Huge Group of Experts Warns Meta That Its Pervert Glasses Will Enable Terrible Crimes (futurism.com)
from sobchak@programming.dev to privacy@lemmy.ml on 14 Apr 04:10
https://programming.dev/post/48782704

#privacy

threaded - newest

IratePirate@feddit.org on 14 Apr 04:38 next collapse

Meta: “That’s the point!”

thorhop@sopuli.xyz on 14 Apr 04:39 next collapse

Also, it will introduce: snitchonomics.

Mass surveillance is here, but what if you could be an annoying little shit in the local community? Introducing: snitchonomics. Go around your neighborhood, discover discrepancies, automate your snitching and become a toadie for the local commissars.

Meta: the Nazis would have loved us.

The_Che_Banana@beehaw.org on 14 Apr 05:50 next collapse

HOA board members are so horny for these right now.

kureta@lemmy.ml on 14 Apr 15:14 collapse

HOA in USA is insane. I just can’t believe they are real.

The_Che_Banana@beehaw.org on 14 Apr 17:57 collapse

When I first encountered them, I thought to myself ‘this is the most communist shit I ever heard, how is this popular in the USA?’

and then Trump came along and the answer: oh, because most fucking idiots love either bootlicking or powertripping

el_eh_chase@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 14 Apr 10:33 next collapse

Just add an arbitrary point system like they give reviewers on Google Maps and people will be beating down the door to do this.

nsrxn@mstdn.social on 15 Apr 10:30 collapse

Nazis did love us. we've always been on the forefront of legalism, detention, and genocide. de toqueville wrote extensively about it

thorhop@sopuli.xyz on 15 Apr 20:52 collapse

Oh for sure. The Nazis were in awe and inspired by the American white supremacist, because of the truly fucked up things they did to black and brown people.

Reading CRT is exhausting in many ways. How many mass graves have been dug up thus far?

magnue@lemmy.world on 14 Apr 05:03 next collapse

Balaclavas will be in fashion

Tundra@sh.itjust.works on 14 Apr 05:16 collapse

Gait Recognition ™️

umbrella@lemmy.ml on 14 Apr 06:09 next collapse

stones in my fucking shoes it is then.

RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works on 14 Apr 10:36 next collapse

A knee brace might be more comfortable.

magnue@lemmy.world on 14 Apr 11:12 next collapse

Hoverboard m8

eleijeep@piefed.social on 14 Apr 11:53 collapse

“We didn’t get a face or gait match, but it’s the only guy still riding a hoverboard in 2026.”

magnue@lemmy.world on 14 Apr 14:12 collapse

;_;

SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca on 14 Apr 12:41 next collapse

I’m learning the Fremen sand walk.

FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works on 14 Apr 13:44 collapse

stones in my fucking shoes it is then.

Everybody says this… but I’m afraid it won’t help or for very long. Gate recog algos measures physical characteristics. Things that are not changed by a shoe stone, like the length of your femur and tibia. The way your hips move as your leg does. Ratio of hip width to other measures. Things things are more fingerprint-ish like that.

It’s a lot like… how facial recog looks at distances between your pupils. Or the exact position of your cheekbones and structure of the face. Making it hard to fool in some ways.

It can all be fooled to a degree. Anyway it’s all probabilities. Maybe it works 95% and fails 5% or w/e, but that’s “good enough” for advertizers and data brokers.

It’s all just an exhausting uphill battle :(

RecursiveParadox@piefed.social on 14 Apr 14:34 collapse

The US used gait recognition on shadows of people during the Iraq invasion and occupation.

Astralhussy@discuss.online on 14 Apr 14:43 collapse

We should all start wearing old-timey flowing skirts.

roguetrick@lemmy.world on 14 Apr 05:57 next collapse

I was really interested in who the pervert experts were, but it turns out it was just human rights groups.

Zerush@lemmy.ml on 14 Apr 06:18 next collapse

github.com/yjeanrenaud/yj_nearbyglasses

qualia@lemmy.world on 14 Apr 06:50 next collapse

“Pervert Glasses” = AI glasses

(For doomscrollers who don’t read the articles)

TransNeko@lemmy.world on 15 Apr 07:54 collapse

well considering that most AI is used to create child porn (looks directly at Grok)… pervert glasses seems like a very good description of these “glasses”.

qualia@lemmy.world on 15 Apr 09:59 collapse

most

¿Is there data supporting this conclusion?

amaryllisfever@lemmychan.org on 14 Apr 08:19 next collapse

Hopefully this will start normalizing wearing masks in public.

