With how society has reacted to the meta glasses, it has me wondering about optical implants. They’re going to be here eventually, and presumably will have cameras in them out of necessity. I’m sure there will be a whole thing about getting ones that aren’t back doored by a corp, but we are also talking about curing blindness. This isn’t something everyone will skip on due to a fear of surveillance, simply because blindness can be so difficult to live with.
Are we careening towards a deus ex scenario where the majority of humanity villifies and ostracizes anyone with augments? I always expected that to a certain degree, religious folks especially being what they are, but the reaction to smart glasses has me concerned that the discrimination against people with optical implants might be way more extreme than I expected, from groups of people I would have previously considered level headed when it comes to technological advancements.
Anyway, I was just curious to hear from others what their thoughts might be on the subject. Do those of you that despise smart glasses think you’ll have the same moral issues with optical implants? What could be done to avoid the issues you have with the glasses when it comes to implants, if anything? Do you intend to discriminate against people with augments if you live long enough to see them in widespread use?
Short answer: No, this is not an issue. The FDA’s medical device regulations are not conducive to targeted advertising/data sharing/moving fast and breaking things. Data collected would be de-facto PHI, so it’s more liability than utility.
Meta want you to record things with the glasses to upload to Facebook. People who make DME firmware do not.
The FDA
Muuhahahahaaaa…
Think about people who are crazy enough (or desperate) to buy a camera that’s built right into their eyes… do you really think they give a damn?
IF FDA
THEN GOTO ELSEWHERE FOR (x)
There aren’t going to be a whole lot of people who are going to fuck with their eyesight if they don’t have a severe eyesight handycap, which isn’t as common as Meta wants smart glasses to be.
Also, every hearing aid is a microphone, yet I’ve never heard of a case where information from hearing aids was being misused. Almost like there’s a big divide between aids for disabilities and surveillance tech.
The hearing aid comparison is a great point.
Not really. Hearing aids aren’t uploading everything they hear to the cloud.
People are seen by others constantly, it’s knowing that someone could save that video and later share it online that creeps people out.
If they’re internet connected, sure I would. It’s a matter of trust. If I can’t be around you without Zuckerberg or someone looking at me too, then I don’t want to be around you.
I assume if we survive climate change and technology continues, that we will enter a society where we are recorded almost 24/7 through different means The question becomes “Will this be data owned by corporations?”, because that will dictate many things.
In your deus ex scenario who makes the augments? A mega corporation. So yes they will absolutely be vilified because they won’t be for the good of humanity they’ll be to charge a subscription for… vision, and spy on everyone you know.
Only way they should be accepted is as legit medical devices with open sources and no ability to stream or record video only pipe directly into the optic nerve. They should not be for tech bro fantasies.
If people like Zuccers are selling them I’ll be ripping peoples eyes out on contact.
If a frog had wings would it bump it’s ass when it hopped? That’s about as relevant as this question.
Don’t worry about lemmy’s reaction to anything. They would ban remembering things you’ve seen if they could.
So, are optical implants going to be vilified the same way smart glasses have been?
You can remember things (somewhat) without a recording device.