Norway Plans Temporary Ban on Smart Glasses

Norway is preparing legislation that would temporarily ban camera-equipped smart glasses in a range of public places, including parks, beaches, museums, shopping centers, schools, daycare centers, healthcare facilities, gyms and public events. Private use would still be allowed. The Guardian reports: Torgeir Micaelsen, Norway's minister of digital affairs, said he was worried that new, powerful technology is being introduced where people risk being photographed, filmed or audio-recorded without knowing it."

"We do not want a society where people worry about being recorded without their knowledge, photographed or filmed in places and situations where they are accustomed to not being monitored," he said.

Norway's Labour party, which heads a minority government, needs the support of other parties to pass the proposed ban. It said it planned to submit a bill "as soon as possible," while tasking an expert group with drawing up permanent regulations on the issue.

Here we go again

[kqs]

We had the same panic when (almost) all cellphones started coming with cameras. "What if people take pictures in restrooms?" And somehow we all survived.

Re:

[lucifuge31337]

Yes. We survived. Do you think society has fundamentally changed for the better due to it? Or has it fundamentally contributed to things to be worse overall?

Re:

[kqs]

Mixed, of course, but overall I think it has made things better. An easy example is filming police. Police are overall a benefit for society, but they have massive power and very little oversight, and historically have been "above the law" and behaved accordingly (not all police, not always, but it doesn't take much). Now that cameras are always available, some percentage of misbehavior is captured and shown publicly, which is the main way that such misbehavior is truly investigated and (occasionally) pu

Re:

[lucifuge31337]

I absolutely agree that's on the "better" side, but I'm not sure we're net positive on this one.

Always on police bodycams are the more useful tool

[drnb]

Actually always on police body cams are the more useful instrument. Civilian cell phones too often do not provide a full and accurate portrayal of events, missing earlier parts of the interaction. This has happened with body cams that can be turned off too, hence the "always on" caveat to ensure a complete portrayal of events.

Re:

[snowshovelboy]

Depends what side of the class divide you are on. Things are arguably worse for the folks who used to be the only ones recording people in public.

Re:

[Locke2005]

And smart glasses just make an already punchable face 100 times more punchable!

Re:Here we go again

[rambletamble]

What sort of argument is that? How could you possibly compare the holding up a mobile phone and using the camera in a restroom, with wearing unobtrusive glasses with a hidden camera?

There's a term for that misdirection you've attempted, is it straw man?

Re:

[PsychoSlashDot]

What sort of argument is that? How could you possibly compare the holding up a mobile phone and using the camera in a restroom, with wearing unobtrusive glasses with a hidden camera?

There's a term for that misdirection you've attempted, is it straw man?

You're correct and I lack the mod points to surface your insight.

These are effectively concealed or hidden cameras, which is not the same thing, and that's why the described panic is fictional.

That said, I do think this is interesting overall because it's a question of how human society changes based on technology. We have rudimentary technology that taps the optic nerve in experimental stages to help with some types of blindness. Sooner or later that sort of thing will probably become routine and non

Re:

[thegarbz]

And somehow we all survived.

Yes, and masturbated furiously to pictures of people in restrooms. It created new genres of porn for people's enjoyment, and created new ways to destroy people's lives.

You may have survived, presumably that's because no one thinks someone would masturbate to you.

Sidenote: a friend of mine has been shot, has a nice scar in her shoulder to prove it. She survived. Maybe we don't need laws against shooting people, after all everyone *I* know who has been shot survived.

Re:

[Locke2005]

I just wish that somebody, somewhere, would masturbate to pictures of me... sigh.

Re:

[Pascoea]

You may have survived, presumably that's because no one thinks someone would masturbate to you.

Ouch. Solid burn, and on point. Well played.

Re:

[Locke2005]

The difference is that when someone points a cellphone lens at you, you know they are recording you, and that the best response is to silently turn around and walk away. Surreptitious recording is done without consent or the victim's knowledge. That being said, it might be a good idea to record consent before sex, and for girls at frat parties to wear smart glasses to prove there was no consent.

Re:

[Ogive17]

I had to tell a co-worker in his mid-20s to put his phone down while pissing in the office bathroom because it was rude.

There just is no common sense. What is so damn important to scroll through for the minute you're standing there pissing in the urinal?

The problem is the more covert nature ...

[drnb]

We had the same panic when (almost) all cellphones started coming with cameras.

Cellphone cameras are used in a more overt manner. The new issue is the more covert nature of the smart glasses.

Strange line to draw

[The-Ixian]

Seems like a head-mounted camera is fine under this ban, though, as long as it isn't also eyewear?

Re:Strange line to draw

[test321]

I don't understand why you think the line is strange. The line is "being photographed, filmed or audio-recorded without knowing it". The sole purpose of the smartglasses is to record people, most likely without them knowing it, therefore a ban is pretty much the obvious thing to do. As a reminder, spy cameras, aren't allowed, including in Norway. A head-mounted camera is obvious, people are aware they might be filmed, so no reason to ban them. Only using such cameras without consent isn't allowed.

Re:

[Gravis Zero]

Seems like a head-mounted camera is fine under this ban, though, as long as it isn't also covert?

FTFY. The issue at hand is that it's a hidden camera.

Subtitles

[TwistedGreen]

A møøse once bit my sister...

Government Spying

[Cpt_Kirks]

The government doesn't want to lose it's monopoly on photographing and videoing people in public.

Re:

[luther349]

they vote you down but its true whers the flock camera ban.

The mini cassette recorder called...

[Zak3056]

Norway's minister of digital affairs, said he was worried that new, powerful technology is being introduced where people risk being... audio-recorded without knowing it."

So, welcome to (checks notes) 1967 [wikipedia.org], I guess?

Re:

[Locke2005]

Audio recording without consent is already illegal under the wiretap laws in most states. The weird thing is that video recording without consent isn't!

What a joke

[bloggerhater]

Standing up against modern "glassholes" is typical political low-hanging fruit.

Norway is just as prolific an abuser of government contracts with surveillance companies intended to bypass local privacy laws and ordinances, as any other government.

They just don't want the competition.

Indeed

[nospam007]

Use your phone in your breast pocket like normal creeps.
Better resolution too.

Re:

[thegarbz]

That's not covert. We know fully well that anyone putting their phone in their breast pocket with the cameras visible is a pervert, because only perverts keep their phone in their breast pocket with the cameras visible.

Re:

[Locke2005]

They get real upset when your phone lens is sticking out of your breast pocket in strip clubs. I don't know why... (Honestly, I wasn't recording, I just didn't feel like sitting on my phone.)