r/technology • u/Ganrokh • 5h ago
Politics Pennsylvania lawmaker seeks ‘visual indicator’ if smart glasses are recording
https://www.abc27.com/news/top-stories/pennsylvania-lawmaker-seeks-visual-indicator-if-smart-glasses-are-recording/1.4k
u/theclash06013 5h ago
I don’t have an issue with this at all, depending on the specifics of course. A lot of recent legislation around technology raises pretty significant privacy concerns, but I also think people being recorded in public without their knowledge is a pretty significant privacy concern too. People shouldn’t have to worry that every single moment of their life could end up online, and I think you have a right to know if someone is recording you.
691
u/Ganrokh 5h ago
Japan and South Korea (and probably other countries) have laws where phones and digital cameras are required to make a shutter sound when a photo is taken. These kinds of features should be a universal standard IMO.
141
u/arseache 4h ago
Funny thing, I was just wondering about how those countries are going to handle these glasses? Will they be made to make a repetitive clicking noise perhaps?
153
u/throw_every_away 4h ago
That’d be kinda cool if they started clicking and whirring like an old 35mm camera when you turned them on
64
u/arseache 4h ago
“Number 5 is aliiive”
42
u/HR_DUCK 4h ago
“Hey Laser Lips, your mother was a snow blower!”
6
u/Grand_Snow_2637 3h ago
"Los Locos kick your ass! Los Locos kick your face! Los Locos kick your balls into outer space!"
4
→ More replies (2)12
u/throw_every_away 4h ago
Whaaat is that a short circuit reference??? You’re taking me way back!
→ More replies (3)3
→ More replies (1)5
15
u/QuadrangularNipples 3h ago
How do those countries handle video recording on a phone? I would assume it is the same solution.
Edit: I just looked it up: the shutter sound is played at start and stop of the video for South Korea.
2
u/slicer4ever 2h ago
Edit: I just looked it up: the shutter sound is played at start and stop of the video for South Korea.
Thats surprising, seems like something super easy to get around by just starting/stopping a video out of earshot of w/e you want to record. Really feel like a simple led light(tbf i guess you could cover that up) would also be forced on when recording.
→ More replies (1)4
u/QuadrangularNipples 1h ago
I am sure it helps with trying to take opportunistic creep shots though. It is really hard to design a law that both stops creeps but also doesn't unduly punish those who are just regular people trying to use their device in a non-creep manner.
11
u/Big_lt 4h ago
I think a bright red dot plus an initial beep to inform it's starting.
If a user tries to hide/damage it they can a fat fine and repeat offenders get jail
→ More replies (1)3
u/JeddahVR 2h ago
The glasses are completely banned in my country thankfully and will be confiscated if found on you in the airport. If you were caught with it inside the country, you'll be subjected to investigation, fines and if you are an expat/visitor, deportation.
→ More replies (5)7
185
u/Mistyslate 4h ago
Make it mandatory for smart glasses to constantly produce shutter sounds. This reflects the true nature of them.
→ More replies (87)88
u/flatwoundsounds 4h ago
Just give them a starting and ending "NOW RECORDING. I HOPE YOURE NOT IN A BATHROOM OR SOMETHING SUPER FUCKING WEIRD RIGHT NOW"
40
u/Objective-Chance-792 4h ago
I can hear Archer saying that, someone get H John Benjamin on the phone.
29
4
5
→ More replies (1)8
u/cakemates 3h ago
then they can start recording from their car and walk around with the camera on harrasing people.
3
u/flatwoundsounds 3h ago
Same as a cellphone, but way easier to wear. Definitely needs a constant light or something...
→ More replies (1)9
u/_redlr 4h ago
Yeah we had an exchange student stay with us from Japan and she was really excited to buy a phone in America to bring back so that she wouldn’t have the shutter sound lol
→ More replies (1)22
u/itsgms 3h ago
I have my shutter sound turned off (Canada) but when I was in Korea visiting family and friends the shutter should turned on and the option to disable it was gone.
