Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
If I see you in public wearing these I'll punch them off of your face personally. Not just because of their horrendous looks, but also because I value my privacy and don't really like people with camera's in them walking about and being able to take pictures everywhere in an instant. Not happening.

Oh yeah dud? Try with me..
I double dare u to punch me. I gonna make u my mujer u know i mean? Ain't the first time i make a varón my gurl u know what i mean?? If i wanna wear thiz and record you when i show u my fist closeup mode cause I'm free 2 do it and ill do it cause its a free country. I gonna record ppl 4 fun and upload it 2 internet so what? So what are you blabbering about privacy?
 
Last edited:
That's cute and everything but public life has no expectation of privacy. I photograph people without their consent all the time tbh and considering most people let the government spy on them indiscriminately I don't see the problem.

So governments are bad so it's OK for you to be bad. How grown up of you.
 
I'm ashamed to be a millennial. This is ridiculous.
Why are so many folks including the entire original article in their comments these days? We all have that conveniently available to us at the top of the thread; repeating it is redundant. Is the commenting system really that confusing?
[doublepost=1487637910][/doublepost]
If I see you in public wearing these I'll punch them off of your face personally. Not just because of their horrendous looks, but also because I value my privacy and don't really like people with camera's in them walking about and being able to take pictures everywhere in an instant. Not happening.
You choose to go out in public. Where other people can see you. And you'd commit assault and battery because you disapprove of someone's fashion choices? (You did suggest a punch to the face was warranted because of the way these glasses look.) Neat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: saudade
So governments are bad so it's OK for you to be bad. How grown up of you.

Congratulations on your excellent reading comprehension, but that's not what I said. I just don't get why people get so upset about their privacy when they are perfectly fine with everyone else watching them ;)
 
Congratulations on your excellent reading comprehension, but that's not what I said. I just don't get why people get so upset about their privacy when they are perfectly fine with everyone else watching them ;)

Where are you getting that? Why do you think "[people] are perfectly fine with everyone else watching them"?
 
Yep, we're the first generation to have goofy-as-hell clothing and odd cultural phenomena.

If anybody needs me, I'll be putting on my bellbottoms, hairspraying my mullet, and heading off to the local building with many computer cabinets and bespectacled children.
5/7
 
Congratulations on your excellent reading comprehension, but that's not what I said. I just don't get why people get so upset about their privacy when they are perfectly fine with everyone else watching them ;)
His reading comprehension is better than you think. You didn't say what you remember saying.
[doublepost=1487697083][/doublepost]
It's not about a belief, its about should have privacy.

I do agree that people should have privacy, but if you're in a public space, you were never entitled to the privacy that some people think they're entitled to.

While someone can't take your photo on the street and then run off and use your likeness in a marketing campaign without your consent, they're allowed to take your photo. They're just not allowed to use it for commercial purposes. None of this is new, but it's always been poorly understood and now that everyone is an amateur photographer, it's becoming a more widespread issue.
 
Last edited:
Spoken like a true industry insider?
Well, I've done video shoots at work (primarily do design and web development) and am well versed with all the tools used. I've seen vlogs before and recognize the gear we use.
 
His reading comprehension is better than you think. You didn't say what you remember saying.
[doublepost=1487697083][/doublepost]

I do agree that people should have privacy, but if you're in a public space, you were never entitled to the privacy that some people think they're entitled to.

While someone can't take your photo on the street and then run off and use your likeness in a marketing campaign without your consent, they're allowed to take your photo. They're just not allowed to use it for commercial purposes. None of this is new, but it's always been poorly understood and now that everyone is an amateur photographer, it's becoming a more widespread issue.
Even in a public space, people must be afforded privacy not to be filmed directly or indirectly.
 
Even in a public space, people must be afforded privacy not to be filmed directly or indirectly.

As someone who takes photos as part of what he does professionally, I agree with that as a matter of general decorum. It's rude to take photos and videos of people who don't want it. You're allowed to (if it's in a public space), but just because it's allowed doesn't mean you should.

It's clear that even in our social media obsessed world, it's still a social taboo to be recording people covertly. Otherwise, people who were sporting Google Glass pieces wouldn't have drawn such ridicule and be derided as glassholes.

It goes the other way too though. People need to be aware that they could end up on film anytime they step out in public and it's your responsibility to protect yourself if you feel the need to do so. There are lots of perfectly innocent scenarios in which you could end up on film that have nothing to do with anyone trying to invade your privacy.
 
As someone who takes photos as part of what he does professionally, I agree with that as a matter of general decorum. It's rude to take photos and videos of people who don't want it. You're allowed to (if it's in a public space), but just because it's allowed doesn't mean you should.

It's clear that even in our social media obsessed world, it's still a social taboo to be recording people covertly. Otherwise, people who were sporting Google Glass pieces wouldn't have drawn such ridicule and be derided as glassholes.

It goes the other way too though. People need to be aware that they could end up on film anytime they step out in public and it's your responsibility to protect yourself if you feel the need to do so. There are lots of perfectly innocent scenarios in which you could end up on film that have nothing to do with anyone trying to invade your privacy.
I also think that "recording people covertly" plays into this quite a bit, which I would say probably influenced the appearance of these glasses. Because unlike Glass, these make zero effort to NOT stand right the heck out. For "visible from space" values of "standing out."
 
I also think that "recording people covertly" plays into this quite a bit

It does, but I think there's definitely a rage trigger at seeing a camera for some people have that has nothing to do with the perception that they're being violated covertly. Ask anyone who does event photography. We get harassed and we rarely do anything that most rational people would consider suspicious.

The most aggressive person who's ever confronted me was a woman in a crowd of 300 people that I took a crowd shot of. I was actually the organizer of the event and she could be considered as my guest.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.