this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2026
257 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

87079 readers
3929 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] joe@lemmy.world -3 points 1 hour ago (3 children)

I consider the meta glasses new enough that it's an early-adoption product. Early adopters are usually not tech illiterate. Does that make sense?

[–] TheFogan@programming.dev 5 points 57 minutes ago (1 children)

I get the concept you are after, but also pretty widely disagree. Early adopters are either researched people that knows what it is and really want it... or they are really rich people that drop lots of money at the drop of a hat at anything that sounds shiny. As someone who used to do IT work for medical practices, I have to say, doctors more often are the latter. I got lots of really cool stuff that I could never afford from helping doctors with their personal stuff and them going "I bought this but realize I don't know how to use it, and it's too much work, do you want it".

[–] joe@lemmy.world 2 points 53 minutes ago

That's a fair point. I'm convinced the Venn diagram overlaps more than I originally assumed.

[–] cannedtuna@lemmy.world 3 points 45 minutes ago (1 children)

This isn’t even a matter of illiterate or literate.

If someone is wearing a camera always assume it’s recording. There’s literally no reason to speculate on the owners intent or competency.

Many webcams now ship with lens covers these days. You wanna take a guess why that is and why you might want a lens cover for an internet connected camera you own and control?

Ignoring possibilities for malicious software being a concern, Meta having control over their product with an internet connected recording device with AI facial recognition bullshit baked in is enough of a reason for concern. And how often do we hear about company mishandling of data leading to private information leaking?

Oops my camera was on, oh no. Why even leave an opening for a careless mistake like that to happen? At the least you’re asking for trouble.

Medical exams can be scary enough for patients w/o having to worry about a camera on someone’s face pointed at them. Patients have a right to feel comfortable in a medical setting and it’s in doctor’s best interest that they feel safe so they can do their job properly.

As for the “whatabout” hidden camera bs. Maybe worry about the one pointed at your face before you worry about the one you don’t see. If you don’t trust your doctor to not have hidden cameras maybe it’s time to find a new doctor?

[–] zarathustrad@lemmy.world 1 points 2 minutes ago

Not arguing with your points (we agree), but regarding my comment about literacy (not the poster who responded):

I was implying that one needs a basic level of tech literacy to even think about cameras as always being on. (As evidenced by the OP, and the poster who replied to me)

As WE know, "I shut off the camera" does not mean the camera is not recording, and "I shut off the WIFI" does not mean the data is secure. Some do not know this.

[–] Glitchvid@lemmy.world 1 points 36 minutes ago

Bro even Macy's sells these things in store. They're a mass market product.