind cameras that much if they were entirely controlled by the individuals themselves. I have a much bigger issue with it when you're streaming my facial recognition data to Evil Megacorp 2™ servers that also feed directly to the "Not Spying.. Again" agency, though.
Is that what you're referring to? https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/meta-facial-recognition-glassesThese people have no ethics and no moral code. They know we'll hate it, so they want to sneak it!
What about a camera that is covered by a cap that can only be lifted if they press the mechanical button on the side of the glasses?
You could still film things like posters to get more information about the event, while not filming everyone all the time.
I don't think that would work particularly well with AR: People get sick if movement isn't synced up properly, not having any sort of cameras or sensors at all would exacerbate that problem.
If you are talking about a simple HUD, then that might be a lot more viable, but for AR and the tech we currently have, some sort of camera or sensor array is kind of a requirement practically speaking.
See, I don't really want full AR. I want a HUD, a very small number of rudimentary AR features, like floating windows for text documents or videos, physical buttons on the arms of the glasses, small drivers by the ears for audio, and battery life that will last most of the day. I already have to wear glasses and if I'm paying more for extra features I want ones that will last the whole time I might want them, not just the six or so hours a day that the current offerings have.
If that's all you want, making something that just clips onto your existing glasses might be pretty viable.
Except that one cool thing with AR is being able to have it tell what you're looking at is. Not just positioning things in space. A lot of cool shit that could be done with AR, like real time text translation, object identification, etc needs some kind of camera, even if it just sees IR light. Lotta cool shit needs a microphone, too.
GNSS isn't really accurate enough for this, especially in urban environments where there is poor line of sight to most of the satellites.
Using an AR display on those glasses with frames that thick is such a horrible idea. Google was on the right track with the HUD displayed on a frame-less prism that doesn't block half your vision.
Last thing I'd want is to be in the middle of something with my hands full and the display bugs out, blocking the one eye, making me screw something up.
Last thing I’d want is to be in the middle of something with my hands full and the display bugs out, blocking the one eye, making me screw something up.
Maybe don't cause your own problems.
I mean, that was sorta the point of the comment...
I don't like them and therefore, I won't be using them, ever. I'd get a less obstructing headset instead. And, I wouldn't get a headset just to play around with it, I'd actually want to use it and try to get to it help me doing things.
It's only a matter of time before someone is arrested on suspicion of voyerism and there is evidence of him staring at some girl's boobs.
Every guy does this, but "Looking at cleavage is like looking at the sun. You don't stare at it. It's too risky. Ya get a sense of it and then you look away!"
-Jerry Seinfeld.
but an open-hardware device running a FOSS AR system? Until these display my health, ammo and the direction to my next objective, I'll pass.
I agree, it would be nice.
The truth is that we already are living in the surveillance state and people are just going to have to "get over" being recorded in public by anyone that walks by.
I don't like it either. But that's the reality we're entering into, where privacy isn't a right but a privilege and that privilege does not exist save for some very select (if any at this point) places like your home ... Maybe.
No, people do not have to get over that. People need to stand up for their rights. Being in a public space isn't justification to have your movements recorded and logged 24/7. Stop being the fucking knee you coward.
I'm just being realistic about the future. You already are carrying around a machine that's listening and watching. You're walking into and out of stores where you're on camera. Hell you're driving past however many cameras in your car or walking past them on the street, every business, every office, every space has cameras now.
Thus, I think eventually more and more augmented reality devices will be seen because people will come to appreciate their uses outside of just being recording devices once that concern is overcome. In other words, wearing AR glasses won't get you default labeled as some perverted weirdo.
You don't need to bend the knee but we're past the point where there should be any expectation of privacy in public spaces. I'm not saying I like it, I'm saying I expect our society to continue to move towards a surveillance model where privacy simply cannot be expected in any public space.
Do I think it's dystopian and bad, yes, yes I do. I also think we need strong privacy protections for our private domiciles. That doesn't mean my opinion is aligned with what actually is going to happen in our world.
I don't want it but it's what is going to happen and has been happening.
While I agree that AR glasses will become widespread, there's still time to advocate for and implement privacy focused regulations. Especially early on as people are upset about the technology
While not perfect solutions, enforcing stuff such as recording LEDs and such are steps in the right direction
AR glasses will become widespread
I was picking up my new prescription glasses this week at a large mall. They had Ray Ban and Oakley Meta glasses and the clerk said they have not sold a single pair.
"Here's a list of reasons why all hope is lost and you too should bend the knee."
That's all I read. C.O.W.A.R.D.
You're a silly person, aren't ya.
Yeah fuck me for acknowledging AR glasses or other AR tech could be very useful but it's being limited by our privacy concerns that are basically theater at this point.
Truly I am so cowardly Mr big internet man.
What does this even mean? You gonna punch every other person you see?
Fuck off with your disingenuous comment
You don't need to actively punch everyone you see. Just punch the Nazis. For the privacy part, what one could reasonably do once the tech becomes affordable is to eg.: wear passive EMP devices or something similar that disable cameras near you (at some point, the tech has to fit in a space too small for EMP shielding).
If you want to bend and spread, you do you. You don't have to tell us to "get over" it and share your fetish. That's a not-nice thing to do.
I'm just being realistic about the future. You already are carrying around a machine that's listening and watching. You're walking into and out of stores where you're on camera. Hell you're driving past however many cameras in your car or walking past them on the street, every business, every office, every space has cameras now.
Thus, I think eventually more and more augmented reality devices will be seen because people will come to appreciate their uses outside of just being recording devices once that concern is overcome. In other words, wearing AR glasses won't get you default labeled as some perverted weirdo.
You don't need to bend over and spread but we're past the point where there should be any expectation of privacy in public spaces. I'm not saying I like it, I'm saying I expect our society to continue to move towards a surveillance model where privacy simply cannot be expected in any public space.
Do I think it's dystopian and bad, yes, yes I do. I also think we need strong privacy protections for our private domiciles. That doesn't mean my opinion is aligned with what actually is going to happen in our world.
I don't want it but it's what is going to happen and has been happening.
Open season on meta wearers when?
Green light!
Perfect response. Record someone without consent, it should be the last time those glasses are wearable.
I can't speak to the laws in other nations but in the US it depends a lot on where they're recording. If you're just out on the street, it's not only not a crime to record in public, it's a protected right. So if you punch them they'd be solidly in their rights to mace you or break your legs, maybe even shoot you in many states. And then have you arrested and force you to pay for a new pair of glasses.
But if they were doing that shit on private property or somewhere worse like a restroom, give them the ol western bouncer treatment and send them flying out the door with a broken pair of glasses. I mean you could assault them out in public too, but there could be some unpleasant consequences.
Breaking someone's legs requires excessive force, so no, you would not be within your rights to break someone's legs for punching you in the face. That would absolutely be an escalation of force and not legally defendable.
In order to shoot someone in self defense, you have to prove that you feared for your life. Its not a get out of jail free card.
It really depends on the state. Quite a few people have been killed by being sucker punched. So if you punch someone out of the blue they can say they feared for their life.
And breaking legs, the amount of force depends on the person. My daughter broke her own legs twice just by slipping on a stair a little. What if they're carrying a retractable baton and when you punch them they hit you in the knee with it? Not unreasonable in a lot of the US.
Again though, its not a get out of jail free card. There needs to be a clear threat to life and limb. Just being punched is not an invitation to shoot somebody. Stop spreading false and dangerous information.
It also depends on where and other context. If it is an old frail man or a woman being punched by a dude twice their size it absolutely can be. I also said it depended on the state and I said maybe. I'm not spreading false information.
I agree but the biggest defense for this is to always assume you're being recorded when in public even if you're not. You never know.
The issue becomes relevant in private spaces, to me. Nobody with smart glasses is coming into my home.
Doesn't this boil down to self-censorship in public? Better not critizise the government in public becaus you never know whos waring smart glasses...
I agree with the core of your point. I'd like to assert, though, that all people exert some level of self-censorship in public on the basis of the opinions of their neighbors and peers. Having to worry about powerful organizations like governments and megacorps also always being there (instead of just sometimes, or usually) adds a new degree of reason to self-censor, for sure.
Yes. You should have to censor yourself for neighbors and peers to have a functioning society. You should not have to do it for corporations. The line is pretty cut and dry and we should fight to keep it.
the biggest defense for this is to always assume you’re being recorded when in public even if you’re not
So women in July should wear tarps?
