Norway Eyes Partial Ban of Smart Glasses

Commenters discussed Norway's proposal to partially ban smart glasses and focused on whether glasses are meaningfully different from existing cameras. Many argued the core problem is covert recording: unlike phones, glasses can record while appearing to do nothing, so commenters said they threaten the "illusion of privacy" in places like gyms, schools, and beaches. Several suggested targeted responses rather than blanket prohibition: banning the behavior of secret recording, requiring visible tells (audible clicks or bright LEDs), geofencing sensitive locations, and using existing legal precedents such as camera-shutter sounds or two-party consent laws. Others welcomed measures aimed at preventing normalization of pervasive recording in everyday spaces.

Counterarguments emphasized practicality and rights: some commenters said banning possession of generic devices would unfairly penalize innocent users and would be circumvented by stealthy, DIY tech or future smart contacts. Others warned that focusing on glasses is short-sighted because surveillance via privately owned cameras, ALPRs, and AI already erodes privacy; banning glasses would be cosmetic unless broader surveillance issues are addressed. A few noted enforcement and open‑source software complications, while some dismissed panic and advocated incremental legal protections to deter casual snooping rather than outlawing the hardware outright.