Great Googly Moogly It's All Gone To Shit

Like, okay, so in Holiday Machello body-swaps with Daniel and then goes out and buys lunch for a bunch of random people in a diner. With Daniel's credit card. Now, I mean, maybe you can just call up the credit card company and say, "I didn't authorize this purchase," but if it was a large purchase, and it seems it probably was, the diner will probably challenge the chargeback, and they almost certainly have Daniel on camera. So like, how is this handled? Does Daniel just have to eat the cost? Budgeting for his credit card bill while cursing Machello for stealing his body and $500 worth of milkshakes? Or does the SGC have like. Insurance. For that sort of thing. Given the nature of the Goa'uld it's not unreasonable. $10 per paycheck and if your body gets hijacked by some kind of alien malevolence and spends all your money the Air Force will just quietly settle the bill in the event you survive and get your body back.

if you follow this link or enter the code ALLIGATOR, all adoptables in my kofi shop will be 50% off until july 1st!

Here are some basic primers. If someone is wearing what look like Meta glasses, they usually have a small circular camera in the outer corners of the lenses, like the one on your phone.

I would also regularly check their own product pages so you're on top of what the models look like. They tend to have larger frames, but come in a variety of shapes and colors.

A new hobbyist developed app warns if people nearby may be wearing smart glasses, such as Meta’s Ray-Ban glasses, which stalkers and harassers have repeatedly used to film people without their knowledge or consent. The app scans for smart glasses’ distinctive Bluetooth signatures and sends a push alert if it detects a potential pair of glasses in the local area.

The American Foundation for the Blind has said that "The Ray-Ban Meta glasses are an accessibility tool only by coincidence. That makes them more affordable and, in many ways, unaware of the needs of users with reduced vision" although they do have seemingly positive views on Meta Glasses as a whole. (source 10). It also seems like their marketing push as accessibility devices began last year (source 11).

But to add even more into the nonsense, Meta is now toying around with adding a "limit" to the functionality of their glasses unless their users pay for more access (source 12). AND, as stated above, Meta has officially added facial recognition code in their glasses and only admitted it after being called out, which is basically the death of privacy as we know it (source 13, source 14, source 15). And oh look another lawsuit because of it (source 16) THAT THEY LOST (source 17)!

Long story short: I don't begrudge someone using them as a disability aid overall, but ultimately both their privacy and other people's privacy are being disregarded by Meta and that is not and should not be acceptable by any means.

I understand there is no ethical consumption under capitalism but there is a level of personal responsibility someone has to take when using them if they truly truly need them, such as opting out of sharing information, not filming strangers without permission, not posting footage of strangers online, opting out of facial recognition if possible, etc.