The Backlash Is So Strong That People With "Pervert Glasses" Are Afraid to Use Them in Public

[dalton99a]

https://tech.yahoo.com/wearables/articles/backlash-strong-people-pervert-glasses-165000816.html

The Backlash Is So Strong That People With “Pervert Glasses” Are Afraid to Use Them in Public
Maggie Harrison Dupré
Mon, July 13, 2026 at 11:50 AM CDT

Meta's camera-equipped "AI Glasses" are so divisive that some adopters are now leaving their expensive smart glasses at home, as Engadget reports.

Influencers, mostly men, have been using the glasses to inconspicuously — and non-consensually — capture footage of themselves approaching women and attempting to hit on them, interactions they've then posted online for content. Some wearers have even attempted to extort victims of covert recordings for cash. That's on top of serious allegations of alleged privacy breaches by Meta itself.

And then, of course, there's the simple fact that a lot of people just really don't like the idea of the world's largest and most powerful social media giant, which has a history of misusing biometric information and other data, facilitating abuse and surveillance in this way — especially as Meta has taken highly controversial steps to infuse facial recognition capabilities into the tech.

The wearables have become so alienating that many people have taken to simply referring to the shades as "pervert glasses."

In short, it's no wonder some owners aren't exactly thrilled to be seen in public while wearing them. Several of them told Engadget that while they were initially excited about the tech, misuse and allegations of privacy violations on behalf of Meta have made them hesitant to use their smart glasses outside of their own home.

...

[riversedge]

1. geezzzzzzzzzz!!

[mwmisses4289]

2. Good. Keep the backlash strong.

Pervert glasses indeed.
Saw an ad on one of my you tube videos for those things. Normally I would hit the skip button on the ads as soon as I can, but in this case, I watched the whole add, so I could get an idea of what these things look like.

[sop]

3. Like any secret recording device, these glasses will be misused and need to be regulated.

You can see someone holding up a cellphone to record your actions, and everyone knows video cameras are everywhere in public spaces these days, but this sort of thing is a clear invasion of privacy. There are already laws prohibiting the recording of private phone calls without permission, secretly bugging someone's home or office, or placing hidden cameras inside restrooms and other private places. I'm afraid these glasses will only be regulated after they're used to record a few corrupt politicians taking bribes, corporate CEOs scheming to defraud customers, or cops shooting people without justification.

[Jedi Guy]

7. "...but this sort of thing is a clear invasion of privacy."

Is it, though? There's no reasonable expectation of privacy in a public place. That's been the case for decades now. If you're wandering around the mall or walking around on a public street, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy and people can video record you to their hearts' content.

Furthermore, you cannot legally demand that they stop recording or delete anything that's already been recorded. Your only recourse is to leave unless the owner of the property asks them to stop or tells them to leave. In the case of a fully public space like a street, there's no owner to do so.

There are already laws prohibiting the recording of private phone calls without permission

Those laws vary significantly from state to state. Some states are one-party consent states, meaning that if I'm on a call with you I can record it without your knowledge and that's perfectly legal. Other states are two-party consent states, meaning that I'd have to inform you that I'm recording the call and you'd have to agree to be recorded.

...secretly bugging someone's home or office, or placing hidden cameras inside restrooms and other private places.

This is significantly different than recording in public because these spaces (homes, offices, restrooms) have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

...these glasses will only be regulated...

Don't hold your breath. Existing laws already address everything these glasses can do, as noted above.

[stopdiggin]

9. thanks. the accuracy is appreciated.

No, I don't like the things either ... But .. expectation of privacy in public space ... Kinda' established territory.

[Coventina]

11. Excuse me but I do expect privacy

In restrooms, fitting rooms, locker rooms, etc.

If I were to see someone wearing such a device, I will call them out, loudly, and report them to management.

[Jedi Guy]

16. As noted, you have a reasonable expectation of privacy in such places.

I'm not sure why you're responding as if I disagreed with that notion when I clearly stated otherwise.

[sop]

14. Sure, in public spaces, but recording someone in a private place without their knowledge or consent is illegal

in most states in this country. While recording in public spaces is permitted by the First Amendment, the Supreme Court has limited that right; one cannot use recording devices in many public settings, like courtrooms, government offices, schools, and a lot of other "public" places.

In Florida, secretly recording someone in a place where they have a "reasonable expectation of privacy" - like bathrooms, changing rooms, private offices, places where children are present, hospitals, homes, etc.- is a violation of "Florida Video Voyeurism Laws." And unless all parties agree to be recorded, video recording of private conversations (face-to-face) also violates Florida's "Two-Party Consent Law."

New technologies always present legal challenges. When drones with video taping capabilities became popular, people started using them for all manner of things till laws were passed to address their use. Now using drones to record above someone's private property, or areas where people expect privacy, is a crime; landowners do not own the airspace above their homes, but drones cannot use that airspace to record, or spy, on people.

