Privacy

The SB 1130 bill is an amendment to sections of the Penal Code and titled, Invasion of Privacy: Wearable Recording Devices. It addresses the many, ongoing privacy concerns around wearables like the Ray-Ban Meta. It amends the law on using wearable recording devices to eavesdrop or record confidential communications, and adds: It would enable an up to $1,500 fine and a possible prison sentence for those breaking the rule. It also makes it a legal requirement to include a light or sound indicator to show a recording is taking place, and makes it illegal to make or sell products that disable the

Max Miller for Engadget With all this talk of targeted advertising, some argue that privacy advocates are tilting at windmills. After all, they ask, what's so bad about more relevant ads? If I have to see ads online regardless, isn't it better for them to show me things I might actually want? While that's an understandable line of thought, the dangers are more to do with what happens when your data is combined from multiple sources and used in combination with data from billions of other people. These knock-on effects extend beyond any individual. Targeted ads aren't about helpfully homing in

Putting the privacy concerns on the back burner for a moment, the technology does have legitimate law-enforcement uses.

The three lawsuits — Sigwalt v. Amazon (PDF), Fennessy v. Google (PDF) and Trevino v. Google (PDF) — all make the claim that these security companies are using AI face recognition technology in ways that violate privacy rights. Slightly older lawsuits, including Ortega v. Amazon, are also ongoing.  Specifically, this “familiar-face” tech can grab and analyze face photos from people who haven’t consented, including delivery workers, neighbors walking their dogs, strangers on the street and anyone else the doorbell camera may take a photo of. Security cameras have been automatically taking and s