Then when I flew back home it was off again. Probably a geo- or service-locked thing.
6
u/_redlr 3h ago
Whoaaaa thats interesting
2
u/asdfdbgdweqdfvc 1h ago
Thats not the norm tho, only some of the andriod phones does this when it detects you are in Japan or korea apparently as well.
The other phones will only do it if you insert a local sim card or connect to a local internet i think also triggers it.
3
u/Emotional-Power-7242 3h ago
That would be awful. Imagine sitting in a nice restaurant shutter soinds constantly going off from people instagramming their food. The other day I hired a moving company and took a picture of the truck's license plate just in case. Now I gotta explain to the guys oh yeah it's just in case you steal from me.
→ More replies (2)12
u/sachiprecious 4h ago
I don't agree with that. There are lot of times I want to take a pic of something (not someONE) in a quiet environment and I don't want my phone to make any noise. I am in the US with a Google Pixel phone and I'm glad my camera does not make sounds (I have ringtone and notification sounds turned off too).
→ More replies (3)17
u/levthelurker 3h ago
Well the US has the 1st Amendment but also doesn't have as high profile an issue of people taking upskirt photos of schoolgirls on trains, mostly because it doesn't have a lot of trains.
→ More replies (27)2
u/BGAL7090 1h ago
Nooo! If the shutter makes a sound it will certainly wake up the beautiful sleeping
womanKITTENI definitely said and meant kitten the first time.
79
u/InfamousPOS 4h ago
I think Flock cameras are a WAYYYYY bigger concern to me rather than someone posting me unknowingly on their tt or IG.
Personally I see this as another way for more of them to get installed Daily while the vast majority of people seem to be focused on the wrong people recording us..
53
u/TheGrandNagus 3h ago
We can care about and legislate both issues. It's not an either/or situation.
9
u/Connect_Middle8953 2h ago edited 1h ago
You sure? Congress sure seems to be unable to legislate anything beyond the “fuck every citizen except the rich corpos” agenda.
You’re asking for regulations with this administration?
→ More replies (1)3
u/Alternative_Toe_4692 1h ago
If we manage to even stall the increase of surveillance cameras for 6 months that’s practically the best win we’re going to get.
It’s not going to stop being used. It’s not going to stop being installed. At best there will be small pauses and delays in the rollout to appease temporary public outrage.
→ More replies (6)17
u/ricLP 3h ago
Both can be a problem worth solving. Flock is much more concerning now because of the number of cameras. If a significant chunk of people would have this it could become as big a problem if not bigger. They don’t have flock cameras in public restrooms, for example
→ More replies (1)43
u/LocalHarmacist 5h ago
I just assume I'm always being recorded anywhere that even resembles a public area. Between people with phones and smart glasses, private security cams, and government surveillance equipment, it's hard to find somewhwre you are NOT being recorded outside of the home and restrooms.
That includes public wifi. It's the wild west on any network I'm not an admin on, so I dodge those all day.
11
u/allthenamesaretaken4 4h ago
I agree and always assume my privacy is nil outside of my apartment, if even there, but it is sad that we have to make that assumption.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (8)10
u/C0de_lyoko 4h ago
This is the correct assumption and defines public versus private locations perfectly by the foundational laws of the USA
11
u/eye_sick 4h ago
We're recorded constantly in public without our knowledge though. Constantly.
→ More replies (2)27
u/Nocoffeesnob 4h ago
I own a pair of Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses and they come with such a visual indicator already but people actively discuss how to hide it right here on Reddit so creeps be creeping I guess.
I like the idea of a law in which both the manufacturer and the user are held accountable for such a light being present and active (in other words, making it illegal to hide the light).
However, the focus specifically on smart glasses is a bit weird. Surely we need this kind of legal regulation to be in place not just for smart glasses but instead for all devices (phones, watches, basically everything with a camera integrated)?