What posible application is there for this CreepTech?
I would love for an AI machine to be all knowing and all pervasive. It honestly sounds like it could be great.
Except definitelt not because we know 100% that nobody could be trusted to be in charge of it.
Ofc I don’t want this. But I look at my wife and daughter and their safety comes first hence the dilemma. And philosophy should be considered as well.
Fucking assholes would sell out the world for a false sense of security.
Those who would give up any measures of Liberty to purchase any amount of temporary Security deserve neither Liberty or Security.
There is no reason for anyone to be walking around and public with hidden cameras.
would these help lead to more arrest if assaults were captured on the cameras
It might also help find lost puppies, but that's not a good enough reason to give up any additional amounts of privacy to the megacorporations or to a police state.
Everyone around you has a phone with a camera. Businesses and the government have additional cameras looking all over. The phone camera being less obvious and handsfree seems like an arbitrary choice of where to draw the line
I don't know about you, but when I'm walking around all my phone camera sees is the inside of my pocket. Hands free stealth cameras seems like a perfectly reasonable place to draw the line.
Spy glasses are much less obvious than using a phone camera.
Back to the 1960s....these were marketed to look at kids and girls.
Is unsolved assault cases currently a problem? That sounds like an answer looking for a problem to me.
And I think it just means anyone deciding to commit assault just also steals/ destroys the victims phone and glasses as a default
Doesn't work 😮💨 push "start scanning" and nothing happens.
It's supposed to ask for Bluetooth access at that point, did it?
Also from the GitHub page:
if you don't see the scan starting, you might need to enable Foreground Service on your particular phone in the Settings menu [in the app's settings, not the phone's]
Yes I did. I don't know what a foreground service is or how to enable it...
Sorry - edited my comment as you were replying. It's in the app's settings menu.
Oh I couldn't access the settings menu previously...
Working now, thanks
It worked for me after I looked at the settings screen. I'm not sure why. If it is working, though, the debug box will fill up with a ton of text.
Turn off "debug" in the app settings to stop that & have it only report suspect devices instead of everything it sees.
None of those buttons at the top work either. Possibly because they're behind my notifications bar.
For me it worked to rotate the screen, then the buttons worked.
Same here.
Go to Android Developer Settings > Display Cutout, set it to one of the other options and it should shift the app down a bit so you can access the buttons. (change it back after ofc)
I used "waterfall cutout" but others might work depending on your phone model. Afaik no other fix is possible without the app's code itself being modified.
Ditto
I think you need to give it a sec or hold. The button down. The same thing happened to me. But it was scanning within a min of downloading
No such luck
I know next to nothing about the glasses, but would they be vulnerable to anything the Flipper Zero is capable of doing?
How hard can you throw it?
Pretty hard. Unfortunately my aim is shit.
Just throw hard enough to trigger fusion reaction then.
XKCD-it. Got it.
depends on what you know about flipper zero.
The app scans for smart glasses’ distinctive Bluetooth signatures and sends a push alert if it detects a potential pair of glasses in the local area.
What do you mean "vulnerable"? Are you trying to blow them up?
Hmm, wonder if Bluetooth (D)DoS attacks are a thing.
https://github.com/crypt0b0y/BLUETOOTH-DOS-ATTACK-SCRIPT
Requires Linux. But a raspberry pi should do the trick.
Now we just need to combine them both so it only targets Meta devices.
how does this work? I thought bluetooth is practically invulnerable to DDOS because of its endless frequency hopping
Haven’t tested it against meta glasses. Essentially it requires the MAC address of the device and pings the shit out of it. May or may not work against the glasses.
That'd be a great TV show plot...but I'm not really a fan of violence. I'd be more interested in rendering them unusable, or spoofing them into making loud fart noises or letting out a loud wolf whistle everytime someone else walks by. Like I said, I don't know, nor do I much care, what kinds of things the glasses do...but I imagine theres some kind of screen the user can watch, so maybe forcing them to view something annoying could be another viable spoof.
Ok, but how hilarious would it be if a series of vulnerabilities (software & hardware) would be discovered that wound allow just that (set fire to the battery), lol.
I mean, the Flipper Zero is just a computer with a few radios built-in.
