[Brian_K_White]

The whole expectation of privacy argument is so obtuse.

If I find you in public and start staring at you and following you everywhere without ever going away, including camping out at the door of every private space you enter and exit. You will absolutely have a problem with it. We even have a word for it and laws about it.

The fact that the barista saw you at the coffee shop and your roomate saw you at the library and the book store has an ordinary security camera are nothing remotely equivelant.

One is stalking, even harassment, and the others are not.

[throwburn202605]

Agreed.

Scale is what matters.

Being in public and being incidently recorded or photographed by a set of separate, independent recorders is substantially different than an all seeing panopticon, controlled one entity who can collate, analyse, track, trace through time (maybe years back).

It's not you who determines guilt. And surveillance is more likely to be used against you for minor asinine things (if only to justify its own existence), than used for you in major incidents it is claimed to be installed for.

[Ekaros]

With a one or two shots of facial recognition working your entire existence can be tracked from when you appeared on first camera to the last one. Even if at some points your face is not identified.

Now combine this to all other data like say payments and well even more identifying points are in the data... Local only video records is entirely different game than being tracked for your whole day...