Cris_Citrus@piefed.zip on 14 Apr 08:24 next collapse

Not like meta has a long history of ignoring obvious, enormous problems theyre causing that experts keep pleading with them to take seriously. Like in Myanmar. Where it has killed an enormous number of people and the death toll keeps rising.

I’m sure they’ll do something this time

FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works on 14 Apr 13:31 collapse

Like in Myanmar

It was horrific, what hapened there with Facebook. Viral rumors would spread, the Rohingya were putting sterilization pills into the food supply. People would believe it. Then they would torture or kill those the rumors were about. They would burn down their businesses and homes. There were mass scale murder and rape, whole viliages burned. Because Facebook had displaced local news. What was on Facebook became the reality for so many people. It became an anti-Rohingya echo chamber, the hate would feed on itself.

I think this effect is playing out in western democracies today. Slower, because the US, Canada, or Europe altogether, are much larger than Myanmar. The big ship turns slower than the small. But the same dynamics are here. Viral social media posts make their own twisted “reality”. It’s not just Facebook, neither. It’s lots of others too.

I don’t know how to stop it.

crapwittyname@feddit.uk on 15 Apr 13:38 collapse

I don’t know how to stop it.

  1. Get off social media
  2. Explain why whenever possible.
FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works on 15 Apr 15:12 next collapse

Sure… but the hard part is convincing 2 or 3 billion of my closest friends. Esp when faced with systems designed by teams of psychologits, to be highly addictive.

crapwittyname@feddit.uk on 15 Apr 15:31 collapse

Well your reach is actually a lot greater than you think. I can’t find it right now but a recent study suggested your IRL influence is roughly 1-3 million people, friend of a friend of a friend of a friend type stuff. Behaviours course through networks of people you don’t even know. A The most powerful thing you can do as a single human being is to log off.

frostysauce@lemmy.world on 15 Apr 21:00 collapse

Yes, and telling people that are addicted to things engineered to be especially addictive to just stop and telling them why they should is an actually effective strategy…

Bloomcole@lemmy.world on 14 Apr 08:37 next collapse

slapping a spy device from their face is self defense, not a crime

RedGreenBlue@lemmy.zip on 14 Apr 08:55 next collapse

Get ahead of the curve and make these illegal.

magnue@lemmy.world on 14 Apr 11:48 next collapse

Haha laws aren’t made to benefit the population silly.

EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world on 14 Apr 13:55 next collapse

The problem with that is, how do we make glasses like these illegal without also making any type of filming in public illegal?

A good start would be for more states to adopt wiretapping laws with two-party consent models. Only 11 states have these on the books currently.

Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca on 14 Apr 14:57 next collapse

I think hidden cameras are already illegal in some places, no?

Like you can’t film in a bathroom, so wouldn’t they be required to take these glasses off before walking in?

Just expand that so no secret cameras can be used, or.cameras disguised as every day objects like pens and glasses.

j5y7@sh.itjust.works on 14 Apr 15:00 next collapse

Buy a pair and follow rich and powerful people around with them. That’s how they become illegal.

kureta@lemmy.ml on 14 Apr 15:11 next collapse

You wouldn’t be able to get close enough to them.

j5y7@sh.itjust.works on 14 Apr 15:23 collapse

How close do you need to get for facial recognition with a device that is designed to vacuum up every face it comes across? After a couple of scandals about who was out where with whom, that’s all it would take.

FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works on 14 Apr 15:38 collapse

I kinda think kureta@lemmy.ml is right tho, it’d be hard. People like Zuck, they take private jets from here to there. They don’t fly commercial. They don’t go eat to normal restaurants with the plebs, he has high end privately catered. He don’t do his own shopping. Zuck bought 11 houses around his own mansion, for … privacy!

That goes into an observation. Zuck zealously guards his own privacy. He doesn’t want YOU to have privacy! But HE wants as much privacy as he can get.

j5y7@sh.itjust.works on 14 Apr 15:57 next collapse

Good points. But the plebs happen to serve these folks. Not to mention congressmen/women tend to be a lot easier to follow than billionaires. Also the paparazzi are a crafty folk being handed another tool to be sneaky. We’ll see.

FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works on 14 Apr 16:02 collapse

True… paparazzi can get to people sometimes.

Totally with you on the idea, btw. I think the people destroying the privacy of everyone in society should feel that themselves, too. They shouldn’t get to hide behind infinite piles of money to guard their own privacy while they destroy ours.