I think the only one they share with most smart glasses is Bluetooth which might potentially have some vulnerabilities which could be exploited, but there are also expansion cards for the Flipper Zero that add everything from wifi and ethernet ports to high-powered IR blasters, so the real question is how vulnerable smart glasses are.
And the truth is, they're vulnerable by default because they rely on corpo servers to operate like any other "smart" device. Any flaw in the security of the glasses themselves barely holds a candle to the fact that they forward everything to Facebook or some other big tech brand name with a financial interest in monetizing your data.
If you prefer to avoid Google: https://github.com/yjeanrenaud/yj_nearbyglasses
Now you need a powerful laser pointer to ruin the glasses camera. Careful not to blind the wearer.
https://xkcd.com/1251/(there is always an xkcd about it)
That was way more on point than I expected.
Apparently the lidar in some cars can damage cameras and are safe for eyes.
why did mods remove this
how is mentioning that cars are dangerous a "call for violence"
Lemmy mods
Lemmy.world mods. They are kinda like feddit.org mods. Whiny cocksuckers who are just so happy to vent their frustrations (or pretend ones) on their userbase.
The removed post is implying people with these cameras should be run over by cars. Whether that breaks any ToS or not idk but it’s pretty clear what the post is saying
meta is all about surveillance cant expect anything less
Lmao it's just BLE radar.
yep, theres a few apps like that nowadays. Bluetooth is VERY vulnerable. At least from my understanding.
Bluetooth is a result of corporate, Microsoft types, giving a list of requirements. It's honestly amazing it sits on top of the 2.4GHz 802.11 standards.
I don't really see anything wrong with making an app for the purpose. Bit of a different target audience and probably easier setup. Also raises awareness via news coverage and by getting people to talk about it.
Didn't say there was
I'd fork this just to name it more appropriately: "Glasshole radar"
Pretty sure the Meta Glasses come with NipAlert pre-installed.
I just re-watched Ghost in the Shell SAC Laughing Man last night, and wouldn't mind seeing these things get hacked with the Laughing Man logo replacing any face it was looking at, re-writing signs, etc.
I wonder if you could run it on a dedicated piece of gear like FlockYou...
Now if they can just notify you that some asshole is recording you on their cell phone instead of reading reddit. probably 0.001% of people out there stalking are using smart glasses.
Now if they can just notify you that some asshole is recording you on their cell phone instead of reading reddit.
If you're out in public, always assume you're on someone's camera. That isn't really new either.
I’ve never seen an online discussion about privacy without some version of this comment. Never gets old. Is there an Android keyboard with an apathy button that I’m unaware of?
Apathy? Not at all. Its simply a matter of established law, in the USA anyway. I can't speak to the legal systems of the other 140+ countries on planet Earth.
Can you cite a law in the USA or in your own country where you have a right to privacy making photographing you simply standing in a public park an illegal act perpetrated by another person or government entity?
I'm not the other commenter, and it's not all encompassing, but I'll link this one here for DE https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recht_am_eigenen_Bild_(Deutschland)
Forgive the machine translation to English, but reading that shows the a very similar exception to privacy protection we have here in the USA
Here's one example:
"There are exceptions to events (demonstrations, general meetings, cultural events, etc.). Here, participants must expect to be photographed. This is about what is happening and not about the person itself. "
Most of the wiki article is talking specifically about copyright, which isn't the scope of what we're talking about. Publication of taken images is a different topic.
There's a difference between taking a picture of a person and taking a picture of scenery or event with a person in it in Germany.
It's a subtle but significant difference. And relevant when talking about do you have to expect for your picture to be taken. You may not care when your in the background or not identifiable but at the same time care when someone knows you and takes photography of you, or takes photos of you where you're the main focus of the image.
There's a distinction between whether they will be published or are for private use too.
With your comments I found additional German legal guidance that mostly matches what you said. It appears that Germany does indeed have a portion of privacy from someone intentionally walking up to you and taking your picture. I don't think this invalidates my original point because it doesn't appear that expectation of privacy extends to installed surveillance cameras in public.
However, I appreciate having a better understanding of German law. Thank you.
Regarding security cameras, you can't point your private security camera off your property. If you put it above your entrance, you can't point it to record the entire street.
Afaik anyway.
