| macintosh.world | Log In | Register |
Today | News | Books | Recipes
Notes | QuickTake | Wiki | Browse
Maps | Reference | Reddit | YouTube
Chat | Games | About
Norway considers ban on camera-enabled wearable 'pervert glasses'
worldnews | by /u/Kymmieuwu | 115 comments | 2026-09-02T17:03:53+00:00 Central
Comments
| /u/Imwrongyourewrong Those glases make him look like Woody Allen |
| /u/TyrellCorpWorker So like a pervert then |
| /u/Detective-Crashmore- I guess that's a nice word for a pedophile? |
| /u/FastAsFxxk All pedophiles are perverts, maybe not all perverts are pedos tho, yknow |
| /u/GodzillaUK It's true. Some just like butt stuff with other, consenting adults. |
| /u/parisianraven Hardly anyone considers someone to be a "pervert" for that |
| /u/newfor_2026 it's still illegal in many places. |
| /u/Far-Hovercraft9471 You haven't been to conservative shitholes, have you? |
| /u/AIBotnmbr99 Ethical ones exist, so you're wrong. People can't control their sexuality, they can control their behavior. You woudknt judge any group solely on the criminals, and ethical ones aren't outting themselves usually because they'll be attacked. |
| /u/weedils Incestual pedophile* |
| /u/GotSomeUpdogOnUrFace He looks like the kind of pervert that Woody Allen calls a pervert |
| /u/LuciusLuscinia They'd be a neat invention if humans were a little less like humans. |
| /u/Dismal-Revolution731 Yeah, ngl, I'm a bit miffed at all of the perverts fucking it up for the rest of us. These are pretty helpful for those of us who use them as a form of augmented memory (voice recordings, visual notes, etc) |
| /u/Vulture2k I am really bad with faces and names, so in a ideal world some scfi camera AR glasses that recognizes people could improve my life so much, but of course neither people nor companies can be trusted with that power or necessary data. |
| /u/Brigty Leaning on technology in that way will only diminish the skill you have. Besides, knowing that the other person uses such technology to even recognize you would count more negatively than simply getting their name wrong imo. EDIT: It was not clear we were talking about a diagnosis, that would be different than just being, to a varyingly degree, bad at something. That said, shouldn't an upstanding society be able accept that some people are bad with faces? Personally, I don't see how I would be offended by someone not recognizing me. Might be confusing, sure, but not offensive. |
| /u/The_Grungeican some people have dyscalulia. name-face recognition problems can be a part of it. as it's a kind of disorder, like dyslexia, practice won't always get a person over it. for me, the invention of modern GPS devices let me be MUCH more functional that i could be without them. i basically couldn't do my job without one. |
| /u/tzigi Leaning on technology in that way will only diminish the skill you have. I don't care at all for such glasses (not planning on buying them, hate the privacy issues etc) but I wanted to chime in on this point: there's no diminishing something when it's already at 0. Prosopagnosia is a real world condition - I don't recognise anybody by their face (it's not a vision acuity problem - all my tests in that regard are fully ok, I don't wear any glasses etc - it's a specifically face processing/remembering problem) so such technology wouldn't diminish any skills in this regard as I have none. I can recognise people I am somewhat familiar with by their gait, clothing style, smell and other distinguishing features but not their faces. |
| /u/Sixshaman Unfortunately, it can be a genetic condition, you can't just have a "skill" for it. See the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tcj-KIMp1VQ |
| /u/AdministrativeLeg14 Take it a step further; I imagine this could be incredibly powerful for blind people who can now have their visual environment described to them. I suppose that doesn't necessarily require face recognition, but it would be awfully helpful. I've been pondering the notion that pervert glasses should be presumptively illegal but that a disability for whichn they're a profound help would itself automatically count as a licence, as it were. (Perhaps temporarily revocable specifically for abuse of the technology. If a blind person abuses his disability to film upskirt videos or whatever to share with other perverts, he'll just have to do without the glasses.) |
| /u/DeLousedInTheHotBox And in reality people would just use that technology to harass women, like imagine if dude could find out a woman's name by just looking at her. |
| /u/TheAero1221 Yea, when I was a kid, I really wanted these to exist. Before I considered all the implications, like the perv shit or mass surveillance. |
| /u/evemeatay Even if it weren't for pervs I don't want other people to be constantly recording me regardless of their intent. |
| /u/Upstairs-Version-400 You have a phone man. It isn't necessary it's just weird. People should be able to tell when they are being recorded. It shouldn't be hidden. |
