Dont buy from Amazon.
How hard can it be
How hard can it be
Now, IDK how I feel about this doorbell. But it's also his property; am I to say he can't have an AI-enhanced doorbell on his house? But that doorbell also likely uploads my image, and data about me, to centralized servers somewhere, largely without my consent. (Aside from perhaps my implied consent of entering his property, but even then, I don't think I noticed it the first time I visited. Now I'm aware of it, since he told me, and has demoed the tech to me in various ways.)
(IDK if this particular thing is an Amazon product or not, and in fact, I highly suspect it isn't, but I want to pose it as an example of just because I might voluntarily choose to not use the tech, that choice only goes so far, and there are still privacy implications for me despite it.)
Even if it weren't his property, if you were in the public aren't people legally allowed to take photos of you and upload it wherever they want? If it weren't legal there wouldn't be paparazzi I would think.
No, not in the US, depending on exactly what you're doing. Taking pictures of people in public is legal, but there are restrictions on what you can do with them.
> If it weren't legal there wouldn't be paparazzi I would think.
The law is different, and less restrictive, when it comes to certain classes of people such as celebrities and politicians.
This is probably one of the areas where the law's not quite caught up to reality.
50 years ago, the probable life story of a picture of you taken by someone in public was that it would be developed, maybe reproduced once or twice, possibly sold to a magazine or displayed somewhere, and then it would spend the next half century in a drawer somewhere.
In 2019, the life story of a picture of you taken by someone with an Android phone is that it is uploaded to Google's servers, where it's analyzed, tagged via facial recognition, combined with location data, associated with your profile, and used to build a better understanding of who you are, who you know, and who you associate with, so Google can package that data and use it to target better ads at you (and Google's one of the "better" players in this space, in that the worst they're likely to do is advertise to you).
I don't think it's quite caught up to people that the average amount of processing being applied to any given picture of them in 2019 is about on par with what the CIA would've dedicated to a picture of the Russian ambassador back in 1969.
But boycotting Amazon because of it is selling facial recognition API? Most people will call it nonsense.