Parking spaces or business must visibly disclose that there's cameras, at least where they would not be generally expected. I'm not too sure about the specifics there though.
Hat ✅
Hood ✅
Head down in my phone ✅
Hmm... I wonder if there's any solid way to detect a camera lens being in active focus or use. This app works by parsing Bluetooth traffic, but a person locally recording on their phone wouldn't have such a trail. Is there any reliable way to detect a camera lens reading exposed light?
Presumably the sensor's data lines would be detectable, but probably more like laboratory conditions.
Perhaps a physical shutter would be a good happy medium. Put 'em on the damn cell phones, too.
Shoot, I should 3d print one for mine. I don't use my camera for much anyway, and better protection from impacts would be nice.
Yeah: they'd be pointing the phone at you.
Yeah, but the issue is intent and actual usage. I don't want to fuck up my neck by always looking down at a 30deg angle, so I do try to view things on my phone more level with my face. I avoid pointing it directly at people, but I can't change how others would interpret that.
It sucks that it seems like as time goes on the best thing my phone will be good for is alerting me to other nearby tech to avoid.
Github (APK) link, if you're on a privacy phone: https://github.com/yjeanrenaud/yj_nearbyglasses
I mean, eventually there are going to be people with camera's stealthily integrated directly into their eyeballs recording non-stop.
Like that black mirror episode letting people relive any moment from their past.
The wireless communication protocol will still be able to be intercepted. A physical port for data transfer will probably be too dangerous to the subject and prone to contamination (and infection).
But not necessarily interpreted.
It apparently works with the bluetooth signals which I found really smart.
Couldn't people who specifically want to stealthily record people just turn off the bluetooth?
I believe Bluetooth is always on with the Meta glasses, at least the last gen. They offload everything to the phone. I got a pair as a work gift and only use them as sunglasses with headphones built-in so I can listen to podcasts on walks.
My partner got a pair for work when they first came out (her job involves creating social media content). I was impressed by the speakers and it’s the same style of sunglasses that I normally wear daily, so I got a pair for myself. It was so nice to be able to listen to stuff and take calls without carry around headphones or putting them in when the phone rang. I was already uncomfortable with the association with meta, but was able to isolate that aspect at first. As they continued to add features, I’ve started being less comfortable with them. I accidentally left them somewhere a couple months ago and decided not to replace them. It’s such a bummer that all the cool tech is now not just spying on you, but on everyone around you. Fuckin capitalism ruins everything.
I get an error saying "something went wrong" "please make sure google play store is enabled ...."
Early days, f-droid is around the bend.
i mean... you can also just look around and see the guy with the dorky out-of-place classes...
I don't want to have to keep up with the current styles of SmartGlasses from however many makers of these things there are at any given time. I am happy to outsource this awareness to someone I can find good reason to trust to provide me the info I need. Just like I don't make my own vaccines, because I have no idea how to get the 5G that small.
You are thinking Google Glass. Those aint those anymore.
Na, I'm looking at the RAY-BAN META GLASSES and they look strait out of some 1970s/1980s "I work at NASA/IBM" movie. Still dorky.
Still dorky.
you must be in the US, where everyone wears these
I dislike Facebook and deleted my account even before they changed to "Meta". I also value privacy.
But what privacy violations do "smart glasses" provide that weren't already trivially available? Tiny cameras are insanely cheap. A reasonably handy person could hide several on their person and there are plenty of "spy shops" that sell actual wearable hidden cameras.
The "I love ICE" kid was wearing Meta Ray Bans but the first video I saw of it was from someone else' camera. I can't leave the house without getting filmed from multiple angles. The only thing those glasses do is make it really obvious that the wearer is a dumbass.
The difference is that meta glasses constantly upload to their creepy servers to do automatic face recognition.
As does Ring, Flock, Samsung, Apple, Google and so on. Some random person with any other hidden camera can easily upload them to creepy servers and do automatic face recognition on them too.
Steve Mann https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Mann_%28inventor%29has been doing that for a long time.
EDIT: For all of you downvoting, this isn't conspiracy or speculation. Just a few days ago the FBI publicized footage in the Guthrie case that was acquired illegally.
True, but understand, every wireless-connected smart device you wear or interact with in any way is doing the same.
