Facebook doesn't seem to mind that facial recognition glasses would endanger women

[turbinetree]

Arwa Mahdawi
Sat 27 Feb 2021 09.00 EST

Facebook is considering building facial recognition capabilities into its smart glasses – which would make life easy for stalkers

?width=620&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=f3c3ee678b746fa573bbe3468d372f95

Tech gets even more in your Face-book
Picture this: you’re sitting in a bar and a creepy stranger keeps trying to talk to you. You ignore them. The next day you get a text from that stranger. Not only do they know your phone number, they know where you live; in fact, they know everything about you. They were wearing Facebook smart glasses, you see. The moment they looked in your direction the glasses identified you via facial recognition technology.

This, it seems, is precisely the sort of Black Mirror-esque future Facebook wants. The tech company (and serial privacy invader) has teamed up with Ray-Ban to develop a range of smart glasses. While it’s not clear exactly what these devices will do yet, Buzzfeed has reported that Facebook is considering building facial recognition capabilities into them. During an internal meeting on Thursday, Andrew Bosworth, Facebook’s vice-president of augmented and virtual reality, told employees that Facebook was currently assessing the legal issues surrounding this.

Legal issues are one thing, but what about the very obvious ethical and privacy issues? Would you be able to mark your face as “unsearchable?”, one employee asked. And what about the potential for “real-world harm” and “stalkers”?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/27/facebook-facial-recognition-glasses-would-endanger-women

And note there are other articles in this posting

[niyad]

1. That is very disturbing. Would you consider cross-posting this in Women's Rights And Issues?

Thanks in advance.

[turbinetree]

2. Your welcome....................

Done........

[multigraincracker]

4. Are there rights to privacy in the Constitution?

This is from findlaw dot com.

Is There a 'Right to Privacy' Amendment?

Created by FindLaw's team of legal writers and editors | Last updated September 30, 2019

The right to privacy embodies the belief that a person’s private information should be free from public scrutiny and that we have a right to be left alone. As technology evolves, more and more of our personal information is in the hands of third parties. From e-commerce and email to smartphones and social media, advances in technology will continue to challenge our legal system and personal expectations of privacy.

It may come as a surprise that the Constitution of the United States does not specifically protect your right to privacy. In fact, state and federal laws can limit some individual privacy rights when there is a compelling government interest to do so. Protecting your rights starts with becoming familiar with the constitutional amendments, federal statutes and state laws designed to keep your private information private.

Constitutional Privacy Rights

Even though the right to privacy is not specifically mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, for cases such as Roe V. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court has found that several Amendments imply these rights:

First Amendment: Provides the freedom to choose any kind of religious belief and to keep that choice private.
Third Amendment: Protects the zone of privacy of the home.
Fourth Amendment: Protects the right of privacy against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government.
Fifth Amendment: Provides for the right against self-incrimination, which justifies the protection of private information.
Ninth Amendment: This amendment is interpreted to justify a broad reading the Bill of Rights to protect your fundamental right to privacy in ways not provided for in the first eight amendments.
Fourteenth Amendment: Prohibits states from making laws that infringe upon the personal autonomy protections provided for in the first thirteen amendments. Prior to the Fourteenth Amendment, a state could make laws that violated freedom of speech, religion, etc.
As technology evolves, so does the due process and rules governing the collection and use of private information. In 2012, the Supreme Court Justices made the unanimous decision reviewing the constitutionality of warrantless searches of cell phones, and the Court held that the personal information contained in cell phones and other handheld devices is just as worthy of constitutional protection as more traditional types of information and records