25
u/TiFist 4h ago
the visual indicator for "everything else" is "holding the phone or whatever in position to film." Smart glasses get around this.
→ More replies (1)10
u/Quirky-Marsupial-420 2h ago
the visual indicator for "everything else" is "holding the phone or whatever in position to film
Spend any amount of time on youtube shorts and you'll see videos of people going up to random people with a camera guy 100s of feet away.
The guy who's near the stranger is mic'd up and the camera is recording in secret.
So it's not always so obvious as someone walking up to you with their phone pointed at your face.
→ More replies (3)3
u/RogueCassette 3h ago
I also own a pair and I think the battery life while recording is a pretty good limiter on these things lol
→ More replies (1)2
u/cruelhumor 3h ago
I think the difference is audio vs visual. Most states have laws on the books governing audio recording and separate laws for visual recording. I think it's fair to say that audio is approached more on the individual level (One-party/Two-party consent), while visual is approached on a location-based or broad-stroke level (public space/private space). The challenge is, how do you merge the two spheres of regulation without being so restrictive no one can do anything, but not restrictive enough so that privacy isn't violated.
With the additional concern of AI injected into the mix, I think it's more important than ever to err on the side of privacy-first.
28
u/Commentor9001 5h ago edited 4h ago
pervasive surveillance by the state and each other and have really killed human joy.
Ever wonder why concrete, parties, etc. are so muted now? Nobody wants to risk embarrassment from anything being recorded doing anything slightly nonconforming... so events have become circles of people aiming their cameras at each other.
21
→ More replies (2)8
u/Stereo_Jungle_Child 4h ago
This is exactly it.
Younger people seem a lot more comfortable constantly being on camera because they always HAVE been. Older people still remember a world where privacy was a thing that was both expected and valued, up to a point at least. It was considered rude (or even potentially dangerous) to photograph or record strangers without their permission. Those days are LONG gone. People are so fucking rude now, they just DGAF.
3
u/BerlinBorough2 2h ago
I notice comments by western traveller about how ‘authentic’ eastern people are and how they just don’t have suffocating western standards. Like yeah they don’t film each other for content 24/7.
→ More replies (1)2
u/TheGrandNagus 3h ago
This really is a major cultural change. I'm 50, and I don't have a single second of myself on video as a child, teenager, or in my 20s. Camcorders were expensive, we could barely afford a VCR for most of my childhood.
Most of the photos that exist are either school portraits, family gatherings, or Christmas/Birthday posing with presents where I was well aware my photo was being taken.
It's incredibly cheap and convenient to take photos and video today compared to 25 years ago.
→ More replies (1)19
u/C0de_lyoko 4h ago
Unfortunately you don't if in public. In the USA you do not retain the right to privacy if no expectations of privacy exist like being in a public location. This would violate the right to a free press and individuals to keep others accountable through public documentation. Stalker glasses aside, anyone seeking to take away my rights or those of others especially with the current weaponization of the federal gov by our executive branch can rightly fuck off.
Edit: spell check
9
u/Bmartin_ 3h ago
I agree but don’t think it is unfortunate. Without free press law enforcement would have even less accountability. We see what ICE and other officials will do knowingly on camera, imagine if it were illegal to record them in public
4
u/C0de_lyoko 3h ago
Unfortunate is more me being empathetic to their social anxiety then thinking public filming is unfortunate. I agree with you
5
5
u/FutureOrBust 4h ago
It doesn't make sense when you start looking at how to scope and define it.
Should it only be glasses? Should it be any electronic device? Should it only be devices that aren't obviously a camera?
You are always recorded in public these days. It could be someone with a camera 5 feet away, someone holding their phone at their side, or smart glasses.
This isn't something unique to smartglasses. If this is really about privacy then we need to have broader privacy protection laws.
5
u/Netflxnschill 4h ago
I saw that one Oracle guy talking about how the cameras never stop recording for bathroom time and shit like that you just have to tell it to stop recording. Sure, Jan
10
6
u/Big_lt 4h ago
People being recorded in public exists everyday. There are millions of cameras ranging from government owned, business owner and residential which capture you walking down the street.