Meta's nonsense isn't unique, and should be regulated into nonexistence, but unless you're keeping your phone in a Faraday bag you too are being constantly filmed, tracked, and snooped upon.
No, my iPhone is not doing that because they give you a switch to turn it off and encrypt anything Apple touches. It disables some handy features but it’s a worthwhile trade off in my opinion.
I'm sure that switch disables it and isn't just a presentation, but if you haven't, get a faraday bag and keep your phone in it when you're not using it.
Cheers.
Alternative android OSes also not withstanding.
There is a big difference between available and normalized. Buying a tiny camera to film people without consent makes you a creep in a way buying a social media corporation's product doesn't. Pulling out a camera to film someone is a signal to them that they are being filmed in a way looking at them while wearing camera glasses isn't.
These glasses could change the landscape of our social reality. If they catch on, corporations will know your facial expressions, your location, and what you are looking at whenever you are in public, even if you have no account.
They will learn the face you make when you are too tired to argue and tell the shops you're heading towards that you're an easy mark today.
They will see a flash of defiance on your face when you hear someone say Nazi shit and change the video advertisements you walk by to ones that will make you feel powerless.
And so the net is pulled ever-tighter. All we can do is try to cut our way out.
If I understand your response correctly, you're arguing that the glasses themselves aren't the issue, it's the shifts that come with accepting the glasses.
They may ironically have the reverse effect. I guarantee that corporations are already cataloging your facial expressions. Between Ring, Flock, Apple, Google, Netflix, Samsung, etc. there are many pictures of all our faces with rich annotation. Currently most people don't even think about how thoroughly they're being watched. These douchy glasses may actually draw attention to the matter.
The main differences I can think of are:
- Better video quality
- More normalized
- Easier to get your hands on
- They look like raybans and are brand name
- They're debatibly "cool"
- Also Facebook is involved
Basically they produce better video and are more normalized in society.
They can produce better video than some cameras but not as good as others. 12MP ultrawide is pretty standard on security cameras and they're already all over the place.
Do you think that the current smart glasses are making surveillance more normalized or do you think that they're getting more common because we've already normalized constant surveillance?
I'd point out that the PATRIOT act passed a quarter century ago with only one "No" and one abstention.
Let's see how "cool" and "normalized" they are when police arrest the first guy recording around a playgound.
Found the fanboy.
"HEY GUYS IT'S NO BIG DEAL NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT. I DISLIKE FACEBOOK BUT DEFINITELY DON'T SEE THE PROBLEM WITH THESE ALWAYS ON SPY DEVICES THAT ARE CONSTANTLY CONNECTED TO DEMONSTRABLY EVIL PEOPLE"
Not actually what they said, though.
Downplaying in the war for privacy is vouching for the enemy.
Would love to know when the iOS app is coming out.
Thanks yjeanrenaud@tech.lgbt !
Well, my glasses don't give off bluetooth signal or record but I'm afraid I'll end up caught in the crossfire with my XR glasses on trains and planes. I travel for work so it's nice to have a big screen to watch media on when I'm traveling for 20+ hours.
Not the purpose of the thread I know but would you care to share additional information? Model, price, comfort, compatibility, are they good?
I picked up the Viture Luma Cyberpunk edition for like $550 USD, they're sold out now but so far I think they're okay. They definitely don't fully live up to the hype but that's part of being an early adopter in the enthusiast space I guess. The app kinda sucks and it's seriously limited, so if you're looking for that 3DoF or lightweight use on the 180VR you'll be out of luck there. The immersive 3d is a neat party trick and seems to work well enough. I like that function for showing off videos that I've taken while traveling or at work. They have built in diopters so you can get the focus right while you're using them as a follow screen. For watching movies or playing games on your tablet while traveling, I think they'll be hard to beat. They have apps for android, windows, ios, and mac. I haven't tried them on PC yet but I'm hoping the pc app is far more flushed out. So far, comfort is pretty good and it seems like they'll be okay for burning a few hours. I also work in a remote location with frequent weather days, so having a private method of watching big screen content in my cabin was a big selling point for me.
Overall, neat little device, but it's definitely quite early in the product development cycle and I'm excited to see what the next few years hold.
Sorry for the incoherent bits and poor formatting, I'm actively falling asleep while typing this out. I'll be more than happy to answer any additional follow-up questions you may have when I'm fully awake.
