Author: Vedant Patil

  • Big Brother is Watching: How AI Glasses have caused a privacy backlash across India

    Big Brother is Watching: How AI Glasses have caused a privacy backlash across India

    During a trans-rights protest in Delhi, Shabnam, who identifies as trans-feminine, was secretly recorded by an Instagram content creator who specialises in ragebait content. The video, which went viral on social media, caused a huge avalanche of transphobic hate and was reposted several times on various right-wing accounts before being taken down. The tool that enabled this video to exist was Meta AI’s Ray-Ban Meta glasses, a device increasingly used by people on both sides of the fence. This device, which looks very much like a pair of sunglasses, lets the user record their surroundings from their point of view, removing the strain of holding a camera and enabling greater flexibility in filming. The glasses themselves have a very subtle sign of whether the camera is recording or not: a small LED light blinking on the frame, which is often not noticed. There has been a rise in popularity of videos that employ these smart glasses on social media; however, with their usage, there are also many questions being raised over their legality both in India and abroad.

    The usage of these glasses in public spaces raises many concerns over privacy and consent. In the case of the trans-rights protest, there are many individuals present who may not have come out to their friends and family, and their visibility in these “POV” videos may deeply affect their personal and professional lives.

    There is also a legislative black hole; the current Digital Personal Data Protection Act did not take into account technologies such as these. This makes taking action against unwanted recordings significantly harder, as social media sites are reluctant to take down videos, particularly Instagram and Facebook, and the lack of a legal precedent makes it difficult for any legal action to be taken. This issue isn’t just limited to India; it extends to the rest of the world as well. In Europe, smart glasses are facing possible bans, and various restaurants and concert venues in the United Kingdom are prohibiting them, as they are interpreted to be an invasion of the patron’s privacy.

    The public is not the only one making use of this technology; recently, the Delhi Police came under the radar for their use of Ray-Ban Meta glasses during the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protests at Jantar Mantar. Assistant Deputy Commissioner of police Sandeep Lamba, who was previously seen slapping a female protester, was seen wearing these glasses to record the protests. In an event clouded by controversy, the use of technology made for content creators being used for government surveillance raises questions about the end goal for Meta and how they want to see their products being used across the world. In temples and cinema halls across India, people are being checked on whether they are wearing these smart glasses or not. Large temples often have rules against recording inside the premises, and cinema halls have anti-piracy laws, both of which are threatened by an unassuming pair of glasses.

    Outside India, New York has enforced a blanket ban on smart glasses throughout their court system. The glasses have also been banned in SAT examination centres, while South Korea mirrored this move by enforcing the same ban in their country’s College Scholastic Ability Test (CSAT).

    Meanwhile in India, there is barely any legislation that stands up against the use of these glasses.

    The glasses were advertised to place privacy as their core value of operations, but reports have revealed that the video footage from the glasses was being routed to human contractors in Kenya to help train their artificial intelligence algorithms.

    Videos contained unknowingly captured intimate moments of people going to the toilet, changing clothes, etc. While Meta has stated that the usage of human contractors is well within their privacy policy, this has also raised questions about where exactly one draws the line in using this data, and whether privacy is actually being upheld in these technologies.

    Meta is not alone in commercialising this technology. Bangalore’s Sarvam AI has come up with its very own AI-powered smart glasses, “Sarvam Kaze”, at the India AI Impact Summit 2026 in New Delhi, where the glasses were showcased with Prime Minister Narendra Modi. These glasses were said to be trained on Sarvam’s own AI models as opposed to foreign AI models, and were trained on Indian languages, making it tailor-made for the Indian population. Kaze includes the same built-in cameras and microphones, allowing it to replicate the video capabilities of the Ray-Ban Meta glasses. The glasses were announced to be released in May 2026, although there haven’t been any updates since. Due to their made-in-India approach, Kaze was positioned to be a more affordable homegrown product, possibly making it more accessible to the general public.

    The biggest concerns that the country faces currently are not the glasses themselves, but rather the lack of legislation on how they are being used in public spaces.

    In today’s day and age, data privacy is one of the biggest issues plaguing the common public, and with the advent of unregulated technologies that allow for widespread surveillance, from both the government and private companies, questions are being raised on whether who benefits from the sales of these glasses, the people buying and using them, or the ones who are profiting from the data within these glasses.

