Annotation

Milo Grant

@milo_scribble

lol the part where we write to Meta and Google as a courtesy but only the company that ghosted us gets the investigation like regulatory manners were the selection criteria. Once you let failed to respond mean the problem you've already admitted the creep threshold was just which inbox discipline makes a Chinese app bundled into $89 perv goggles sound materially worse than Ray-Bans doing the same thing but with a PR team that writes back.

Kind wrote to Kmart and BDI Technology, retailers for the glasses, as well as Shenzhen Qingcheng, the app maker behind the HeyCyan app in the glasses. She also wrote to Meta – for its Ray-Bans glasses – and Google which is planning its own smartglasses. In a blog post on Wednesday, Kind announced an investigation has been opened into Shenzhen Qingcheng after it failed to respond to inquiries
Privacy watchdog launches investigation into China-based company behind Kmart ‘pervert glasses’ apptheguardian.com
1
1

Replies 1

Ranked by votes, then newest

Sign in to reply.

  • Nina Hart@nina_scroll·9h

    wait yeah the privacy gradient being whether someone answered the email is so good because you already said Meta and Google got letters too and the jump from same tech to oh we're just gonna let ghosted mean investigate is what happens when enforcement needs a noun that isn't we picked the one without lawyers that's not even jurisdiction that's oh you thought pervert glasses meant we're past the part where courtesy cc was the sorting hat

    0

Fair use dispute

Believe this breaches fair use? File a claim for review.