Not incoherent at all and I appreciate you taking the time to interrupt your beauty sleep to respond. ;)
This technology space has a lot of promise but knowing when it is really ready for prime time is difficult to discern with all the hype. Sounds like it is close, or fully useable depending on use case.
You hit all the key points so no follow up questions. Thanks!
I vaguely recall a similar approach to detecting law enforcement by scanning for BT signals from common law enforcement BT devices. I don’t recall if they were body cameras or communications equipment or something else, though. Sound familiar to anyone?
now if i could get that app without a phone, and with a warning of nearby phones too...
Warning: there is probably a bunch of phones near you right now.
Prolly use a Flipper Zero
i wonder if it can detect the snapchat ones too.
needs a disrupter to ignite it's batteries. js. what good is detection w/o counter measures
are you filming this? 👊
This is fantastic, but from what I understand they use randomized OUIs, so wouldn't they be undetectable or at least unreliable in detection?
Following for the iOS port
Can I set mine to loudly blare, "pedophile detected!"?
Can we not call everyone we don't like pedophiles? It lowers the impact of the word when it's used against an actual pedo. It also makes it harder to reason with those people because they just think of you as name callers.
Sorry bro, I'm still calling you that if you are wearing these glasses.
It's not a stretch
https://evrimagaci.org/gpt/bbc-breakfast-exposes-secret-smart-glasses-filming-scandal-523718
I don't think highly of people that choose to partner with these companies to sacrifice both their own privacy and that of those around them.
You call them what you want to call them, but I think the negative stigma here is good.
It's a huge stretch. Most of the people buying these glasses are just interested in technology, see this cool new thing, and are ignorant to privacy because they already use social media and whatnot. Creeps use phones to take underskirt pictures of girls too, so are you going to go around calling every phone owner a creep? People like you who see ignorant "normies" as malicious enemies are what's wrong with the privacy community. Like I said earlier, we should educate, not name call.
'people like you' don't give consumers enough credit. They aren't ignorant to the privacy concerns. That's nonsense. They just don't care about them. People buying these glasses take it a step further though by disrespecting the privacy of others. For that, I will ostracize them and their apologists.
Also what so "cool" exactly to you about strapping an ip camera to your face?
I'm not going to argue with you anymore. Let's agree to disagree 👍
Technically one of us is supposed to call the other a cunt at this point, but will accept your breach of protocol.
Wouldn't your phone screaming "pedophile detected!" make it seem like its referring to you ?
I don't think so. The guy wearing the meta frames next to me on the other hand...
I think setting to "rat detected" would be better.
Why?
Shit, I have meta glasses for listening to music and occasionally recording my kid doing something silly.
Now people are going to look at me funny.
Have both your hands while recording is different.
This edit as a response is just unreasonably funny. Hands free and everything, perfection.
It's pretty easy for me to put my phone in my shirt pocket with the camera exposed and facing out
/no, I don't use this for anything nefarious
Are you really comfortable with Meta having videos of your children?
Nah, I block access. It's all local.
Ha, look at this dood over here trusting Meta does not get the data on their devices though workarounds.
Magical workarounds?
No need for magic, if samsung and sony can do it with tvs and fridges why would Meta (a company built almost entirely on and from user data) not use the same sort of tactics, maybe not the raw data but meta data I am sure.
If it's blocked off in your switch/firewall/network config then I don't think that's possible.
Well in the tv and fridge example they piggy backed on other networks in range using a backdoor. Like cellphones and other devices.
Can you link a source please?
If I can find the lawsuit sure, It was just a footnote in a suit about 5 years ago. Oddly I am having issues finding the coverage on it from before, but I do know that the suit was settled and was to include evidence of hidden backup "maintenance" networks if a smart device was offline/did not report after a set time. I remember it was a big deal at the time as it implied that device makers where building in support for these unlisted hotspots possibly across manufacturers.
There is a current case on the issue in general but not about the back door network tricks, not even sure if the backdoor was ever proven (the case was settled). But I know that these companies think they are entitled to our data and have little trust they would not do some sort of shit like this.
Bruh
People were already looking at you funny.
Nothing personal, but those glasses are going to come off your face and straight onto the asphalt when I get the notification.
Don't buy meta shit.