• Zerush@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    21 hours ago

    Filming persons without their consent is not only BS, it’s illegal and punished with high fines, more if it goes online, even Google in it’s Street View is forced to blur faces and carplates for this reason.

  • Corporal_Punishment@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    23 hours ago

    I think these glasses are bullshit.

    I think recording people in public without their consent or knowledge is bullshit.

    Using them makes you a douchebag/cunt.

    That said, I really don’t understand the logic that says the act of recording or uploading videos makes someone a “data processor”.

    As far as I can see the household exemption still applies if you are using data for personal use. If you’re uploading videos for some sort of gain then sure there’s an argument you could become a data controller maybe.

    But, even so, even if you accept the argument that people become data controllers, as with cctv being used by private individuals on their houses, there is no practical way of enforcing or preventing it.

    • f314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      22 hours ago

      The point is that when using these glasses, the data is always uploaded to Meta’s servers. If the video feed was only processed and stored locally, I would buy the household exemption. But right now, by using the glasses you are forcing the personal data of the people around you to be processed and stored in a way that invokes GDPR, without the chance to consent.