It would be one thing if we could easily opt out. But we can’t. It’s not MY choice that puts me into this. It’s the choice of some other rando walking down the same sidewalk as me.

RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works on 14 Apr 16:22 collapse

Make a series of drones that look like parts of the houses surrounding Zuck’s main home, maybe chimneys, plumbing vents, etc.

Even using a private jet, a flight plan has to be registered. Musk removed an account from Twitter for posting his “private” flight information. Same thing can be done to Zuck.

Sunsofold@lemmings.world on 15 Apr 02:43 collapse

Introducing House Bill 33-29-5 a.k.a. the ‘save our children from pedophiles with cameras’ bill

Legal summary

  • Prohibits filming anyone with a portfolio worth higher than $500,000
  • Prohibits owning a camera without a $10,000 camera license
  • Legalizes whipping the shit eating worm who took video of me visiting my mistress
lightnsfw@reddthat.com on 14 Apr 15:33 collapse

I think the best start would be to make it illegal to collect and retain data that would make devices like this useful.

lmmarsano@group.lt on 15 Apr 10:35 collapse

Or don’t, because we aren’t fragile ninnies unfamiliar with the concept of carrying a microphone & camera everywhere we go & easily carried away by sensational headlines for dumbasses.

crapwittyname@feddit.uk on 15 Apr 13:35 collapse

The cameras and microphones we carry around are not hidden, and one can tell when one is being recorded by them, ninny.

lmmarsano@group.lt on 15 Apr 20:45 collapse

Nah, not really. When someone is holding their mobile device, we haven’t the slightest clue unless they’re overt & clumsy about it. No indicator light, either. This selective outrage is peak ninny nonsense for dullards who can’t manage a second’s thought & need fellow average brains to point this out.

frostysauce@lemmy.world on 15 Apr 20:53 next collapse

“Being secretly recorded by smart glasses is the same as being recorded on a smartphone” is a really dumb take.

lmmarsano@group.lt on 16 Apr 00:41 collapse

Yeah, it takes impressive dumbassery to pretend to know whenever a mobile device is recording when we have them everywhere. Dumber still to convince yourself that ain’t relevant to the same principle that no privacy is reasonably expected in public and whatever bullshit they’re fearmongering is already effective reality that they’re conveniently overlooking in defiance of basic sense. Sometimes a comment claiming another is a dumb take is self-indulgence poorly attempting to evade critical examination of their own dumb as fuck take like right there.

LuceVendemiaire@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 15 Apr 21:36 collapse

ok perv

lmmarsano@group.lt on 16 Apr 00:44 collapse

Cool ad hominem fallacy. Your lack of reason isn’t an argument. Next time try logic instead of failure.

Horse@lemmygrad.ml on 16 Apr 00:56 collapse

that isn’t an argumentum ad hominem, they are just insulting you

frunch@lemmy.world on 14 Apr 09:14 next collapse

I found this morsel particularly poignant:

“Ironically, Meta expected rights groups to be too busy to step in, given the disastrous geopolitical climate.

“We will launch during a dynamic political environment where many civil society groups that we would expect to attack us would have their resources focused on other concerns,” the document reads, as quoted by the NYT.”

thebardingreen@lemmy.starlightkel.xyz on 14 Apr 10:53 next collapse

Who are the morally bankrupt execs who wrote this? I want names.

Gathorall@lemmy.world on 14 Apr 13:33 next collapse

And I used to think the “secret dastardly plan diary” -files scattered around in Resident Evil and the like were silly B-movie stuff that obviously would not be written down in the real world.

But no, they’re assigned in company strategy meetings and politicians just hit their sex slave supplier on Gmail with “Heya yo haave sum tasty kiids to fuck in Cali thiss wekend?”

racoon@lemmy.ml on 14 Apr 14:38 next collapse

“if such a dynamic political environment fails to come, the corporation will spur on dynamism by sponsoring alternative dynamic groups from within the country whenever possible”

vala@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 14 Apr 17:30 collapse

The fact that this is being said so openly.

racoon@lemmy.ml on 14 Apr 20:20 collapse

oh it illustrates the principles of Shock Doctrine as explained by Naomi Klein in her book as have been used over and over by extreme capitalist to impose the wonders of their ideologic scientific capitalism. But I just made up the whole sentence above

BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today on 14 Apr 16:53 next collapse

That’s particularly evil. No matter what their lame rationalizations will be, this is how we know that they created this tech in bad faith, and they intend to use it in bad faith.

