131
Florida woman goes to Crunch Fitness. Then she notices a man in Meta glasses: ‘This is my protection’ (www.newsbreak.com)
submitted 2 weeks ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
45 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/51905809

Starts to feel like a wave of this kind of BS is hitting the world.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 17 points 2 weeks ago (10 children)

The gym already has security cameras, the fuck does he mean the glasses are for his "protection"?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [+] -16 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

    I'd imagine that in that job—if you're not a perfectly fit young dude or a woman—there's a lot of accusations of "being a creep."

    Imagine you're the guy working that job and someone complains that there's a mess in the women's locker room. What do you do?

    You ask a woman if there's anyone else in there, maybe shout that you're coming in to clean it up, etc. Then you walk into the women's locker room and someone—anyone—sees a man walking into the women's locker room. BAM! Instant creep status.

    Are Meta's glasses the answer? Fuck no! But I understand the "I need protection from accusations" argument.

    What's the alternative? Cameras in the locker room? Hidden cameras?

    The guy probably thought that the glasses were big, ugly, and obvious (because they are) so no one could complain that they didn't know they could be recorded in that guy's presence.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

    What about a simple camera watching the floor with automatic deletion of data after 48 hours? Why should fucking META of all companies and the garbage manager have unlimited access to this material instead of being stored in a way that doesn't fuck all clients over?

    Why do you have such insecurites that need a fucking all encompassing nanny in form of an abusive GM?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    I assume he doesn't actually have access to the business cameras because he's just an employee of a much larger organization.

    Example: I work for a large organization and I do not have access to any cameras anywhere. I wouldn't even know how to request it!

    Also, the recordings need to last a lot longer than 48h. A month makes more sense.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    How long recordings are stored is a point of discussion - i say for everything involving the police, when taking their overblown budgets into account, 48-72 hours are plenty.

    And if this fuckwit does not have access, that's how it should be, and that's the same reason why he shouldn't have any private recordings too (if we ignore that Meta is using that data for whatever they want)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago* (1 child)

    That's way too short. Because if the point is to protect yourself from accusations, you need to be able to go back in time to whatever the company/courts would say is a reasonable amount of time (and match that policy).

    1. A week after the event someone reports something.
    2. Corporate investigates and doesn't tell the employee for a week or two. Maybe even longer.
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago

    If the police walks in to secure evidence, i am sure that you can implement a mechanism to freeze the current state of the storage. If it is public knowledge that businesses are not allowed by law to store surveillance data longer than a week, this will also be reflected in peoples behavior.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    Imagine you’re the guy working

    Idk, An employee entering whatever gender toilets to clean it isn't gonna be seen as creepy imho, unless they're being actively creepy, like by recording videos with creepers' glasses. I mean, menployees clean women's toilet all the time and womenployees also clean men toilets.

    I can't believe many if any business is currently paying gender-specific cleaners for gendered toilets. An employee would just grab that yellow rolling cleaning cart and deal with the thing and move on. It's a scenario that happens literally everyday everywhere unless the place doesn't clean their toilets.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    The difference here is that your typical janitorial staff will look like janitorial staff. This guy is just a generic manager (a uniform change when cleaning would be a good idea though).

    The other issue is that most businesses don't have locker rooms; they're just bathrooms.

    A bathroom has stalls where you can't see them whereas a locker room will often have naked or nearly naked people just walking about.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 weeks ago

    You don't go into an opposite gender bathroom to clean without propping the door open and putting a sign up stating that it's being cleaned. You don't want to be in a stall cleaning something up, while someone else walks in and starts changing without noticing you in there.

    Heck, even if it's a same gender, they often do that so they can take care of the whole job quickly without getting interrupted.

    Recording while walking around in the bathroom/locker room is never and has never been the answer to any problem that has ever existed.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent