Why? As they say: no expectation of privacy in the public space, amirite?

They'll be fine. As the police often say, if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide.

I feel like this is a submarine ad for the glasses by Meta.

Clearly, all Big Tech needs to do is to create some version of "Flock-powered" smart glasses and, all of a sudden, U.S. police will become Meta's biggest cheerleaders here.

“Cops apprehensive about impending Orwellian state”

The panopticon is only supposed to look out, not in.

Why did they do something wrong?

aren't these the same people telling us that AI-powered cameras on every street corner will make everything better for everyone? What do they have to fear from people seeing what they do? Why do the police fight so hard to ensure everyone else is constantly being observed but also to ensure that they are never being observed? Ostensibly, police act in our name and to our benefit. Why are we kept in the dark as to what they do?

How long until a random person wearing Raybans in one of those states that banned recording within X-feet of an officer gets shot?

don't they know?

>“When people talk about just one of these, privacy or safety, they’re prioritizing the wrong thing, and what we have to prioritize as a country is compromise,” Langley said during a recent interview with Fox News. “How do we have our safety, and how do we balance privacy?”

I do love the irony and schedenfruede, but this isnt about recording in public areas, its about recording the inside of prisons and ICE concentration camps. That is generally not something you can legally record and is analogous to a flock camera inside your office or house, which most people would agree is bad