FearMeAndDecay@literature.cafe on 14 Apr 22:57 collapse

Yup. It’s also an admission that they know they are in the wrong and will cause harm to people, but don’t care. A lot of these companies try to pull the “we didn’t consider these concerns; we need to do more research” shit when they get called out on it, but this makes it blatantly obvious that’s bullshit

Megacomboburrito@lemmy.world on 15 Apr 05:44 next collapse

Wow, they said the quiet part out loud

NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world on 15 Apr 19:07 collapse

Whoever had that idea probably got a promotion and raise.

NotSteve_@lemmy.ca on 15 Apr 21:08 collapse
FosterMolasses@leminal.space on 14 Apr 14:25 next collapse

Stopped reading after “netizens”

incompetent@programming.dev on 15 Apr 01:10 collapse

Okay. Thanks for letting us know.

rumba@lemmy.zip on 14 Apr 15:57 next collapse

I’ve never completely understood what the full fuss is over the face-mounted cameras. They put high-power zooms and 50MP sensors on the back of cell phones, and nobody bats an eye.

There’s fuckloads of recording going on. Do it with a phone? yeah fine. Do it with glasses, world’s gonna end.

Put an indicator light on the glasses with a sensor to make sure it’s on from the nose bridge.

I’d LOVE to replace my phone with a pair of glasses.

helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world on 14 Apr 16:01 next collapse

Put an indicator light on the glasses with a sensor to make sure it’s on from the nose bridge.

This is that part that’s missing, it’s more obvious when someone is holding their phone to record you. Phone’s should probably have an indicator too…

rumba@lemmy.zip on 14 Apr 16:15 next collapse

phones should absolutely indicate and in a way that can’t be taped over.

brucethemoose@lemmy.world on 14 Apr 16:22 next collapse

It’s generally more obvious when someone holds up a phone, but yeah.

Zach777@lemmy.ml on 15 Apr 01:03 collapse

Can’t it just be illegal to record someone without consent or something? Barring whistelblowing use cases. Putting it on the device manufacturers to stop it is rather dystopian and is like the age verification laws going into affect so they can shut down foss.

rumba@lemmy.zip on 15 Apr 12:44 collapse

I’m totally down with that. exception of the police and government officials. of course, it’d never happen because it would make commercial surveilance cameras illegal.

BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today on 14 Apr 16:49 next collapse

In some countries, they’ve made it illegal to turn off the shutter sound on your camera, so that women can hear the sound when some pervert is trying to take upskirts.

Putting a recording light on the glasses does basically the same thing, by alerting those around them. It wouldn’t be hard to disable it, though.

JcbAzPx@lemmy.world on 14 Apr 19:04 collapse

It should play a loud klaxon with the phrase “I am recording surreptitiously” overlayed on it.

BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today on 14 Apr 19:18 collapse

LOL. Yeah, that’ll work.

queueBenSis@sh.itjust.works on 14 Apr 18:19 collapse

this also assumes the entire public is aware of what that little light means, if they can even see it in sunny situations. oh, a light! ok, why didn’t you say so, i by all means now consent to endless public recording from human mounted cameras /s

brucethemoose@lemmy.world on 14 Apr 18:43 collapse

Actually I think the public would generally understand this. Older demographics know what a camera indicator is, and for younger ones, a little light on sunglasses would get their attention.

Universally? No. But I’d wager the percentage is high enough for a crowd to know.

RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works on 14 Apr 16:27 next collapse

Yes, both the glasses and phone can record.

The glasses have an AI that can scan social media, and other public data, to identify people in real time. I supposed this can be done with an app on a phone. But the glasses do this as a core function.

It’s also a lot more obvious when someone is using a phone to record in public.

rumba@lemmy.zip on 14 Apr 16:57 next collapse

But the glasses do this as a core function.

go back to google glass, it had none of that and it was just as big of a target.

It’s also a lot more obvious when someone is using a phone to record in public.

There are entire kinks around voyure footage taken unaware in public from cell phones. I think your lack of seeing people doing it a confirmation bias.

FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works on 14 Apr 19:54 collapse

It’s also a lot more obvious when someone is using a phone to record in public.

Agree. Less obvious with glasses… AND easier to do it 24/7. People get tired holding up a phone. Or they have to put it down to use both hands for something. With glasses, some will record everyone around them, during every moment of their waking life.

RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works on 14 Apr 22:34 collapse

I’ve heard of users forgetting about their glasses when going to the bathroom.

matlag@sh.itjust.works on 14 Apr 16:42 next collapse

If I obviously orientate my phone towards you or your kids, you’ll be totally cool?
Now assume that a smartpervert glass wearer is doing just that but you don’t know about it.

rumba@lemmy.zip on 14 Apr 16:52 collapse

If I obviously orientate my phone towards you or your kids, you’ll be totally cool?

You don’t need to obviously do that, a reasonably wide lens and you “reading social media” would do the same. It happens all the fucking time.

Now assume that a smartpervert glass wearer is doing just that but you don’t know about it.

Assume every time someone has their phone in front of them their camera is on and has at least a 45 degree viewing angle.

I’m saying it’s exactly the same on a phone, don’t delude yourself that it isn’t happening or that it’d be totally obvious

dmention7@midwest.social on 14 Apr 17:08 next collapse

This comparison is like saying that, because a car can be used to run over pedestrians at any time, there is no reason to be alarmed about people installing the Crosswalk-pocalypse 5000 (now with 30% more spikes!) on their front bumper.

Of course we know people can discretely record you with a phone. The difference is that the fraction of people doing that is very small, while the percentage of people doing that with Meta glasses is basically 100%.

rumba@lemmy.zip on 14 Apr 17:39 collapse

the fraction of people doing that is very small, while the percentage of people doing that with Meta glasses is basically 100%.

care to give me any citation at all on that?

dmention7@midwest.social on 14 Apr 22:39 collapse

Honestly, pulling it out of my ass.

Now your turn… what is your definition of “very small”, and where is your citation that a larger percentage of the population uses their phone camera to discretely creep on people?

rumba@lemmy.zip on 15 Apr 12:51 collapse

youtube, #candid #activewomen it’s pretty digusting honestly, but it’s not glasses.

athatet@lemmy.zip on 14 Apr 18:08 next collapse

Okay? I don’t want to make it easier for pervs to record people.

queueBenSis@sh.itjust.works on 14 Apr 18:20 next collapse

rumba is obviously a perv. we all get it now.

rumba@lemmy.zip on 14 Apr 18:32 collapse

My problem is we’ve let it through literally everywhere else, cameras, cellphones, public survielance, dashcams. The one thing that i’d actually like to be able not to pull my phones out for is the hill to die on. it just all seems really fucking pointless

matlag@sh.itjust.works on 14 Apr 20:02 collapse

You don’t need to obviously do that, a reasonably wide lens and you “reading social media” would do the same. It happens all the fucking time.

No, I don’t think it happens “all the fucking time”. That it happens is granted. I don’t think it’s that common.

I’m saying it’s exactly the same on a phone, don’t delude yourself that it isn’t happening or that it’d be totally obvious

Smartphones have an incredibly range of usage, and no one ever advertised them as “tool to secretly take pics and videos of people around you”. And no, it’s not that easy to film people secretly: you need to maintain the phone with the right orientation for an extended period of time and if you or the target move, it gets more and more obvious.

Smartglasses are almost made for that, and the abuses are already showing out there:

independent.co.uk/…/meta-glasses-app-covert-filmi… cbc.ca/…/meta-glasses-covert-recording-9.7139927 www.cnn.com/…/manfluencers-smart-glasses-intl www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx23ke7rm7go

I’m not the delusional here. You’re in denial of what’s already happening. And without a strong regulation, it will get worse.

sobchak@programming.dev on 14 Apr 22:28 collapse

Would be less of an issue if everything wasn’t uploaded and analyzed by Meta, which will eventually be handed over to the feds and advertisers. If everything was done locally and not uploaded, there’s still the problem of it being like a “spy” cam. Lights can always be taped or painted over. There’s already been cases of people doing stuff like going to massage parlors and uploading the videos. There’s been reports of Meta employees and contractors having to analyze videos of people using the restroom, dressing/undressing, having sex (I assume these people didn’t realize they were recording, or they didn’t realize others would be able watch).

HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world on 14 Apr 16:13 next collapse

so like, i think the tech is cool. i can’t really think of a good use case for it though. that’s the thing.

lost_faith@lemmy.ca on 14 Apr 17:28 next collapse

When google glass first debuted, I was thinking how much easier my job could be if I could have the faces of the people authorized to enter in that device to make admission easier (there were over 300 faces to remember that didn’t have to use their issued ID due to position), as in, when a person approaches if they were in my “PRIVATE ON DEVICE” database their access card would display on my screen. Never got one, thankfully. This new tech would be great for this except I doubt that there would be an offline mode, so I see no use case for this unless you want to assist in the tracking of people for Meta.