Unless people wearing these new glasses warn others they're being recorded in private settings where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, and request their persmission to do so beforehand, these surreptitious recording devices will also fall under these laws. It's just a matter of time before laws specifically addressing these devices will be enacted.

[dickthegrouch]

21. Broadcasting someone's activities without their permission is a lot more complicated.

TV stations have to get written consent to broadcast many of the "person on the street" interviews they do.

If you're broadcasting my activity for your gain, financial or social, without my permission, I can sue under copyright and DMCA.

[Jedi Guy]

22. If you're walking down a public street I don't believe that's the case.

If you're in public and therefore have no reasonable expectation of privacy and some dumbshit "influencer" captures film of you for their channel there's very little you can do about it.

If there were legal recourse for that kind of thing there'd be a hell of a lot fewer videos online of people behaving like clowns and ending up Internet famous as a result.

The exemption you're talking about for commercial use isn't going to apply to an individual, it would apply to a company that used your image/likeness for profit.

No disrespect intended but I don't think you're correct on this. But what the hell do I know? I'm just some random schmuck on the Internet, not a copyright attorney.

[CrimsonBight]

24. That is not correct.

In an on-the-street interview, when the camera is in plain view, consent is implied (Alexander v. Pathfinder, Inc., 189 F.3d 735, 743 (8th Cir. 1999)). You do not need written permission. News outlets obtain permission anyway as a best practice. I have done this myself when recording lectures at public universities.

The only time consent is required in an in-person interview is if the subject has a reasonable expectation of privacy.

[Goonch]

4. ;-{) Pervert Glasses

[FakeNoose]

23. Yeah, not gonna happen anytime soon

Mark Zuckerberg already has too much money ... I'm not planning to give him any more dough.
I quit Facebook over five years ago. Bye-bye Mark.

[Kid Berwyn]

5. Nothing says "Pervert" like Zuckerberg.

Billionaire got that way rating, ranking and cataloguing co-eds.

[dalton99a]

6. +1

https://www.businessinsider.com/well-these-new-zuckerberg-ims-wont-help-facebooks-privacy-problems-2010-5

[miyazaki]

18. Give them a little cheese and people will hack themselves. nt

[Coventina]

8. Public restrooms? Locker rooms? Etc.

How these things are legal, I don’t know!

[Blumancru]

10. High tech version of the "X-ray Specs" sold in ads in comic books 60 years ago.

[chowder66]

12. What a way to ruin your brand Ray-Ban!

[yardwork]

13. Good.

[Grins]

15. Did ANYONE at the world's most vile corporation ever ask, "Waitaminute....?"

"Maybe we SHOULDN'T do this?"

Jesus, are they that tone-deaf?

[RockRaven]

27. No, they hypothesized a way to make money off of it, and then ran with it.

Because that company is inherently sociopathic (top down).

[FakeNoose]

17. Single women should be wearing AI glasses to protect themselves from these guys

Do you think an abuser would approach any woman in a bar or public place, if she's making a video of HIM?

Hell I don't own a pair of those glasses, but I'd invest in a cheap look-alike pair just ward off the weirdos. These days I'm too old to get that kind of attention from strange men, but still.

[highplainsdem]

28. No. They'd be viewed with suspicion themselves.

[2na fisherman]

19. What If Everyone Wore Them To Monitor ICE Agents And Police?

In a world where Big Brother is watching you in a total surveillance environment, what if all his siblings had this technical ability to watch him and his henchmen? Officers might have to be more careful about using excessive force with impunity.

[drmeow]

20. I guess everyone

forgot about Google Glass and all the "Glassholes"

[CrimsonBight]

25. We were too busy being upset about something else at the time.

Probably Dungeons & Dragons, hippity hop music, or fidget spinners or something.

[RockRaven]

26. If you buy pervert glasses, you DESERVE to be treated like a pervert. And they ARE pervert glasses.

Spare us any "not all perverts, uh, I mean, not all glasses!" crying.

Those devices are fundamentally designed to record people without their consent. That is inherent in their design and function -- it isn't possible to get everyone's consent, all of the time, in every public place, in advance. So you are recording others without consent, full stop. And you are doing it on purpose, stupidly and selfishly.

You cannot wear those devices in public without nonconsensual recording others. So everyone SHOULD treat you like a creep and an asshole because if you use such devices YOU ARE ONE.

If you walked around with your phone in hand constantly recording everyone and everything, or back in the day did the same with a camcorder, people would rightly treat you like a freak and a jerk for doing so. That doesn't change just because the camera is now shaped like a fucking pair of glasses.

Your behavior is antisocial. The only problem bigger than your behavior is your inability to recognize your behavior for what it is. Fuck off!