[drdaeman]

I believe the problem is not smart glasses per se, but spyware that runs on a lot (if not most) of such devices.

Shame the language makes people intrinsically hate the former by associating it with the latter without even questioning it. The idea of smart glasses is cool, the implementations are not.

[itishappy]

Smart glasses are spyware. The ability to record without my knowledge or consent is what I take issue with. I don't particularly care if you self host.

[nomel]

> The ability to record without my knowledge or consent

All major brands have a clear indicator for when they're recording.

Someone could block that indicator out, but someone could also just go to Amazon.com and select one of hundred of available pinhole cameras or not-smart camera glasses.

These aren't enabling an ability that hasn't been enabled for decades. If anything, seeing someone with main brand smart glasses makes it more obvious.

[drdaeman]

Smart glasses (or any camera-equipped device) don’t have to record anything to provide utility.

If anything, the primary utility of smart glasses is the wearable display, not camera. YMMV, of course.

But even machine vision-capable devices can do a lot of useful things without causing you any trouble, unless your issues are more of a religious concern rather than anything substantial.

[mrgoldenbrown]

Do you consider dashcams to also be spyware? I feel like dashcams are just as hidden and nonconsensual but more or less accepted.

[aa-jv]

Alas, your knowledge or consent is not a requirement if you are in public, and this is a human right worth defending, frankly.

Your desire to consent to being recorded in public places does not counteract my right to record everything I can perceive in public. Period.