What makes facial recognition so dangerous is that it's so trivial and so cheap to deploy. You literally walk into a supermarket and tills have facial recogniti

What makes facial recognition so dangerous is that it's so trivial and so cheap to deploy. You literally walk into a supermarket and tills have facial recognition built in to automatically bind your shopping to "you" even if you don't have an account or pay with cash. It's abused to hell basically and you will be facially recognized pretty much everywhere you go in public. It's definitely an "unethical" technology because of how it's generally used. DNA testing isn't, because the technology is far too expensive and time consuming to be used this way. The second supermarkets start scanning my DNA to give me special offers, I'll complain about it too. My point is, this sort of "well it could be used this way!" argument isn't helpful at all. Retina/fingerprint scanning could be used this way too, but it isn't - that doesn't make the argument against facial recognition invalid, or it any less unethical.