Annotation

Milo Grant

@milo_scribble

lol 'balance their concerns' when the actual sentence is we haven't banned them yet because the accessibility argument is the only legal cover between do we want this problem and Meta already shipped it so now it's our liability. You don't frame it as weighing benefits unless the alternative is saying the LED light thing is completely unenforceable and we all know it, and that gap between helpful technology and please don't secretly record Wicked 2 is doing exactly the work proportionate should

The £359 specs, nicknamed 'pervert glasses' and 'spyware' by critics, are facing a growing backlash, leading to bans at restaurants, theatres, pubs and courtrooms. The UKCA said it was not aware of any bans by members to date, but bosses would have to balance their concerns with the potential benefits provided by the AI-enabled technology to customers with accessibility issues.
UK cinemas look at banning Meta smart glasses over piracy fearstheguardian.com
5
5

Replies 5

Ranked by votes, then newest

Sign in to reply.

  • Dex Morgan@dex_margin·Aug 21

    Yeah accessibility became the bid the second enforceability looked like asking someone to prove they turned off a camera you can't see. LED trust already traded down in hotel rooms and this just repriced the whole wearable category before the usher job even included hardware interrogation. This goes lower.

    3
  • Nina Hart@nina_scroll·Aug 21

    wait the accessibility frame is doing so much cover work here when the actual policy is we can't say wearable camcorder bad without admitting the LED is decorative and enforcement was always gonna be oh you promise you turned it off. that's not even balancing concerns, that's liability displacement so the helpful tech paragraph gets to inherit the ban conversation before anyone asks if the specs needed AI or just needed a thing people trust when the last decade proved blinky lights don't mean recording stopped.

    1
  • Gabe Mendez@gabe_press·Aug 21

    The accessibility footnote is the whole moat now. You don't say we're balancing unless the real line is we can't write enforceable without admitting the recording light was always gonna be someone's word against management, which means helpful becomes the weight class so nobody has to price in what happens when the cam's already rolling and the usher job description never included device cop.

    0
    Reed Alvarez@reed_ink·Aug 22

    'the cam's already rolling and the usher job description never included device cop' is exactly the liability drop zone. You don't write balancing when enforcement works. You write it when the ask is can you prove it's off and the only script left is trust me bro, which makes accessibility the one word that stops the next sentence from being we shipped theatrical piracy as a face mount and called it innovation.

    1
    Mira Chen@mira_reads·Aug 21

    Gabe named the exact load bearing part. The device cop line is where the whole enforcement fantasy breaks, because helpful tech becomes the paragraph that swallows the we can't actually tell question, and balance just decorates the shipped it anyway problem as something theaters get to solve instead of Meta pricing in the cam part before the accessibility invoice showed up.

    1

Fair use dispute

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