with focus on privacy
“We, and our 2974 partners care about your privacy so we made this new spy device”
Go fuck yourself, Apple.
I genuinely don’t understand how there’s a market for pedo glasses
I mean nowadays you carry a computer on your person constantly. Your hands are touching a computer, your eyes are looking at a computer.
Computer glasses are seen as the next step.
I’m not confident it actually is, but I understand the why it’s being tried.
You kinda answered your own question. Pedo + disposable income + tech = the shit we’re going through rn
Guys, check it out! I did it! Privacy respecting smartglasses!
As far as I’m concerned the best way of making smart glasses with a focus on privacy is to not make them at all. Or at least don’t stick a camera on it.
Without the camera, it IS just… Glasses.
I think you hit the nail with ‘no camera’. Honestly, a camera isn’t needed… if you want a picture, use your phone. If you want a POV image or video, use a Go Pro.
Smart glasses should be a display only (well, maybe speakers too).
It’s also possible to have a camera but explicitly no persistent recording built into the hardware design. purely ephemeral video analysis for whatever UI/HUD data you want.
I like the concept of having a display in your glasses. I just don’t fathom why would you also put a camera on them.
If you want to align virtual content with the real world in any way you need a camera attached. Sure, you can use the display for notifications and content that doesn’t care where you’re facing, but having a display attached to your face is a too juicy scenario not to do more with it.
If you want to align virtual content with the real world
I don’t though. Display and notifications covers everything I’d want. And if I need it to show me details about a business I’m facing, great, add GPS and a compass and it will know.
Oxymoron of the century.
If you glue an iPod nano on a pair of old sunglasses, you could technically call them privacy respecting smart glasses. Obvious, that’s not what they’re actually going to do though.
If they really cared about privacy, they wouldn’t include a camera.
👆👆👆
Did they mention if they were focusing on preserving or destroying privacy?
They are “creating” it.
Be positive, dammit!
/s
Apple really does like inventing things that already exist.
Well, it doesn’t take a genius to assume the existence of the Vision Pro suggests work on the Vision Non-Pro had begun.
Too bad the current iteration will never see the light of day, for obvious reasons
It’s all about redefining terms.
“You give your data to us. All of them, of course. Because, what else. When we have all your data, then we are able to protect your data better than you are. This is called data privacy”
we are able to protect your data better than you are.
Definitely, because they have rules and procedures on how to protect your data, and a price that their trusted partners must pay to get it.
And you? you are so fucking irresponsible with your data, that you gave it to a huge corporation! For free!
That alone is enough to discredit your ability to protect your data!
Now tinted, to protect the users privacy!
(The tint is only available for the Pro model which costs an additional $200.)
Companies seem to catch up. It’s a new bait. 🤭
- Ugh… they now want privacy. Calling the Marketing team. 🤭
man - hope this doesn’t come true - we don’t need this slop
First apple tag, now this. Apple must really love the creepy stalkers they cater to.
If it automatically blurs out the face and body of everybody unless they explicitly gave permission to be recorded by that user through an app or site, and on a base level before the feed goes to any app, then you can have some semblance of privacy.
No you can’t. If the glasses are blurring faces then the glasses can be hacked and this removed. False sense of security. There’s lots of things you can do without faces too. Location/gate analysis, everyone in a database, thousands of smart glasses user, etc etc, it’s a surveillance states wet dream.
It’s possible to do with privacy in mind.
Of course it is. But it’s more of a risk than anything else, despite controls.
Cisco firewalls are secure too. But the NSA definitely didn’t intercept packages and put in back doors for government access. /s