| /u/busburnbooty Used mine on vacation to film clips me kayaking in fjords, mountain bike riding, and just asking meta to translate signage because I have poor eye sight. |
| /u/Far-Hovercraft9471 Humans ruined humanity |
| /u/varro-reatinus You humans sure are a contentious people! |
| /u/MiamiViceGuy Yes. I could use this as an assistance device to deal with the symptoms of epilepsy and the medication I take for it. A computer that sees what I see and is able to recall and remind me of things would be a godsend. There's an area of my brain that doesn't work, this would fix that, like a wheelchair for legs or regular glasses for eyes. I have a scar in my hippocampus which is the area of the brain that organizes memories. A device like this with software specifically designed for my needs could change my life. |
| /u/big_galoote Not a bad idea, all things considered. These are horrendous for privacy. |
| /u/Puzzleheaded_Eye6770 Yup. I couldn't quite figure out why I hated these so much, but this is it. I cringe when someone I know posts a video from their glasses. |
| /u/Total_Adept Reminds me of google glass back in the day and calling them glass-holes |
| /u/markyymark13 Its interesting how some ten years ago Google Glass died after so much public scrutiny. Now ten years later, these Meta glasses, go pros, etc. glasses are everywhere, just a walking panopticon. |
| /u/PlaysForDays These glasses may be common where you live but they're not some ubiquitous device everywhere |
| /u/chaosfire235 Google glass also suffered from being more expensive, way more dorky looking, and having limited features as well. Not saying Meta glasses are the iPad to Google Glass' Newton, but they're less rudimentary. It's also why they're selling more to the count of millions to Google Glass' tens of thousands. |
| /u/zoobrix I honestly don't believe the sales figures for META glasses. Either they're puffing up the numbers or the vast majority that buy them screw around with them for a day or two, realize they're pointless, look awkward and nothing they do is worth recording, and back in the box they go. Where I live is the exact kind of place people have the money to buy needless stuff like this, and I just never see them. Maybe one time, but I feel like I would notice them more if people were ever actually wearing them, they stick out like a sore thumb. META is happy to knowingly bait children into a social media addiction, fudging the sales numbers on a product category they desperately want to catch on would be one of the less shitty things they've done. |
| /u/Lissica I mean most of the meta ones just look like normal glasses. I have a pair of the original Facebook ray bans that I use for music on my walks, and most people don't question them until I wear them indoors or draw attention myself. |
| /u/Muppetude But at least with Google glass, everyone knew there was a possibility you were being filmed because people wearing them looked like discount cyborgs. |
| /u/sabotourAssociate I have never seen a living soul wear them, same as the meta's yet. |
| /u/Muppetude The Google Glasses looked ridiculous, so it makes sense why you never saw them. I only saw a handful of people use them before they were discontinued. The Meta glasses are way harder to spot. They look like identical to regular glasses, and we've likely seen at least several without realizing they were Meta. |
| /u/SummerAndTinklesBFF My brother in law has them. They are ugly as shit. But also he wore ugly as shit nerd glasses beforehand. So not much has changed. He still uses his phone to record videos and take pictures. I honestly have no idea why he has them |
| /u/Neon_Divided I think people, rightfully so, don't like to be recorded in public. Recording is ubiquitous now and people record you in public and then they put you on the internet for the whole world to see and you have no idea. Or maybe you do. But I think it's perfectly natural for people, while they don't have an expectation of privacy while in public, to be upset that they are constantly being recorded by strangers and then having that video available for the world to see. |
| /u/Puzzleheaded_Eye6770 It's not even just about perverts. It's just lack a privacy. I don't care that you have a tiny little green recording light. It's creepy that people can just walk around with glasses and record shit and most people won't even notice. |
| /u/Xsiah People have also found ways to cover the little light |
| /u/National-Charity-435 meta thinks they have the software that can detect obstruction of the privacy indicator |
| /u/youregonnalovemynuts Riiiight. I'm sure they'll invest heavily in making sure of this, LOL. |
| /u/spukhafteNahewirkung Meta also thought that spending 80 billion dollars on virtual reality with legless avatars that looked like Miis was a good idea. |
