Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | NekkoDroid's commentslogin

> my understanding is that the light is resistant to simply taping over it, and recording can't happen in this case.

I remember when the glasses came out and this was tested: if you tape it over before starting the recording it refuses, but if you tape it after starting it will happily continue to record. I don't know if they changed it, but that is how it use to be.


Still works like that.

The glasses have in the same hole a led light and a small light sensor (similar to the ones used in monitors to set up auto-brightness).

On start recording the glasses check if the light sensor is above a certain threshold, if it is then it starts recording and turns on the led light.

So, if you start recording and then cover the hole, it keeps recording because the check only happens on start. Even if they wanted to fix this by making the light sensor do a constant check it wouldn't work as the privacy led light indicator is triggering the same sensor, which is a terrible design choice.

And to disable the light is as easy as using a small drill bit and breaking either the light sensor module or the led light. They can detect if it's been tampered with and they put a giant notice saying the privacy light is not working but they still let you record anyways lol.


> Even if they wanted to fix this by making the light sensor do a constant check it wouldn't work as the privacy led light indicator is triggering the same sensor,

The privacy led light could just turn off for a couple of milliseconds (or less) while the light sensor performs its check.


Or, just buy any of the many pages of hidden cam devices that exist on Amazon, which also aren't limited to only 3 minute videos.

> The privacy led light could just turn off for a couple of milliseconds (or less) while the light sensor performs its check.

True but then that would mean a blinking led light instead of a constant turned on led light, which is a different product requirement from what it currently does.


Parent's point was that you can likely do it at a high enough frequency that blinking would be imperceivable by the human eye.

I don't think the cheap light sensor would have a fast enough polling rate for that. And if you increase the polling rate I will just put a phosphorescent sticker that absorbs and reflects the light coming out of the led with a good enough afterglow that the photoresistor will still pick up as some value and still allow for recording.

Also what is the implication here? If you cover the hole accidentally for one microsecond do you invalidate the whole recording? Does it need to be covered for more than one second, two seconds, ten?

All of that for what? So that in 2 years we can have chinese off-brand clones for 50 dollars that offer no security mechanisms anyways?

We all need to understand this is the new normal, being able to be recorded anywhere anytime. Just like you can get punched in the street anywhere anytime. We only act on things that can be proven to have caused you prejudice in court.


We successfully shamed people out of wearing Google glasses. We also mostly have social norms about when recording with your smart phone is ok. We don't need to accept defeat about these glasses just yet

I feel like it was pretty common to have the red light blinking on and off every second when recording. In that time where it is off during that cycle it would make sense to preform the sensor checks.

Sounds like it would be pretty easy to fake out with a custom circuit too, for those that are willing to go beyond ‘whoops how did that happen’ levels.

This is somewhat handled by the max recording time of 3 minutes.

> Also "run0" [2], another alternative that comes from the Linux/Systemd camp, using "polkit" and is similar to "systemd-run".

It literally is `systemd-run`, just with slightly different defaults (multi-call binary). Unlike `sudo` and `doas` it inherits almost nothing from where it gets launched, which can be very unexpected if you simply treat it as a drop-in replacement for the 2.


> Has OpenAI laid out the specific definition of what an AGI is for this case?

Yes and it's actually hilarious: a system that can perform most economically valuable work better than humans, or specifically when the AI generates $100 billion in profits.


While I in theory would love this idea, attaching arbitrary metadata to something and expecting a manager to somewhat "nicely" figure out some text to display for it is just not really scalable unless you limit what those fields can be set to. Mainly cuz just displaying keywords isn't exactly user friendly and having anything longer will also need to get translated for all/most/some languages they manager supports.

> Genuine question: what if the recovery asks for a 2nd factor that's e.g. the device which you lost? Is that common?

Instagram does something similar. If you have no logged in device and you reset your password, good luck getting in, cuz it wants you to log in a device "it recognizes" else it won't let you log in.


Google does it too. You log in with your password and it says "please press the number 35 on your phone"

> • 2 means “the error output” • > means “send it to” • &1 means “wherever the normal output is currently going” (the & just means “I’m referring to a pipe, not a file named 1”)

If you want it with the correct terminology:

2 means "file descriptor 2", > means "assign the previous mentioned to the following", &2 means "file descriptor 1" (and not file named "1")


My guess is lack of morals

> Dutch people always complain that in Germany they can't use their phones to pay.

I pay p much everywhere with my phone using the Sparkasse apps NFC payment. Maybe it's a north/south divide (assuming the dutch are mostly visiting the north, as I am in the south).


> There's a page or two our there that detail the issues, which I'm too lazy to link here.

https://manjarno.pages.dev/ (hasn't been updated yet)


They also have to be intended primarily to be used in very wet environments and washable/rinseable. So unless someone found Atlantis they will have a relatively difficult time using that as an out.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: