A woman's discomfort with a doctor wearing smart glasses during a consultation has sparked debate over privacy and the use of camera-equipped technology in healthcare settings.
its invading privacy. a Patient can use hidden camera,often times doctors/ other employee makes condescending comments of patients while they are under anesthesia about the patients.
Because if a doctor puts up a hidden camera only the doctor (and anyone they might personally share the footage with) can see it. With those glasses everything goes through Meta’s servers and we don’t know who has access to the footage.
So is say the scope of the invasion of privacy is the difference.
Exactly. There is zero way for those glasses to remain HIPAA-compliant, because everything you do is uploaded to Meta’s servers.
I remember a bunch of DateLine exposeés about doctors who used hidden cameras to record patients.
What does it matter if that camera was sold by Facebook?
How about we accept neither as being appropriate.
That’s my point: Neither are and yet this doctor wasn’t arrested over this like if he had a different hidden camera
its invading privacy. a Patient can use hidden camera,often times doctors/ other employee makes condescending comments of patients while they are under anesthesia about the patients.
Because if a doctor puts up a hidden camera only the doctor (and anyone they might personally share the footage with) can see it. With those glasses everything goes through Meta’s servers and we don’t know who has access to the footage.
So is say the scope of the invasion of privacy is the difference.
Every slopper should just be killed. They are already p-zombie puppet terminals for some silicon valley billionaire, so its only biologically murder.