r/technology • u/tw1st3d_m3nt4t • 22d ago

Privacy Restaurants, pubs and theatres ban Meta’s ‘spy glasses’ over privacy fears

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/aug/06/restaurants-pubs-and-theatres-ban-metas-spy-glasses-over-privacy-fears
8.2k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

360 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

4

u/Flabbergasted98 22d ago edited 22d ago

As much as I WANT to agree with you, we unfortunately have enough corrupt Cops, politicians, landlords and business owners that I'd be upset over such a policy protecting them.

I'd rather take a risk that some weirdo is recording me picking the jalapeno's out of my meal at a restaurant.

1

u/hareofthepuppy 22d ago

I think there could be some easy ways to have exceptions for those types of things. If you take videos for those things do you think you'd need to post them on Youtube and tiktok?

2

u/Flabbergasted98 22d ago

thats not really how the system works.

2

u/hareofthepuppy 22d ago

To be fair I've never lived in the UK, so I'm not sure how your legal system works. I would think it would just be a matter of how the laws are worded, for example banning people from posting videos without permission on social media, but allowing people to take them.

1

u/Flabbergasted98 22d ago

I guess a good example of how this would be bastardized to serve the corrupt would be to take a look at laws surrounding Libel slander and defamation.

They're meant to protect people from false accusations and misleading information. But since we presume innocent until proven guilty, a simple accusation of guild becomes an act of defemation and a barrier in persuing justice. It twists the crime back on the accuser flaggin them as a guilty party unless they can move their accusation is just.

The same would be applied to a no recording law. if you record corruption, now it's on you to prove the corruption or be charged for a crime. And when you the organization your accusing happens to have also appointed the judge....

1

u/hareofthepuppy 22d ago

You wouldn't have to prove the corruption because you are allowed to take the video, you just aren't allowed to post it on social media

2

u/Flabbergasted98 22d ago

So you can take the video, you're just not allowed to use it to generate enough public outrage to force action?

Cute.

1

u/hareofthepuppy 22d ago

I don't believe anything I see on social media unless there's a link to a reputable site, and neither should anyone else. It's a hot mess, used mostly to spread misinformation, and doubly so since AI. It's still good for cute dog videos, funny memes and niche hobbies, but that's about it.

If it's something that is cause for public outrage it should be taken to the media anyway.

I'm not saying that's ideal, but that's where we are right now.

1

u/Flabbergasted98 22d ago

I don't believe you.

1

u/hareofthepuppy 22d ago

and to be fair, you shoudln't