Comment by october8140

2 months ago

It's me. I want to be protected from hidden cameras from other peoples glasses.

Project Codename: Allen Funt

Project Description: Glasses that have a speaker and appropriately say “You’re on Candid Camera!” when it detects others being recorded.

... by using your own glasses with a hidden camera? Sounds like a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun.

  • ”I would feel pretty silly if my solution uses its own camera. So I'll be avoiding that.”

    From the GitHub link.

    • The solution to this (smart glass privacy debate) is Apple releasing smart glasses that automatically anonymize anyone in your photos/videos who isn’t a friend or family member with you at the time (it could be done automatically as Apple knows your friends/family members' faces already). All else appear as random faces, completely removed, a blurred out crowd to whatever privacy config options they offer and you choose.

      Not a creep here and use my Meta glasses to record my normal non-creepy life and life experiences. They are really convenient and useful (just suck cause they break easily either from software updates to water splashes)!

      8 replies →

I want to be able to use glasses with a camera, in situations which warrant it, to prevent people from gaslighting me or others about our conversations. Something like you see in dashcams, where it's always recording to a circular buffer of a few seconds to a minute, and then one can then enable "full" recording which dumps the buffer to storage and then starts saving everything until disabled.

I also live in a US state that only requires one-party consent to record a conversation, meaning it is fully legal in my state to record any conversation I am a participant in, regardless of the consent of the other participants.

How should this be reconciled?

  • Same way as the police body cameras do it: disclose what you’re doing. Which really is all OP is asking of the Ray-Ban spy cam wearers, too. A blinking red light is the conventional method.

    In the police’s case, there’s rarely a choice, but at least you’re reminded you’re speaking For The Record instead of with a person. In your case, that way I know not to talk to you.

    I wonder why stealth is so foundational to these devices’ success…

  • Other people don’t have to agree to be around you if you insist on using a camera all the time. I wouldn’t.

  • I think your ‘freedom’ infringes on other people's ‘rights’. I think rights should trumps freedoms, that is, your liberty ends where someone else's right to privacy begins.

  • Sounds dystopian to me, I'd want to reconcile it by not allowing "one-party consent" for people to record me.

    Not sure if the state laws you're referencing are in reality limited to phone calls, but I strongly dislike unregulated public camera use.

    Your vision (no pun intended) is the story of the Black Mirror episode "The entire history of you", IMO from the show's golden age.

    edit; I know that surveillance cameras pass this line already, but here they have to be announced with signs. And even when they aren't, to me state or police surveillance is different from potentially everyone stealthily recording me in private or public spaces.

    • It's possible the state laws in question (Tennessee) only apply to audio recordings, which would suit my desire. I also don't believe that the idea of a rolling buffer that normally discards its contents to be morally against the idea of notification of recording, or of seeking someone's consent.

      I'd be fine with glasses that only record audio in such a way, that illuminate an LED once the "record" button has been pressed. If audio is being recorded into a buffer at all times, but then discarded unless triggered to start "recording", then maybe that should not count as "recording" under the law.

      As a practical matter, if one is in a situation where such recording is warranted, by the time you press the record button, you've already missed important information that's relevant to the context of the recording. Allowing a 60-second rolling buffer that then gets dumped to storage when "actual" recording starts should be allowed.

    •   > Sounds dystopian to me
      

      1984? It's not the only surveillance state story. Everyone loves when you can dig up something from decades ago that is no longer representative.

      Cameras everywhere just keeps everyone honest, right? Nothing to hide, nothing to fear, right? What's acceptable now will always be acceptable in the future, right? My mind never changes, whose does?

      3 replies →

  • "Secret" camera recorder on a phone. Runs in the background, so you just need to keep the gaslighting person in view.