• danielfm123@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    45 minutes ago

    Years ago people discussed if having a mobile next to the body could be bad for health, specially brain, now we see doctors using smart glasses with wifi 5 and 5g mobile network.

  • Avicenna@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    There is no question that this violates doctor patient confidentiality and damages trust. Fuck no. Even if they fucking have to not take off their clothes NO.

  • melfie@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Yes, dipshits like that should be banned from the medical profession.

  • heartSagan5@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    22 hours ago

    That seems like a HIPAA violation because it’s unknown eyes and ears in the exam room.

  • Crozekiel@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 day ago

    It is really upsetting that we can’t get actually good “smart glasses”. Like, glasses that have a little screen projected on the lenses and can do searches and stuff for you on the fly, or display text like a script or something, or watch a video, or see your music playlist…

    Why does everyone trying to make “smart glasses” feel compelled to include a fucking hidden camera?? And now it’s even worse with the AI riddle surveillance state we are living in. I won’t even be a little surprised to find out that Meta’s pervert glasses are being co-opted by Flock to add even more cameras to their “safety” network…

  • cinoreus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    The confrontation, shared in a video that has circulated on Reddit, centres on a simple but uncomfortable question: should a doctor be wearing glasses with a built-in camera while examining a patient in an intimate clinical setting?

    I hate it when articles do this. Firstly, answer is NO. secondly there’s nothing uncomfortable about the question itself because answer is a NO, third there’s no need to frame a clear violation of privacy as a question. If it’s not acceptable to pull out a phone and start recording in that situation, then it’s clearly not acceptable to wear those glasses.

    • UnequalExchange@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      “Is genocide OK if after you sweep away all those no-good ‘Undesireables’ you get to build a seaside villa and resort AND you now get to pump oil out of the ground from where those peoples’ homes once were? …Some experts say YES! And we agree! Here’s why…”

      -articles like these

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      19 hours ago

      If the glasses were hipaa compliant, they could be used as a medical tool, but I would never trust Zuck’s glasses to be like that.

  • youmaynotknow@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    85
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    They need to be banned, agreed. But that doctor needs to have his medical license fully revoked, permanently.

      • Crozekiel@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Check that man’s hhd for sure

        I know this is nitpicky and I’m sorry but… “hdd” not “hhd”. But probably in 2026 its an ssd anyway.

        • Burninator05@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          …its an ssd anyway.

          It depends on how much video he has. HDDs arent cheap but SSDs are expensive and don’t add much in a data archiving scenerio.

          • Crozekiel@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 day ago

            Actually, we are probably both wrong and it’s the nand flash on his phone. The kind of tool bag buying meta pervert glasses probably isn’t actually a big techie…

  • ramjambamalam@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 day ago

    I can’t believe that image in the thumbnail came from official Meta marketing. I have to imagine that Jared the Subway guy didn’t make the cut because he didn’t look creepy enough.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    She should have slapped those glasses off his face. Legally speaking it should be fine to punch anyone wearing pervert glasses in the face.

  • 87Six@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 day ago

    Fucking mention that moron’s name in the headline. Pussy reporters.

    • 0x0@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Or actual journalism.
      If he’s convicted of something, then yes, he gets his name on the papers; otherwise he’s innocent until proven guilty.

    • UnequalExchange@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      24 hours ago

      innocemt until proven guilty. The only time they can reveal the person’s name aand face is if theyre convicted of something AND theyre an adult.

      Also a bonus if he does get convicted of this and his name and face gets revealed is that other people who recognize his name and face and who have ALSO been his victims can also then come forward and put additional charges on him. And who knows maybe he has so many victims itll be like a liife sentence when everyone finishes dumping more and more charges onto him.

      Humans have an a amazing ability to be idiotic so you cant always blame with malice what can be explained by idiocracy…but iif he is malicious? Ya throw the book at him. And more.

    • Tiger666@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 day ago

      Do you know what slander is?

      Do you know what habeous corpus is?

      Would you like to be arrested and not given the same rights and protections?

      Maybe you should get arrested by ICE and see what its like.

  • belochka@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    There are two parts to this:

    1. Ethics, a doctor would be expected to know better,
    2. Reality, where eventually such things will just stop being 100% percent visible, and thus will happen again and again with impunity.

    So, first, doctors shouldn’t do that, second, ban or not, this will be happening all around us, no exit.

    • 0x0@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      1 day ago

      Eventually people will just have to get used to the idea of not caring about/sexualizing nudity.

      • belochka@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Somehow people sharing your point of view in my experience are mostly men and mostly imagine it as lots of handsome young-looking people walking around in half-transparent elastic body suits in some future where everyone is “fixed” to be fit and look nice. And in that kind of sci-fi books somehow women are prevalent among characters, but the leading ones are men.

        You get the general idea, yes?

        I’m a very social awkward person, but honestly that worldview hints you should get out more. Again, I should follow my own advice, but.

        • 0x0@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          That’s a weird world view I don’t share, but feel free to convince yourself that i do if it makes you feel better.

      • Tiger666@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        So you just throw privacy out the window with the baby?

        Are you american?

        Do you know what the fourth amendment is, of course not?

        • 0x0@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 day ago

          Oh hi there keyboard warrior.
          No, none of those, but i wouldn’t expect you to understand reality.
          Have a nice day, bye.

      • AstralPath@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Walk outside completely naked right now then if its not such a big deal. Let’s see you put your money where your mouth is.

        • 0x0@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          In some countries you can.
          Thank you for missing the point.
          Bye