There are also many people who film openly in public with their phone.
Where I think the concern is in more intimate settings like a restaurant or bathroom or the obnoxious stalker type that's follows you around. However the simple act of being filmed on public has no legal recourse considering it's happening and has been happening for ages
→ More replies (54)2
u/ThrowAndHit 4h ago
Agree here - yes, there’s no expectation of privacy in public, but disclosure of being recorded should be standard.
→ More replies (1)
570
u/BeerInTheRear 4h ago
Neat.
Now do the same thing for Flock and all the other cameras pointed at us in public places.
→ More replies (14)111
u/SnooMaps7370 4h ago
this is the real privacy issue.
IDGAF if some random asshole wants to record his interaction with me. I'm all for people's rights to record their interactions discretely if they feel someone is trying to fuck 'em over.
the problem i have is with the police state being allowed to record everyone, all the time.
80
u/ChuckVader 4h ago
Sure, except that random asshole agrees to share everything recorded with meta who then sells that data to the same people flock does.
26
u/SnooMaps7370 4h ago
so put the restrictions on that transaction.
i've known too many people who needed to rely on single-party recording consent laws to prove things like wage theft or physical abuse happening to them to be cool with hard-coding a "you are being recorded" announcement into personal devices. that shit will literally cost lives.
→ More replies (1)5
20
u/TopRamenisha 4h ago edited 3h ago
You should care if some random asshole wants to record their interactions with you. Anyone can wear those glasses, record your interactions, and use the footage for any purpose they want to. Meta keeps that footage and uses it as well. You’re imagining just random people on the street, but think about everyone you interact with. Your bank teller. The person who takes your credit card for payment at a store. Your neighbors who now have videos of your coming and going from your house. The list goes on and on.
I recently sold my house and did not notice until almost the end of signing all the paperwork that the notary was wearing Meta glasses. She could have recorded all my personal information - my bank account info, the wire instructions for how to send money to me, my social security number, my drivers license, how much money I was to receive, where it was being sent, the numbers for the account it was being sent to, my signature, my thumb fingerprint. All the paperwork and title information and info that is private and personally identifiable but necessary for completing a home sale. The inside of my new home where we signed the paperwork. Was she recording? She claims no, but what if she was. Who has access to that recording? Where is it stored? Who at Meta is watching it? Could she sell it to someone? What if Meta gets hacked and the videos are accessed by someone else?
The list goes on. Flock is a real privacy issue, but those cameras are clearly visible, in public, and you know they are recording. Glasses on every persons face, in private spaces, potentially accessing and recording your personal information for unknown use and unknown storage is a serious issue that you should be more concerned about. Think about what Meta has done just in the last decade with our data, who they have sold it to, how they have used it to sway elections and change outcomes to their benefit. They use it to train their AI models. Mark Zuckerberg is in bed with Trump and the technofascists and does not have a good track record about caring for humans. Glasses that record video on the face of everyday people is how you create a surveillance state in private spaces without needing to put Flock cameras in peoples homes
→ More replies (5)10
→ More replies (7)3
u/xpxp2002 3h ago
Exactly. This is a perfect example of "be careful what you wish for" as everyone hops on board with this idea.
I'm disappointed I had to scroll this far down to find the common sense response.
Instead, we're heading into an opposite world where the surveillance state will be allowed to record with impunity and no requirement to disclose where they're doing it, what they will do with those recordings, who will have access to them, or how long they'll be retained. Meanwhile, any individual trying to gather evidence of domestic abuse, police misconduct, or an employer admitting to something illegal will be precluded by a dumb blinking light.
156
u/Sockoflegend 5h ago
Seems reasonable it could have an LED on the front
95
u/omg_cats 5h ago
They DO have an LED in the front! And there’s a bunch of logic to disable recording if the led is disabled. Creepers being creepers though people have found ways to disable it - have to be pretty motivated tho.
