Meta makes AI glasses slightly less creepy with limit on nonconsensual recording

Meanwhile, there’s a proposed nationwide class action lawsuit advancing in the US that accuses Meta of continually lying about privacy risks in the marketing of its AI glasses. Meta has yet to file a response in that litigation, but in its statements and marketing campaigns, the tech giant continues to insist the glasses are designed with privacy in mind. As one example of how this ropes in unwitting people who aren’t aware of the privacy risks of nearby glasses, the complaint cited one video where a user set down his Meta glasses on his nightstand, which then captured video of his wife undressing. “The video was sent to people halfway around the world to view and annotate in order to train AI—all without the woman’s knowledge that the video of her had been captured in the first place,” the lawsuit said. Users suing are hoping to force Meta to pay out damages, including potentially punitive damages, to every person in the US who bought smart glasses under the allegedly false premise that Meta cared about user privacy. “Despite their actual knowledge of the human review pipeline and the inherent safety and privacy risks associated with such sharing of data, Defendants have continued to market the Glasses using the same ‘designed for privacy’ representations,” the lawsuit said. They’ve also asked the court to force Meta to change its messaging. That would include blocking Meta from continuing to advertise glasses as privacy-protecting, which users alleged would ensure that Meta’s future customers aren’t exposed to “unreasonable risks of dignitary harm, emotional distress, stalking, extortion, identity theft, and reputational injury.” In a loss, Meta could also be required to improve its public awareness campaigns and fully explain the privacy risks of its smart glasses. If Meta’s alleged deception goes unchecked, users suing have claimed that the company will continue treating smart-glasses wearers as a lucrative new source of data, without meaningfully protecting them or the public from the most significant privacy risks. “The consumer data is extremely valuable to Meta,” the lawsuit said. “New data input is central to AI production, but as AI labs exhaust publicly available data, proprietary sources of new data can cost hundreds of millions of dollars. But instead, Meta can farm personal data from unknowing consumers who have already purchased the Products—turning consumers themselves into commodities without them ever knowing it.”