this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2026
277 points (98.6% liked)

Privacy

10303 readers
668 users here now

A community for Lemmy users interested in privacy

Rules:

  1. Be civil
  2. No spam posting
  3. Keep posts on-topic
  4. No trolling

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Talentlesssculptor@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And then you go to jail(in most countries).

[–] unitedwithme@lemmy.today -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Most likely a ticket and court appearance.

I'm telling you, Zuck aka Zuck the Cuck is obsessed with watching people. First, Meta buys Oculus in a really odd/weird move for the company, as AR/VR grows slightly popular, mostly niche. The partnership with Rayban shows they're really more so just for data gathering, eavesdropping, spying, invasion of privacy, getting there juicy gossip that isn't posted to social media, intimate moments between 2 people (which could include underage users too), and other likely more sinister purposes I haven't thought of.

Meta is the least likely company to give a shit about any one individual as a person, and it's all about "engagement" and obsession of use of their platform. If someone records me, in a state that's a 2-party consent state for audio/video recording, and they do not comply, I would be swift to take action. Meta doesn't care about laws or policy, they'll push any blame to the users for needing to check with local laws, etc, and find any other scapegoat possible like always. "It's never their fault" duh.

[–] Talentlesssculptor@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Two party consent states also prohibit civilians from recording police though right? How is that a good thing?

[–] unitedwithme@lemmy.today 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

You can record video, but you need consent for audio, or it needs to be posted somewhere for petiole to be aware. Most dash cams or security cameras can omit audio for this reason.

[–] Talentlesssculptor@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

So then this kind of activity is perfectly legal? People in public can expect to be recorded by pervs using any kind of camera?

[–] unitedwithme@lemmy.today 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Basically. If you're not recorded by a perv, you're recorded by dozens of businesses as you drive by or walk by. Where I work, I personally installed our 100+ camera systems.

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

So why are people being so butt-hurt about this specific device? Is it all because it is connected to Meta?

[–] unitedwithme@lemmy.today 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, Meta, but also the feed is non-stop and it has people on the other end watching all the time. Huge lack of privacy, assuming you go to the bathroom wearing them, or intimate with your SO. Meta pushed hard for facial ID tech so you could "see" who's around you, etc.

I just hate Zuck the cuck trying to infiltrate every aspect of people lives for "engagement" while blaming OSes for allowing his platforms to be used for the addictive nature, NOT taking ownership or fixing it at all. No apologies, no responsibility, nothing. Takes his billions to build a compound in Hawaii for when shit hits the fan he can't be attacked..

[–] Talentlesssculptor@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Sure, meta and Zuck the cuck are horrible, but the idea of hidden cameras has got utility.

[–] unitedwithme@lemmy.today 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

How so? And worth the utility over every other horrible aspect?

[–] Talentlesssculptor@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

Well hidden cameras are a great tool for the under privileged to record systematic oppression by law enforcement and other agents in society.