29
u/No_Entertainer_3052 5h ago
I mean at the end of the day simply putting something over it is always gonna be an.option nothing can really be done about that
31
u/Dragon_Fisting 4h ago edited 48m ago
The meta raybans use sensors to disable recording if the led is physically blocked. There's a more in-depth modification that some losers have found to disable the light but trick the computer into thinking the light is still on. It's at least beyond the ability of the average consumer to disable it, but there are people offering to disable the lights as a service.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (2)10
u/DeadMoneyDrew 5h ago
It's straightforward to disable the recording in the software if the sensor/light is blocked.
11
→ More replies (1)11
u/No_Entertainer_3052 5h ago
Its bit of chicken and mouse because they can add a safety feature and someone will figure out a way to get around it usually within a few hours or people will just Crack the firmware
I dunno tho nowadays you can hide a camera in your clothes no one could see with or without these glasses if you wanna perve out not sure what the difference is
5
u/parade1070 4h ago
The problem is mass surveillance, not random persistent voyeurs
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (2)2
u/DeadMoneyDrew 4h ago
Yeah, sure. Blocking recording with software will hinder spur of the moment opportunists. Someone who is committed to the bit will find a way.
→ More replies (3)9
u/PeteCampbellisaG 5h ago
For me it's the color of the LED. It should be a strong red and/or blinking so that it immediately draws attention and possibly accompanied by some sort of tone or sound that plays when recording starts/stops.
→ More replies (12)5
95
u/faen_du_sa 5h ago
And it should be a bit more complicated than just severing the cable to disable it.
75
u/fredandlunchbox 5h ago
You just paint over it.
27
u/Icy-Gap-1429 4h ago
light ring around the circumference of the lens could do it, something like how webcam manufacturers are implementing
3
u/Caleth 1h ago
If it's toggled on with software it'll be toggled off with software too. There is no way to have these be "failsafe" so that they can never record without being lit/making sound etc.
One inspired horny perv will be all it takes to work around the fixes and we'll be back to square one. Tech like this doesn't need to exist because if it does there's no way to stop it from doing evil and the utility it brings doesn't justify the cost.
→ More replies (2)8
3
→ More replies (1)13
u/the_ballmer_peak 4h ago
You make a good point, but it wouldn't be that hard to force manufacturers to have the device detect this and turn the camera off if the light is covered.
16
u/gentlecrab 4h ago
Meta glasses already do that and people figured out a way to get around that.
→ More replies (3)23
u/johnny5canuck 4h ago
There is ALWAYS a way.
7
u/the_ballmer_peak 4h ago
I'm sure someone will pull the device apart and disable the light sensor, but the percentage of people willing to do this is orders of magnitude below the percentage of people who would just dab some black paint on it or cover it with tape.
Solving the 99% use case is more than good enough here.
→ More replies (5)2
u/EagleBigMac 4h ago
The meta rayban 2 do exactly that even if it isn't covered but it thinks you are trying to cover it. My wife was complaining about how sensitive it was.
→ More replies (1)10
u/FeatherlyFly 4h ago
And for those who do disable or hide it, it should come with hefty penalties, starting with fines and ending with escalating felony charges related to the lack.
4
u/chicametipo 4h ago
Yeah, this is the only real solution. Tape, paint, solder, all can be used to easily bypass protections. Throwing the book can’t be defeated with tape though.
5
2
→ More replies (4)2
118
u/Guilty-Mix-7629 5h ago
I suggest them being forced to wear an oversized jester hat any time they wear these public surveillance devices.
23
u/a4mula 4h ago
While screaming they're an unwitting plant for data scraping.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Ill_Emphasis3927 2h ago edited 2h ago
Saw a short the other day where I guy was trying to get his kid to do some science experiment thing. Lots of the video are sped up as she's doing it but breaks to normal speed as he's saying "Meta start recording. Meta Stop recording." And, like, obviously the entire thing is an ad for the smart glasses but I'm just thinking this guy is a fucking loser.
