this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2026
200 points (97.2% liked)

Canada

12187 readers
988 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


🌐 Other Relevant Communities


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

To no one’s surprise, women and girls are disproportionately targeted, making image-based abuse not just a technology issue but a gendered form of violence rooted in misogyny and power. In fact, in Laura Bates’ book “The New Age of Sexism”, she cites research that says that of the 96% of deepfakes that are non-consensual sexually explicit images, 99% of those depict women. In fact, most of the apps, bots and websites that will create deepfake explicit images don’t even work on pictures of men.

Deepfakes can be used to humiliate, silence, intimidate, or punish women for speaking publicly, participating online, or simply existing in digital spaces.

In the UK, women have reported being filmed by men wearing smart glasses while being approached in public spaces, with recordings subsequently uploaded to social media attracting sexualised and other gross comments. Similar “pickup” content has emerged in the US, where men have used smart glasses to record interactions with women in airports, gyms, and other public spaces, often turning those encounters into viral online content.

Last year, an Auckland man used the Ray-Ban Smart Glasses to covertly record a sex worker without her consent while she was naked. The recording was detected only because the woman noticed him activating the device (by touching the side of the glasses). He pleaded guilty to attempting to make an intimate visual recording, but was discharged without conviction - to the dismay of the brothel owner.

This is particularly concerning because wearable devices are designed to blend into everyday life. A child may not recognise that a pair of ordinary-looking sunglasses contains a camera. They may not realise they are being recorded, and will have little ability to control what happens to that image/footage afterwards.

Consent becomes much harder to meaningfully give or refuse when recording devices are hidden inside objects that look completely ordinary.

Too often, we're told that women and girls should simply be more careful, more alert, and more aware of their surroundings, remain vigilant, and constantly assess whether they are being recorded, instead of placing responsibility on those who design, deploy, and profit from technologies with foreseeable risks of misuse. The same is true for children and young people, who should not need levels of technological awareness beyond their developmental capacity simply to protect themselves from covert recording.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Brisbogan@lemmy.zip 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I wish I could get these glasses without the camera. Playing music, scrolling stuff on my glasses on the train every morning etc. Sounds amazing.

[–] streetfestival@lemmy.ca 3 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Playing music, scrolling stuff on my glasses on the train every morning

Both of those things can be done with a phone or mp3 player and some headphones. These glasses don't allow you view a social media feed, for example; you're describing a different technology https://www.techlearning.com/news/what-you-need-to-know-about-meta-glasses

[–] brax@sh.itjust.works 7 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

I don't get how Google glass got laughed out of existence, but people are out there champing at the bit to buy Meta spyware glasses... It's fucking insane.

[–] Abyssian@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago

The people excited to buy them aren't the same people who were laughing before. These are the people who sit in a bus and wish they could just whip their dick out and start jerking off on someone, but who have the social awareness to know that would be frowned upon. Now they can record their day so they can revisit that train ride or few minutes on an elevator with a child, or kids gymnastics practice later on and pull their dick out for real this time.

[–] streetfestival@lemmy.ca 2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

I think the corporations have done a great job at normalizing surveillance and anti-privacy in the intervening years. In that time there's also been a huge trend in marketing of getting celebs to do advertisements, which I'm guessing has some effectiveness seeing as it's spread like wildfire in the last several years, and meta's pervertware glasses have a dumbass-spokesperson in someone apparently famous named Kylie Jenner or something like that. I think your question is a good one; I think the answer has is how effective corporate manufacturing of consent has become (and the death of [mainstream] journalism; these days news outlets are just loudspeakers for corporations and politicians, especially in the tech space - critical thought need not apply)

[–] brax@sh.itjust.works 2 points 12 hours ago

We need to make tech moree difficult any way we can to drive the normies back out. Let them have their slop lol

[–] IhaveCrabs111@lemmy.world 4 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

I will never think ray bans in general are cool ever again.

[–] BillyTheKid2@lemmy.ca 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)
[–] IhaveCrabs111@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

You’re fashion sense was ahead of the times

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 3 points 23 hours ago

We're ready to break them, as a last resort.

[–] limonfiesta@lemmy.world 32 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (12 children)

We're normalizing the courageous, and morally righteous, act of destroying Flock cameras.

Normalizing the destruction of pervert glasses seems like the next reasonable escalation in that fight.

Well that sucks. I don't know if I can put enough force behind my fist without damaging the fragile nose and ocular bones underneath.

[–] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago

Don’t forget ring cameras!

But yeah, I won’t be upset if we start seeing pervert glasses getting slapped off pervert faces.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago
[–] Th4tGuyII@fedia.io 16 points 1 day ago (19 children)

While it is true that nobody should have an expectation of privacy when in public, that doesn't automatically grant you consent to purposely film people in public either.

Filming with these glasses discreetly in public removes that element of choice. People can't consent or avoid something they can't even see happening, like they could if the filming was done with an action cam or with a phone (held normally). Anyone who thinks that violating consent like that is okay is someone I wouldn't want to hang around with.


And sure, maybe most people using these glasses are honest folks that would never film people without consent, or use them for any kind of malfeasance - but to that I'd say, why should everyone else have be at the mercy of your honesty?

That's not a fair deal, and I doubt most of these glassholes would like to be in the reverse situation of being filmed going about their life without their consent.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

You have no expectation of privacy in public, but that doesn't legalize voyerism - https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.44.115

  • (ii) The intimate areas of another person without that person's knowledge and consent and under circumstances where the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, whether in a public or private place. (b) Voyeurism in the first degree is a class C felony.
load more comments (18 replies)
[–] Malyca@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So we're supposed to develop hypervigilance? As someone with cptsd I've been doing that since I was in diapers. It's incredibly taxing for your brain and takes years off your life. Terrible advice. Best thing we can do is publicly shame these people every time we see one. Call them pervert glasses, get mad, if it happens enough times they will get rid of them.

[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago

That's what took them off the market last time. We can do it again.

[–] KulunkelBoom@lemmus.org 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Do they work when driving? Maybe a sunglass version? That would be handier than window mounted cameras and the like. Fuck 'em if all they're for is privacy invasion. Enough of that shit is enough.

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Do they work when driving?

Yes

Maybe a sunglass version?

You can get them in sunglasses yes, and prescription lenses. Basically any lens you want.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Sunshine@piefed.ca 8 points 1 day ago

Watch these creeps wearing garbage glasses make life so much harder for the folks with low vision.

[–] ryan213@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 day ago (21 children)

I think we should all yell out "Pervert" at anyone we see wearing them in public.

load more comments (21 replies)
[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

It was fun while these were just used for sports and actually interesting outdoor activities, it serves me really well while cycling and snowboarding. I gave away the original wayfarer version so my family can experiment with it for accessibility and now I have just the sports version, which hopefully it's too dorky for these pick-up-artist idiots to start popularizing.

Guess I'll have to go back to a go pro in my helmets like a Teletubby… and find a decent combination of open ear headphones and a microphone that works against the wind. sigh maybe if they made a camera-less version that would solve most of it

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (5 children)

I think a good way to combat this, and it should be done now, would be to convince pretty young girls to pull out their phones and record any glasshole they see, while belittling them. Post that shit on TikTok, and laugh. They'll be in public areas, wherever crowds of young people gather.

If we wait too long, and let these become more commonplace the initiative will be lost.

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

Unfortunately that may just lead to more young girls getting attacked. The perverts who buy pervert glasses have the emotional intelligence of an angry warthog

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›