immortalclarareborn @immortalclarareborn - Tumblr Blog

CVG #175, June ‘96 - Preview of the ‘SEGA World London’ Theme Park.

hi sorry i need all non-sonic followers to know for a moment that SEGA has made the decision to publish a game with a name that will ruin every 8 year old’s search history

thevideogameartarchive

‘Golden Axe III’ - the lesser known SEGA Mega Drive sequel. This originally only came out in Japan, but has since been in many repackages of those games. This is the cover artwork.

segacity

Dee Jay ‘Street Fighter: The Movie’ SEGA Saturn Support us on Patreon

sonichedgeblog

A concept render for ‘Sonic Adventure’. This was using lower poly assets, when it might have been looked at for SEGA Saturn development. Support us on Patreon

oldgamemags

SEGA Master Force #5, November 1993 - A writeup about the books for ‘Sonic The Hedgehog’.

nintendroid

Golden Axe II for Sega Genesis.

wcwit

[X]

acquired-stardust

Vampire Savior: The Lord of Vampire Sega Saturn 1998

segacity

Giant Monsters ‘Astal’ SEGA Saturn

thoughtful-blonde

knucklecurve

filthy, filthy read

justsomeguycore

i think everyone in the whole world forgot that mystery doesn’t have to equal crime

justsomeguycore

sometimes it’s just like. what happent ?

vulturevanity

I think we need to kill the sentiment that people lose their right to personhood once they do something bad enough

vulturevanity

I don't know who needs to hear this but you need to stop dehumanising people even if those people are "abusers" or "creeps" because you need to understand that you are not immune to doing something equally as bad

Abusers and creeps are not some species of especially heinous animal or alien or monster wearing the face of a human. They're people. And you NEED to drill it into your head that they are people because you NEED to remember that people are capable of doingn heinous shit. And you are a person. And your loved ones are people.

By emotionally classifying people who have done heinous things as subhuman filth incapable of thinking and feeling and acting just like you and me, and by using that emotional dehumanization as a reason to deny those people any compassion or support on a systemic level, you risk becoming blind to abuse/violence perpetrated by someone close to you or even yourself. Because if "abusers don't deserve rights", then you won't ever want to admit or accept that you or a loved one is perpetrating abuse, and that makes stopping the abuse or preventing further abuse much harder. This is how you end up excuaing abusive behaviour on the grounds that, since you don't see someone as a disgusting subhuman pile of garbage therefore they can't possibly be An Abuser, Trademark

vulturevanity

And here'a the even harder pill to swallow: since the world isn't split into "abusers" and "good people", in the same way you or someone you love can inflict abuse/violence on others, the people who HAVE inflicted abuse/violence on others can, in fact, change and become better people

There is no bottomless chasm of moral uncleanliness that someone can run off and fall into and get stuck in forever. People can do better. Yes, even those people. You HAVE to accept this. Otherwise not only is there no motivation for anyone to try and do better (which is when people become stuck in a cycle of violence and abuse they don't want to escape), but your idea of a perfect justice system doesn't look any different from Literal Christian Hell. And I HOPE you understand that Literal Christian Hell is, to put it very lightly, not a good justice system.

klapollo

I heavily recommend getting very good at spotting Meta glasses. Like I'm talking so good all you need is a glance. Otherwise, I would go about public life bearing in mind that more and more people are wearing expensive camera glasses that can record you without you realizing.

klapollo

Learn how to identify smart glasses through visual cues, behavioral patterns, and recording indicators. Handle privacy concerns with this pr

Ready or not, the smart glasses future is upon us.

With smart glasses, there are concerns around being recorded. Fortunately, you can watch for indicator lights and certain movements as a way

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.

Shop every style. Every color. Prices from $299 to $499. Browse Ray-Ban Meta and Oakley Meta AI glasses and sunglasses to find your pair.

klapollo

The creator of Nearby Glasses made the app after reading 404 Media's coverage of how people are using Meta's Ray-Bans smartglasses to film p

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 app comes as companies such as Meta continue to add AI-powered features to their glasses. Earlier this month The New York Times reported Meta was working on adding facial recognition to its smart glasses. “Name Tag,” as the feature is called, would let smart glasses wearers identify people and get information about them from Meta's AI assistant, the report said.

ozarkthedog

I am against Meta and everything they stand for but I’m curious if peoples’ opinions would change about someone wearing them as a disability aid?

viridian-dagger

Not necessarily, because Meta has military contracts (source 1, source 2, source 3), is testing surveillance tech on their own employees and their customers (source 4, source 5), and there are at least two class action lawsuits against them for privacy violations (source 6, source 7, source 8). There is also some sketchy stuff about workers being forced to review material, which may or may not be used without the customer's permission, that is sensitive, graphic, and/or pornographic (source 9).

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.

Disabled people deserve assistive technology AND privacy rights, and Meta is not the solution.

bo-oui

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

immortalclarareborn