What if I run my own cameras, my own local models, and my own analysis? All from the privacy of my own home... Is that okay?
What if I recruit a few friends around my town to do the same, and we share data and findings? Is that also fine?
What if I pay a bunch of people I don't know to collect this data for me, but do all the analysis myself?
Where do you draw the line? Being able to concretely define a line here is something I've seen privacy proponents be utterly incapable of doing. Yet it's important to do so, because on one end of the spectrum is a set of protected liberties, and on the other is authoritarian dystopia. If you can't define some point at which freedom stops being freedom, you leave the door wide open to the kind of bullshit arguments we see any time "privacy in public" comes up: 100% feels, and 0% logic.
Because it seems clear to me that if an individual was to surveil and build up a dossier on any random stranger as much as an entity like Facebook or Google does that this would be considered stalking.
I've never been able to quite figure out why incorporating and doing it to basically everyone some how makes it legal. I think the secret ingredient is money but I'm not exactly sure how that works.
But this is incorrect. Flock is just incidentally watching you. Assuming they're being honest about their retention policies (which I would definitely that take with a grain of salt, but I'm making the assumption to steelman here), if no one searches for you, you're forgotten from their system after 30 days.
Stalking is targeted. Passively observing and making that information easy to search for a limited period of time is not quite the same thing, and the distinction has important implications
I don't disagree that quantity has a quality of it's own in some circumstances, but that's not an inherent property of "quantity".