I’m kinda tired of everyone on the internet seeing the worst in everything and then treating that interpretation as the standard.
I’m a staunch liberal, but I’ll be the first to say that many liberals grab onto the worst-case scenario and really run with it sometimes. And it’s no different from the way we see conservatives do it and make fun of them for it. Do people abuse government benefits? Yes, but it would be unfair to zero in on the small number of people who abuse something and say that's the defining characteristic of everyone else? No.
The entire discourse around Ray-Ban Meta glasses would have you believe that they can only legally be sold to registered sex offenders. If you’re out of the loop, these glasses record the scenery around the wearer. There’s been widespread public concern about people using the glasses for nefarious purposes, and that fear has dominated the discourse. So much so that anyone promoting the product is often met with intense scrutiny and backlash.
The public response to the Ray-Ban Meta glasses has focused on the potential harm of hypothetical use, instead of how they're actually used. Will some people use them to be creeps? Yeah, probably. But that is not the majority of people. If you look at who is actually buying these glasses, it’s normal everyday people who just want to record their everyday life. The footage I usually see is people riding their horses, going on bike rides, running, etc. There is nothing wrong with recording any of that. Yet if that’s your intended purpose and you got a pair for that, people would still be mad. I don’t get it.
Also, what can someone do with these glasses that they can’t already do with their phone or another recording device? If anything, a phone is worse. You could just stick it under a woman’s skirt and take footage without her realizing. But glasses have to be worn on the face, and people can generally keep better track of a face than a phone.
I’ve seen the argument “people don’t consent to being recorded”. This does not introduce any new issue. The ethical debate of recording people in public has been around since the video camera was invented. We have some rules/laws around that, so this isn’t exactly the wild west of public policy. Also, most people already step outside with an understanding that they may be recorded, whether they’re in the background of someone filming content or a store security camera.
“But the surveillance state!” Have you read the privacy terms of these glasses? Can you say for sure whether user content is being shared with third parties and for what purposes? What is the tangible harm these glasses have caused or will cause that is unique to them?
I know Meta is not a beloved public corporation, but that doesn’t inherently make the glasses evil. Whatever concern people have about these glasses would be better served by educating themselves on privacy laws and pushing their lawmakers to ensure a standard of safety and regulation for these things. Actually, I have an almost finished draft about why we should all care more about privacy law. I’ll get that published and then come back and link it; it’s deadass important, you guys.
But I digress.
Another thing that I think the public has the wrong reaction to is AI. All the criticisms of it stem from lawmakers failing to properly regulate technology. People should be compensated for their work if AI is going to train on it. We should limit what can be done with AI to reduce unnecessary resource use. Like those dumb AI videos you see on Facebook, those have to go first, as they are not worth the water they’re wasting. Limit who can use AI and for what. It should be heavily regulated in what jobs it takes/replaces, and should absolutely be banned from automating important decisions like insurance claims. Especially in the US with private health insurance. But that will only happen if a law requires it.
People need to stop getting mad at things and get mad at gaps in law and policy.
Too many individuals are writing think pieces about Kylie Jenner when they should be writing to their local representative.