| /u/WrenReverie Will never forget Meta clowns saying in that interview: "Sorry VR can't do legs right now." MFers in VRChat doing back flips and break dancing with full motion capture technology. I swear Meta destroyed the bustling VR industry. So many cool things were being made before he made the "metaverse" an obnoxious joke while their product was basically a mobile phone strapped to your face. |
| /u/ZumboPrime They absolutely do. It doesn't work, but they have it. |
| /u/Brock_Lobstweiler It's like the software on e-scooters that is supposed to detect when they're being ridden on the sidewalk. Only works part of the time and when it does work...nothing happens. |
| /u/SIGNALMEYOURWARPLANS They put just enough effort into it to try and shift blame from themselves to the individual perverts. |
| /u/Jose_Canseco_Jr the latest dan toomey video shows a guy breaking the light (tho not the lens nor the sensor) with a drill bit, and covering it up with epoxy so nobody's the wiser - all for $100 and done in his NJ garage |
| /u/chemastiko People can literally drill the green light indicator and just cover it up... |
| /u/ColinStyles You know you can buy button cameras on Amazon for a decade plus, right? Actual creeps and perverts have been able to do this trivially for far longer than these glasses have existed. |
| /u/Turbulent_Lunch4548 But that was considered spy shit and people who do that will be seen as weirdo's. I think you are missing that them being glasses is an attempt to normalize them. |
| /u/cansofgrease You can spot the perv glasses pretty easily. Button cameras zero chance and they're way cheaper. |
| /u/Turbulent_Lunch4548 Right, so the glasses are normalizing this behaviour while the buttons aren't. |
| /u/Kakkoister That's something you go out of your way to do. Your chances of encountering someone doing that are very tiny. These glasses aren't specifically just for spying, they are general use tech too, which means a lot of average folk will simply have them on, drastically increasing how often you're being recorded and potentially having your face/body/voice given to AI training or passed around data brokers. The surveillance state is already bad enough, why would we want to make it several times worse? We should be fighting this kind of stuff as much as we can. |
| /u/NewPhoneWhoDys Those didn't send the data directly to a company with a history a data manipulation and sale. |
| /u/Beneficial-Rip6624 I work in construction and these glasses are a godsend for me. Hands free phone, pictures and videos easily accessible, and they work for PPE. They are great for pre and post construction pictures. They are great for documenting issues on the job site. I get the concern, and I try and not wear them in most situations. The backlash just seems to be absurd, especially when you have these tiny hidden cameras that have been readily available for more than a decade. |
| /u/racksy Actual creeps and perverts have been able to do this trivially... and now they're creepy gross in glasses. |
| /u/Sequil Well that ship sailed a long time ago. But the important part is that people should be able to be aware who is recording them. |
| /u/goingfullretard-orig That ship was 2nd in line... |
| /u/Puzzleheaded_Eye6770 I think the first ship was pulling the second |
| /u/Ryuko_the_red The issue is the moment it's illegal to record in public the government becomes extremely selective in who they punish for recording in public (news, filming you trying to hold your local political party accountable) now are going to be punished severely and with major bias. |
| /u/kaligreen916 Norway may be different but in the US there is no expectation of privacy in public meaning taking photos in public is not and can not be a crime in the United States. Not sure why you would even want that anyway... |
| /u/Beneficial-Rip6624 Have I got some news for you! |
| /u/Fish_Mongreler Cool, you can no longer record police or criminal activity, no doorbell cameras, no recording your family at the beach in case a random gets into the background. Accidently record someone while trying to film your dog? Jail |
| /u/Rotund-Pear2604 Nah it's ruined by Meta harvesting your data so they can build image and video generation models on par with Chinese AI. Gotta wonder why they'd want to hasten the advancement of such a tool. Hint: It's not because they want you and I to be able to make meme clips of random bs. Anyway that's literally the only reason Meta are pushing their pervert glasses now. Meta needs a niche in the AI sector and they failed in the generalized AI sector because investment is being diverted into Anthropic and OpenAI, eastern AI is light years ahead in image and video generation, Meta sees an opportunity to do the same in the west because owning the ability to create convincing fake content benefits the political class. See Trump posting deep fakes on twitter for evidence. |
| /u/who_even_reads_this This is the real value of these glasses, such a shame that they have been used in shitty ways by others. |
