3 ms·

> What innovation? This is a question that possibly can't be answered if it's illegal to experiment with it from the get-go. Off the top of my head, it could b

> What innovation? This is a question that possibly can't be answered if it's illegal to experiment with it from the get-go. Off the top of my head, it could be used for thought-provoking art installations; perhaps one that utilizes facial recognition to derive the viewer's emotions and let the procedural art change accordingly. > that's already mostly illegal tracking Yes, GDPR's a great step in the right direction. It's stopping a lot of the corporate surveillance. Right now the EU needs to keep an eye that their governments are also subjected to the same level of restrictions, which are currently not if its ends are for "national security" or similar reasons.

tastroder 7y ago
The art use case is a nice one I haven't considered. But that sounds like something that's easy to cover either in the definition of public spaces or a flat out exception like there no doubt will be for research. I fully concur w.r.t. applying the same restrictions to European governments, i.e. this sentence from the article: "These include the German government is planning to roll out facial recognition technology [...] after a successful trial in Berlin." The "successful" trial published an anonymized evaluation, results were horrid. It's quite amazing how split the political field must be here. In Germany that's also down to law enforcement exemptions from quite a few privacy laws, no "national security" pretense needed.