I highly recommend! It's a fantastic critique of unhinged capitalism and blind consumerism. Definitely one of John Carpenter's best. Slavoj Zizek did a splendid analysis of it that convinced me to watch it. Actually, I should give it a rewatch sometime.

D_C@sh.itjust.works · 18 pts · 20d

Ok, if I had never heard of Facebook or Cuckerberg. And had never even thought of people using these types of glasses to perv with then I'd still know they were a bad thing because my one simple rule.

The rule is that if a jenner or kartrashian advertise it, are involved with it at all, have invested in it, etc etc, then it's a very very bad thing (until proven otherwise).
Shitty people advertise shitty things

Sunshine@piefed.ca · 10 pts · 20d

American billionaires are the type who waste 215m over the course of 13 months 2024 presidential election attacking trans people instead of paying for universal healthcare.

frazw@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 20d (11 replies)

Glasses for perverts huh? My dad was considering glasses like this (not necessarily meta) to help with his macular degeneration. They can read out text in front of them, zoom and useful stuff like that for people with vision problems. But now he won't even consider it because he's worried he will be labelled a pervert if he is seen wearing them because apparently no one can conceive of a reason why smart glasses might be about more than spying. So he has chosen going slowly blind over having people shout at him in the street. I don't really blame him but I am sad for him that a viable aid is now so stigmatised he is afraid to use it.

That said I do not trust Meta and fully expect them to use the devices for spying and harvesting data even if the wearer does not.

lime@feddit.nu · 25 pts · 20d

if there were ones that were fully local and only activated their cameras when holding a button or something i think people would be fine with them. but what we get is spy-machines that send everything you see to marky-mark and his goons.

ExtremeDullard@piefed.social · 25 pts · 20d (1 reply)

For every person who wants those glasses for legit purposes, there's a thousand pervs. Facebook shifted two million of them, and I guarantee you those aren't two million people with vision problems.

frazw@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 16d

Yes, and created a stigma

LurkingLuddite@piefed.social · 9 pts · 20d (3 replies)

If you think those glasses can do those things, you have been fooled.

frazw@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 16d (2 replies)

I'm not just talking about meta glasses. There are others more targeting vision impairment, but they have similar camera-in-glasses issues that attract the pervert label.

The meta ones were recommended by the macular society, don't ask me why.

frazw@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 16d

And for the record, we are not talking about large commercial products, more niche medical products that are much lower volume and much more expensive.

LurkingLuddite@piefed.social · 1 pts · 5d

Meta glasses last all of twenty minutes while recording. They will never be to the quality that accessibility assistance devices will need to be.

Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de · 2 pts · 20d (1 reply)

they can't zoom, there's no fucking display

you know what can zoom and read out text? A phone.

frazw@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 16d

Jeez, why the aggression? I dislike meta too, but there are other products that have glasses mounted cameras that do offer zoom and text to speech for macular degeneration that he now won't consider because people react like you just did to the meta product .

bold_atlas@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 20d (1 reply)

Those people are saving your dad from:

wasting time and money because they don't work
possibly making his condition worse because they are not MD approved prescription glasses
being spied on and tracked
having his private medical info being sold off to advertisers, insurance, employers, government, etc who will use it against him
disappointment because they don't work

frazw@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 16d

Well all I can say is the macular society suggested them to him. We approached them about another product designed for vision impairment to find out if they had any experience and they said to try the meta glasses. We didn't, but I still think if there is a camera based solution that helps him, he now won't wear it because of the stigma.

And for the record I'm not in need of any convincing to avoid meta.

TIEPilot@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 20d

Obey

minorkeys@sh.itjust.works · -16 pts · 20d (6 replies)

What the fuck is everyone going after meta for doing exactly what all of them are doing? Surveilling all of our lives. Are we really so stupid that we only care when it's a pair of glasses doing it FFS?

Visstix@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 20d (3 replies)

So people shouldn't be upset about people buying glasses that help companies spy on people, because companies spy on people?

minorkeys@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 20d

They should be upset about all of the surveillance, not just the meta glasses surveillance.

DaTingGoBrrr@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 20d (1 reply)

Lmao I had to give a very similar response to a genocide denier regarding Uyghurs in China 😅 for some reason a lot of people think that we shouldn't criticize "bad thing" because others are also doing or have done "bad thing". How fucking complacent can you get?

Visstix@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 20d

Everyone knows genocide is not a big thing. Everyone is doing! Don't worry about it.

Rothe@piefed.social · 9 pts · 20d (1 reply)

There are dozens of us who are perfectly capable on focusing on more than one issue at a time. So no, we don't "only care when it's a pair of glasses", we care when it is a pair of glasses as well as all of the other things wrong with the world.

It is not an "either/or" situation.

minorkeys@sh.itjust.works · 0 pts · 20d

It is for a lot of people, it seems.