→ More replies (3)8
u/0202_tihssitidder 2h ago
HOLD THE FUCK UP. What about those of us that wear Jester hats and aren't recording anything?
We'll get lumped in with the weirdos!!
41
u/Boring-Shop-9424 5h ago
Hardware indicators are fine but they only work if you trust the manufacturer enforces them in firmware. Which, given recent history, is a big ask.
→ More replies (12)
10
14
u/Fake_William_Shatner 4h ago
“Trust us.”
There’s a problem already with this whole plan.
Just the other day we were talking about the remote shutoff on new cars. It’s probably been there for a while, we are just now hearing about it.
They won’t be done until there is a probe inserted in your body. They won’t be done when there is DRM in your brain interface. They won’t be done when a repo man shows up to take back your liver because you skipped a payment. Even though the tech to make your vat expelled hamburger is further advanced and expensive than the one to clone livers.
They will never be satisfied with the control and invasion of your privacy because they know they own you. You are just leasing your life.
76
u/Humble_Chipmunk_701 4h ago
Normalize shunning people who wear meta glasses
11
12
→ More replies (32)7
u/jackalopeDev 4h ago
I've heard some good things about them from blind people who use them.
→ More replies (1)
20
u/Talrynn_Sorrowyn 4h ago
If Japan can require all phones have an audible noise made when taking photos due to perverts taking upskirt shots of schoolgirls & office ladies in public places, it shouldn't be hard to require an indicator light on smartglasses when they're actuvely recording vudeo.
5
u/cornstinky 2h ago
So all videos recorded in Japan have annoying noises added in? Or only still photographs? (that wouldnt make much sense, in fact it would be stupid)
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (4)2
u/missprincesscarolyn 1h ago
We can’t even get police officers to consistently turn on their body cameras.
23
u/Specific_Frame8537 4h ago
The visual indicator will be that they're wearing these dipshit glasses and should be under suspicion every second of every minute.
→ More replies (10)
5
9
u/DevoidHT 4h ago
The issue with this is people are already tampering with their indicator lights to hide them. If you make tampering with them a felony maybe but I would rather they come down on the companies to make it impossible.
5
u/km89 3h ago
That's the fundamental problem with technological security. The defending team has to win every time, the offensive team only has to win once.
There is very likely nothing Meta or anyone else can do to make it literally impossible to record without a visual indicator. They can make it more difficult, but someone somewhere is going to figure out how to bypass any safeguards--and then they're either going to tell others how to do so or start selling their services, or both.
10
u/ToolTimeT 3h ago
Stupid since anyone can wear a concealed camera on their body and record that doesn't involve glasses.
→ More replies (2)
22
u/RoflMyPancakes 4h ago
It should be VERY apparent, like ABSURDLY apparent that it's recording. Not just an LED but like a ring of LEDs around the lens.
It should be VERY hard to bypass, and bypassing it should be a crime.
→ More replies (3)12
u/Deep-Minimum7837 2h ago
How about we keep glasses the way they are now and not put tiny cameras in to spy on people? Putting hidden cameras anywhere in places like this should be a crime.
9
u/Dirtywoodchips 3h ago
Ppl pissed about glasses but not the cameras on every corner tracking you. Idgi.
→ More replies (5)
6
u/stelio_contos68 3h ago
People wearing these glasses already stand out because they're wearing the glasses. Assume they are recording.
Google button camera, pen camera, or water bottle camera, these are the things recording you without your knowledge.
3
9
u/JescoWhite_ 3h ago
Yeah…. This falls in the category of just because you can doesn’t mean you should. Way too many videos being taken of unexpecting people. Especially women and children.
