You may have seen the widespread backlash over the recent popularity of smartglasses, such as those from Meta, which feature tiny cameras that can take still photos and videos of people without their knowledge, and project a heads-up display of information onto the lenses visible only to the wearer. They have already been banned by many theatres, restaurants and pubs and have now been banned from courts in England and Wales too. Sleazy owners have been quick to exploit their potential for creating sexualised content of women in the street, who they approach, chat up and secretly film. This has in some cases led to unsuspecting victims being named in the comments and even their addresses shared. In one case a user tried to blackmail the victim when she asked him to remove a video of her that he had posted on social media. No wonder they have already been dubbed ‘pervert glasses’, and the pressure group Everyone Hates Elon has been putting up billboard ads around London showing them being worn by Jeffrey Epstein with the tagline ‘Glasses for people who don’t do consent’. From the point of view of Meta, these smartglasses are essentially mass data collection and AI training devices. Which is fine for surveillance-state fans who want to share every aspect of their lives with Mark Zuckerberg and his tech billionaire buddies (including going to the toilet and other intimate moments, according to the poor Kenyans paid little over a dollar an hour to watch all this footage for Meta) but the people being unknowingly filmed by these glasses as they go about their day have not consented to being part of the program. Some defenders of the new technology point to how useful they are for blind and partially sighted people and claim that the