Is the claim that meta uses publicly posted videos as a source for ads? The meta glasses are irrelevant to that fact.

I’d be happy to join some kind of rage-off at metas general practices but my claim was specifically just about the glasses data

▲

ben_w 2 days ago | parent [-]

The database is literally Facebook, you upload a picture or video and there it is, on the database, which is Facebook itself, that's why it's called "Face" book: because it is a database of Faces named after an actual book of photos of faces.

The Meta glasses, like everything Meta does, is marketed as a tool for interacting with Meta's services. Including Facebook.

	▲	pj_mukh 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		“There has been no evidence that a database built off of meta ray-bans exists.” This was my only claim. Which remains true. Videos off of the glasses voluntarily posted on FB is no different than iPhone videos posted on FB so it has nothing to do with the glasses themselves. If your claim is “posting videos in FB is a bad idea”, I agree, I don’t do that but again, that has nothing to do with the glasses either. It doesn’t make posting easier or force me to opt-out of automatically posting or anything silly like that And you can’t do any “facial recognition” against Facebook either. I’m glad meta figured out that was a pointless bad idea.