JennaR8r@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 15 Apr 02:44 next collapse

I would like it to replace clunky GoPro camera to capture outdoor sports adventures.

HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world on 15 Apr 05:19 collapse

See that’s a good use. I’m thinking of getting a “dashcam” style gopro or other camera^9^ for my bike (I might be able to get a free low end one through a law firm I consult with from time to time. I like free and at 15mph you aren’t that blurry. Or maybe you are but for free I can try it and use it elsewhere like a chump if it sucks)
^9^<img alt="" src="https://morbotron.com/video/S10E04/FZGhXCufbPQ3TWaKQ6um2xVOVIQ=.gif">

Tangentism@lemmy.ml on 15 Apr 07:12 next collapse

There’s a couple of people on SM I follow who use them.

There’s a street photographer called Bleg who always explains to people that he is using them to record the interaction.

Another is a guy that feeds several cat colonies on his mail route (first class whiskers) so he can use both hands to stroke and feed the cats.

Another is a guy called AsamaPOV that visits small family run restaurants in Japan and like the first guy, always explains and asks permission.

They’re examples of nice people but the scope for abuse is so wide

ftbd@feddit.org on 15 Apr 08:58 collapse

How do they ask permission without filming them first though? With such a device, I’d assume it is always recording and sending data to Meta servers.

Tangentism@lemmy.ml on 15 Apr 18:54 collapse

I’m not sure how it’s working but if it was saving to your phone then uploading instantly to FB, it would be caining TF out of the users data allowance!

Just did a little digging and it does but you can use them without a data connection so you could avoid uploading any footage to them

lmmarsano@group.lt on 15 Apr 10:31 collapse

Accessibility: live captions & transcripts. Sharing whatever you see in high stakes situations, eg, police interactions. Seems pretty obvious.

wizbiz@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 14 Apr 16:35 next collapse

Gonna make Bluetooth scramblers real popular

JennaR8r@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 15 Apr 02:43 collapse

And there’s an app called “nearby glasses” that’ll notify us when/where anyone nearby has these meta glasses active.

SleepyPie@lemmy.world on 14 Apr 16:45 next collapse

Please reach out to your family and urge them to stop using Facebook (or worse, any form of reels) if they still do. The onus is on the informed now. It’s not enough to just ask the tech barons to stop, we also need to divert their support.

FatVegan@leminal.space on 15 Apr 05:42 collapse

I’m so happy that no one in my family is into social media at all. But those who I know who are into it, just do not care at all. To a point where I wouldn’t even bring it up

FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works on 15 Apr 15:28 collapse

But those who I know who are into it, just do not care at all.

I have friends like that too. Which is why it’s so hard.

It’s not even a fair fight, b/c the big social medias employ psychologists to design their product to be as addictive as possible. So it pits Jane and Fred Doe of Main Street against a team of psychologist PhD who study every possible way to weaponize Jane and Fred’s normal human feelings and emotions. Jane & Fred doesn’t want to quit, so will find ways to rationalize a use of the products.

It’s a big damn problem. It impacts everyone. All of us. Not just the ones who use FB, IG, or X.

minorkeys@lemmy.world on 14 Apr 23:31 next collapse

Are they that terrible or is this mostly a corporate propaganda campaign against Facebook? We’re all on every camera and microphone pointed in our direction 24/7 already because couldn’t figure out we shouldn’t turn every nation into a corporate surveillance state.

BigJohnnyHines@lemmy.ca on 15 Apr 01:29 collapse

Honest question: are you high?

minorkeys@lemmy.world on 16 Apr 01:57 collapse

I don’t recall but it is quite possible.

Earthman_Jim@lemmy.zip on 15 Apr 05:26 next collapse

They know. They consider it a sell-able feature.

ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online on 15 Apr 08:08 collapse

Perverts know what perverts want.

Raiderkev@lemmy.world on 15 Apr 15:37 next collapse

Just need to associate ray bans with creeps moving forward. If they are too far away to tell, just assume it’s a fucking weirdo in Meta glasses. Forever associate the brand with creepy weirdos, and maybe they’ll rethink their strategy.

pyre@lemmy.world on 15 Apr 17:34 next collapse

since when do we need experts for this? what we need is laws. it’s unbelievable that they’re even allowed to do this shit.

jali67@lemmy.zip on 15 Apr 21:13 collapse

Bro I just want to listen to music without putting something in my ear, not be a pervert. Why do people have to ruin things.