| /u/Chief_Mischief Could this be resolved by removing video recording capabilities? I could see AR glasses helping with translation, transcription, navigation, etc for people with disabilities. Not the Zucc glasses, but i can see potential to do a lot of good for a lot of people with similar functionality. |
| /u/Xsiah You can't really have one without the other. You are recording video and sending it to a server that processes it and responds with the translation/transcription/etc data. You could ostensibly prevent the service from saving that data in the user's own files, but it would still be given for free to Google to do with as they please. |
| /u/Jiminy_Cricket12 we have been sacrificing privacy for convenience for a long time. I feel like it won't be long until there is nearly nothing "private" left. at least when it comes to tech devices. |
| /u/Chief_Mischief Hm, I hadn't considered that. I see that you could use Google translate offline after downloading language packs, but that workaround still requires local storage and processing to provide that service. Maybe this is wishful thinking, but some future technological breakthrough that can circumvent the recording/storing while providing the aforementioned services would be really interesting re: revisiting this topic. It's a shame that tech companies have such a dismissive approach to privacy. |
| /u/Flameancer Oh it will probably get there but right now we just don't have the processing power, storage density, and power density in the form factor that would make it possible (at least in consumer space, maybe a government lab). I think Apple was going to do something similar but they have the idea of making your phone the processing unit rather than sending it to the cloud and honestly as someone interested in an AR like interface that's not a bad compromise. |
| /u/mekamoari It's like the most super obvious solution and I didn't even know/expect them not to be linked to a mobile device tbh |
| /u/SadZealot It isn't dismissive of privacy, it's actively, intentionally exploited for profit |
| /u/Blacklite_01 It's bad enough with AI cams on every street corner. |
| /u/JamesinaLake I am visually impaired (legally blind in one /50% left in the other ).due to an auto immune disease .. I don't make use of them but they have become quite popular in the community for some. I think many folks aren't aware of that. The perverts are obviously a problem , but I think an outright ban would do a lot of harm to the blind /low vision community. |
| /u/Responsible-Tree-875 Yes, they should be prescribed perhaps |
| /u/junglebunglerumble Problem is companies won't bother making them if they can only sell them to a tiny portion of the population, wouldn't really be worth the R&D costs unless they jack up the prices enormously to offset the lost sales |
| /u/morningsaystoidleon Exactly. Look at the price of any assistive technology. |
| /u/IamDa5id Phones with cameras too? |
| /u/Available_Finger_513 I feel like you could put still a small hidden camera anywhere on you and accomplish the same thing |
| /u/PhucYiu Like one from say a smartphone that almost everyone has. I actually worked on these for a couple years at Meta and on my first day I told my boss these things seemed like their only use was for spies and stalkers. But also you could literally just have the phone sticking out of a shirt pocket recording all the time like a poor mans body cam and nobody would notice. I don't think these things are really any worse than the smart phone cameras we all carry on us all the time already. |
| /u/fleemfleemfleemfleem I don't think these things are really any worse than the smart phone cameras we all carry on us all the time already. People are responding to the cameras being made to look like something else (glasses). There's an expectation that if a cell phone camera is pointed at you you might be recorded. You don't typically expect glasses to record yet. The fact that it is made to resemble something ordinarily innocuous is why people are bothered by them. |
| /u/zabby39103 We have had way more effective hidden cameras for ages, decades, for shirt pockets, bags, etc. The reason the glasses are getting play are because it's obvious and creepy when someone stares. They actually suck as a hidden recording device. |
| /u/EmpressClaraB on my first day I told my boss these things seemed like their only use was for spies and stalkers. Do you just have literally zero imagination? |
| /u/flavored_icecream only use was for spies and stalkers As a cyclist I've long thought of getting some sort of camera sunglasses to help with identifying idiots in traffic (loads of them around here) - similar to dashcams on cars. Sure the camera could be placed on a handlebar as well, but then it would be directed only to the front and often times the danger for cyclists comes from the side. Although not really interested in some Meta glasses - more along something that overwrites the SD card or stores video to phone via bluetooth. |
