Hacker News Reader

> "Oh no that's sci-fi and decades away", I really don't think so. I think neuralink, and competitors too, will next move on to reading the visual cortex. They already have plans to push data to the visual cortex, to enable the blind to "see", reading in healthy people seems quite doable.

> I expect something like this to happen before 2030.

I think 2030 is too early for that, medical tech is slower than most people expect. What may happen by then is (more) retinal implants connected to external cameras, as the early tests of that kind of thing are now well into the past and early models were actually authorised: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argus_retinal_prosthesis

The non-medical surveillance risk is higher. The smallest camera (as of 6 years ago) was already small enough to be easily missed amongst makeup sparkles if you were so inclined: https://originalpricing.com/ov6948-medical-camera-sensor/

Low resolution? Sure. Expensive, too. But I can easily see this being embedded in someone's nail lacquer, or eyelashes.

There have been hidden cameras of various kinds for a lot longer than that, hidden in buttons etc.

Between this and how easy it is to use AI to fake a picture of anyone you choose, anywhere you choose, doing anything you choose… I have absolutely no idea what will happen to consensus reality and shared social norms next year, let alone by 2030.

Yes, the reality issue is big. This may be in fact the only thing which saves 'big' news. And it may be what kills all forms of social media posting.

Some yahoo you don't know, posting a video of <thing happening> is useless without some degree of trust. So whether an established celeb on Youtube or actual media outlets, centralized reporting is going to become more of a thing.

When I was a kid, pre-internet, pre-camera, 'rumours' could be devastating, and were often wildly made up. Yet there was always this category of people who simple could not get through their head, that simply because someone hears something, it isn't therefore true.

This category of people still exists. And I think they'll be most hit by this.

>to enable the blind to "see"

Please watch this ad to enable 5 minutes of premium color vision!

> Regardless, I agree for now? Yes. But the future? I don't see it as blockable forever.

It's increasingly necessary not to allow guests to bring their devices into your house or establishment. Somebody should go into business doing courtesy phones, where you can switch your sim/esim at the door to a dumbphone owned by the business.

When it comes to smart glasses, if they're prescription you had better have spares or you're going to be blind.

Canada's censorship solutions are no solution; you can't stop people from doing things by cracking down on civil liberties, people will just ignore you and do it anyway. Then you're stuck chasing anonymity, now your entire society is totalitarian and everything is rooted. In order to fight the totalitarian surveillance and tracking instituted because you wouldn't tell some pervert to take his robot glasses off, the electorate makes MechaHitler your PM, and it's now in control of your surveillance system.

It would be very funny if Skynet took over because people elected it, like Hitler did.

It's not censorship to be in control of your own likeness. And having laws which are easy to call upon is part of justice being served. In the Quebec example, someone posting something about you is as easy as 'take that down' then 'police are called if you disobey the court', which is really how courts have always worked everywhere around the world.

The US has a crazier takedown regime, letting companies do this. At least in Canada it goes through a court, it's about your personal likeness, and you can contest it.