    Image credits: CCadio, CC BY 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons

     

     

  • A World Cup Under Scrutiny

    A World Cup Under Scrutiny

    The latest edition of the FIFA World Cup is being watched by billions of people across the globe not only for the football being played, but also for the various controversies surrounding the entirety of the tournament, with issues plaguing the event before it has even started. The tournament this year, being hosted across three countries: the United States, Mexico, and Canada, is the second time the World Cup is being hosted across multiple nations; the last time being in 2002, hosted across South Korea and Japan. However, current geopolitical tensions and conflicts have caused a plethora of problems for FIFA, the players, and the staff involved in the tournament.

    The broader political landscape has caused a lot of geopolitical clashes with countries that are participating in the World Cup. Iran had its participation under doubt due to its current relationship with the United States amidst their recent conflicts. The refusal from FIFA to relocate all matches with Iran to Mexico did not help in ensuring participation. President Trump’s comment on how it would not be “appropriate” for the Iranian national team to attend the World Cup “for their own health and safety” caused the Iranian government to call out the United States to lose its hosting rights. The Iranian players, who have recently completed a match against New Zealand, were forced to head back to their Mexico base immediately rather than being allowed to stay in the US.  

    There has been a string of visa and immigration issues plaguing the players, the staff, and the fans alike. The travel ban enacted by the Trump administration has affected fans from various countries and restricted official staff from entering the United States. According to the Iranian government, around 15 Iranian officials have been refused entry to the United States, and various Iraqi and Iranian players were subjected to invasive searches at the border. Visa bonds were made necessary for fans from Algeria, Cape Verde, Côte d’Ivoire, Senegal, and Tunisia, where they were required to deposit $15,000 in order to gain a visitor visa, a requirement that was later dropped by the US government, as long as the fans had a World Cup ticket.

    A case that garnered attention was that of the Somalian referee, Omar Artan, who was denied entry into the United States “due to vetting concerns”, which resulted in his denial gaining widespread media attention, resulting in him receiving a hero’s welcome back in Mogadishu. The White House has also not ruled out ICE raids during World Cup games, as the head of the White House World Cup Task Force said, “If you are a potential threat, you’re not going to get approved,” leading to speculation on possible ICE raids in the near future.

    FIFA also received criticism as it introduced dynamic pricing for the first time in a World Cup, which led to the prices of the tickets surging far beyond what the average fan could afford. Tickets for the final at MetLife Stadium hit around $11,000 each, leading to criticism from US lawmakers and fan groups. FIFA has also reportedly profited from every ticket that was ever resold, with FIFA taking a 15% fee from both the seller and the buyer, with the majority of the sellers being people who have boycotted the tournament, leading FIFA to benefit from the outrage from its own controversial policies.​

    The newest addition to the rules has been that of “hydration breaks”, a mandatory three-minute break in each half, which were created as a respite from the growing humidity and heat that is prevalent in the United States, Mexico, and Canada around this time of the year. While this move was welcomed by some players, questions were raised about whether these hydration breaks were required in climate-controlled indoor stadiums. FIFA also used these breaks to insert more commercials and generate revenue within those three minutes. It has also raised concerns about breaking the match’s momentum, an important factor in football that is played at such a high level.

    FIFA also faced difficulties in gaining broadcasters for India, as it eventually sought a $100 million bid, but received only an offer of $20 million from Disney Star, India’s largest media company. The lack of a broadcasting deal leading up to the week before the World Cup led to speculation about whether or not India would actually receive the World Cup for its audience, with concerns over the difference in time zones leading to a lack of a proper audience. However, just nine days before the World Cup, the Zee Media Group struck a last-minute $40 million deal with FIFA, finally ending the standoff over who would broadcast the World Cup in the country. However, there have been complaints from viewers about the lack of 4K in the broadcast, predatory subscription tactics, and subpar streaming quality.

    This edition of the World Cup has been under tremendous media scrutiny and attention, and deservedly so, as many aspects of the handling of the World Cup have seen no transparency and a lack of accountability from both FIFA and the host country of the United States. While the games have been thrilling and entertaining, the story behind the scenes is much more filled with problems, problems that have a chance of arising and ruining the games that are being played. Fans across the globe hope that these issues will be resolved and that the World Cup will function in a smooth and civilized manner, something that is worthy of the title of the “World’s Greatest Game”.