| /u/Lil_Frog_Builder Exactly. It's not just about creeps; it's the total normalization of zero consent in public spaces. We already have enough surveillance cameras everywhere. |
| /u/thortgot We already have zero consent in public places. |
| /u/No_Ask_5032 When I complained about this exact thing with regard to phones, all of the internet kept telling me that I'm an idiot. But now suddenly it's an issue cause the camera is attached to a different device? - |
| /u/Amazing_Giraffe_7464 Filming in public is protected by the first amendment in the states and in many other country's laws. There is no expectation of privacy in a public setting. |
| /u/BubbleMoth With advances in technology, I think it's fair to expect laws to advance as well. |
| /u/Available_Finger_513 There is nothing preventing a person from whipping out their phone and recording you in public right now. It is completely legal and does not require consent. |
| /u/Meta_P There is something that prevents that from happening now: social norms. Someone "whipping out their phone and recording you" is seen as an asshole. They're likely to get told off, yelled at, or could even start a fight. Wearing glasses that can record automatically just hides the shitty behavior, normalizes it, and shields the asshole from repercussions. That's the difference. |
| /u/zabby39103 I know when someone is staring at me way easier than if someone is secretly filming from like a hidden camera in a bag. The reason these glasses are in the news aren't because it's an effective hidden camera, it's because it's not an effective hidden camera. We've had WAY more effective hidden cameras for AGES. And if you want to ban hidden cameras broadly, you're going to hurt a lot more than perverts. Investigative journalists for one. |
| /u/Amoral_Abe I think that's actually changed. The age of social media has led to lots of people whipping out their phones to photograph and record things. It's become very normalized. Specifically Instagram for photos and TikTok and Youtube for videos (I think TikTok has played a much greater role in normalizing taking videos of random stuff as youtube sort of leaned more towards the curated long form content..... until TikTok popularized shorts) |
| /u/RabidPlaty It's a lot easier to pretend you aren't filming with your phone, the glasses light up which is a clear sign someone is recording |
| /u/flammable-liquid Depends where you are from. I would be pretty upset if my country (USA) banned these before banning other forms of mass surveillance systems. In the states you do not have a right to privacy in public spaces. It has been challenged multiple times. Regulating these are not a bad idea though. Do we have a competent enough Government to actually have a way for these to go through some kind of approval? Some sort of testing to show the light can not be tampered with and still be usable. Or some minimum for the brightness of the led. |
| /u/WorstCPANA I don't really get the hate except it's meta....What's the difference between always having a camera in your hand vs on your head? Why shouldn't we call phones pervert phones? What's the difference between these glasses and a GoPro? Why aren't those called pervert blocks? I think there's plenty of great things you can do with hands free filming. The fact that there are some perverts (and what a branding by politicians to hit the emotional nerve), shouldn't mean we ban them. I am all for private entities banning them from their grounds, I go to festivals and there were a couple people with them at my favorite one this year, and the public was outspoken about it and we expect they will be banned on the grounds next year. |
| /u/sailorbrendan What's the difference between these glasses and a GoPro? Why aren't those called pervert blocks? I think if you walked around the city, or the beach, or into a bathroom with a gopro on your head people would probably react to it. |
| /u/sckuzzle Source: I have a gopro mounted to my helmet that I'm in the city with pretty much every day. |
| /u/taez555 As a pervert, even I think these things should be banned. |
| /u/9persona These creeps are giving perverts a bad name! |
| /u/External_Relative231 You just need to accessorize |
| /u/taez555 Hey, that's my hat!!! |
| /u/bongwatervegan Are the beards made from taco corp trimmed pubes? |
| /u/notBackgroundtree The exact video I was thinking of |
| /u/SigFloyd There's honest perverts, and then there's *those* people. |
| /u/iusethisatw0rk Self awareness is the key |
| /u/LukeDies They don't represent us. |
| /u/Lazy_perv Pervert here who also agrees |
| /u/gimmebanter We should just ban zuckerberg entirely while we're at it |
| /u/NGTTwo Norwegian prisons are too good for him. How 'bout an Iraqi latrine instead? |
| /u/Consistent-Tie962 Thanks. Not one good inventions. All stolen ideas that perpetuate addiction and they call themselves tech company. |
| /u/thegreatsalvio I hate that these glasses are used by creeps, and what's worse they are ruining tools like this for the actually visually impaired people... |