→ More replies (4)
3
u/Expert-Upstairs-4502 1h ago
Ok but I want a big red glowing light on every public or contracted by public service surveillance camera then
3
4
u/imminentjogger5 4h ago
there is a visual indicator it's just that there are dozens of youtube channels telling you how to disable it
5
u/FureiousPhalanges 3h ago
While that's a step in the right direction, I personally advocate for refusing to interact with someone until they take their smart glasses off
5
u/tpeandjelly727 4h ago
There’s a light that blinks or is supposed to when meta glasses are recording. Not sure about others.
11
6
u/DelewareValleyTuners 4h ago
Nah, if you are in public, you outht to assume no privacy.
→ More replies (10)
10
u/wrianbang 5h ago
How are they defining recording? If the glasses are on it is recording data. It may not appear as a recorded file but data is being collected. It’s the same as when you’re phone is on but not having camera recording enabled.
9
u/stedmangraham 5h ago
Recording video is a pretty definable thing. There are edge cases, but as long as video or images are being stored in some form of memory then you could consider it recording.
If that makes these dumb glasses useless then so be it.
5
2
2
u/comFive 4h ago
the whole glasses frames shoudl light up. It's crazy that raybans and meta only had a little light, that was easily covered by a piece of tape.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
u/keithstonee 3h ago
You will be ridiculed and made fun of for being a corporate shill and buying that shit. Don't let people just walk around with glasses like that for nothing.
2
u/Jomotaku 3h ago
I think audio indicators as well would be good. Like Japanese phones where u can't disable it. U can still circumvent it but it's still something atleast
2
2
2
2
2
2
u/cantinflas_34 3h ago
It needs to cover when the user is not actively recording but data is being streamed regardless. The fact that this isn’t a thing is insane to me.
2
u/Alternative-Dot-884 3h ago
Only because PA opticians don’t want to get caught on camera lying about agreements or illegal dealings. It’s certainly not to protect the average person.
Also someone can cleverly use their hair as a way of saying that indicator was unknowingly covered.
If you’re recording me and you’ve managed to block the recording alert light from being seen how do I ever prove that?
What difference will it mean? How is it enforced and without being enforced why have the false prevented if a law that means nothing?
2
u/IndyWaWa 2h ago
There are hacks all over youtube on how to disable indicators. Asshole abusers will always try to find away around accountability.
2
u/Deep-Minimum7837 2h ago
"We need to have a visual indicator to tell if people are recording with their creepy glasses?"
Or..... how about this? Or, we could just not make glasses that spy on people?
2
u/EffeminateSquirrel 2h ago
For my 5th birthday, my uncle bought me a fireman's hat with a siren on the top that had a spinning light and made loud siren sound. He bought it specifically to annoy my dad.
I propose this as the "visual indicator" in the law.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
2
u/dudeaciously 1h ago
As a techie, I support such a law. That will create a new set of etiquette of when recording is ok. Like me taking an iPhone video of a tourist site, that may include passersby. Not cool in a bathroom.
For the "can be disabled", anyone can do anything illegal, like putting cameras into shoes for upskirt videos: https://www.nine.com.au/business-news/japanese-police-seize-hundreds-of-upskirt-camera-shoes-20140924-p5simc.html
2
u/NoveltyPr0nAccount 1h ago
This Pennsylvania lawmaker is up to some shady stuff and doesn't want to get caught on camera doing it. He should become the target of investigation.
2
u/therealdanhill 1h ago
I would be surprised if there were even 250 people on the planet that have used a laser engraving tool to physically destroy the LED on their expensive glasses. People are tilting at windmills as far as this "issue" goes. The legislation however is probably fine.
2
u/Dave_A480 1h ago
Considering that you can disable any such indicator with a bottle of Testors model-paint (or nail polish)...
Waste of time.
2
u/RagnarokToast 37m ago
How about a permanent visual indicator that they are smart glasses at all and a constant audible beeping while they are recording?
1.3k
u/madgoat 4h ago
People already cover/disable the LEDs on these glasses to hide current indicators. forums are full of how-to guides to disable the visual indicators.