Hacker News Reader

Comment by pesenti | Hacker News Reader

That’s a good question and I don’t think we have all the answers yet. But I expect that many functionalities will need to request and get consent from 3rd parties.

View on HN

So, will I have to sign a consent agreement every time I talk to a d*** wearing these glasses? Is this the "irl" equivalent of the cookie consent banner in the web browser? Heaven forbid. I want to be positive about technological advancements but I'm frankly flabbergasted that anyone, including you, thinks this is a good idea for the world. And in my heart of hearts I have to think that your salary and prestige are coming before your integrity and common sense.

If you can't answer this particular question after you've already advertised that feature there are only two possibilities to explain this knowledge gap:

1. You don't think upfront about the consequences your products have for people's privacy.

2. You don't care about the consequences your products have for people's privacy, and leave the particular details for the lawyers of how such products could still be distributed legally.

Which of this explanations should we prefer?

Which feature are you talking about? This is a research project, not a product. The point of research projects is to investigate and figure out answers we don't have today.

> One of the features outlined in the article for this post was for the glasses to remember things that other people said.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28898645

So just to be sure: Is this feature one of the goals of this research, yes or no?

From the same post:

> How would such other people who don't want to be recorded for these purposes opt out?

To make the obvious very explicit: The previous question (which you just praised as a "good question") is about this feature. Wasn't this clear to you until now? I'm wondering. This is a simple conversation thread not hard to follow.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com