Snapchat Spectacles Now Available to Purchase Online for $130

saudade

macrumors 6502
Sep 8, 2015
321
182
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:

mkeeley

macrumors 6502
Sep 18, 2007
451
850
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.
 

Piggie

macrumors G3
Feb 23, 2010
8,286
2,471

CarlJ

macrumors 68040
Feb 23, 2004
3,018
4,581
San Diego, CA, USA
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

Alonso Quijano

macrumors 6502
Jul 17, 2013
289
173
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 ;)
 

WinstonRumfoord

macrumors 6502
Mar 27, 2014
452
1,116
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"?
 

imronburgundy

macrumors regular
Nov 1, 2013
237
270
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
 

smirking

macrumors 68020
Aug 31, 2003
2,175
1,585
Silicon Valley
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:

smacrumon

macrumors 68030
Jan 15, 2016
2,693
3,934
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.
 

smirking

macrumors 68020
Aug 31, 2003
2,175
1,585
Silicon Valley
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.
 

GeneralChang

macrumors 65832
Dec 2, 2013
1,501
1,167
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."
 

smirking

macrumors 68020
Aug 31, 2003
2,175
1,585
Silicon Valley
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.