If I look at you and recognize you I don't feel that I have violated your rights, whether I use cybernetic augmentation or not.
(No; if anything, it'd be a job-creation program at that point. ;) )
Anyways, where's the limit? Is it just megacorps at 1000000x the scale that can't do it? Can a tiny company do it at 10x the scale? Can I personally do it at 1x the scale?
2. This Regulation does not apply to the processing of personal data: ... (c) by a natural person in the course of a purely personal or household activity
Once something is done commercially, it inevitably scales in frequency and continuity.
Most of human civilization has been a pattern of small communities where everyone knew everyone. The privacy granted implicitly by anonymity is relatively new (and, I'd argue, whether it's a net benefit for society is a largely open question... A lot of harm is done by people who quietly go off the rails because nobody knows who they are).
I find that hard to believe. Teotihuacan (first example that came to mind) already had 100,000+ inhabitants around 1 to 500 CE, and according to Wikipedia it was only the sixth largest city.
Regardless, I don't see why it's particularly important what cities were like during "most of human civilization" when discussing electronic suirveilance.
There's some sense to that approach; people don't want to trust that the only thing keeping Google from doing the cross-correlation is their own corporate ethics. I ultimately think trying to ban the intake in that way is bailing the Titanic, but I think I see where they're coming from.
I have tens of thousands of photos in my google account, and thousands with my wife. Right now, google can show me photos of me and my wife. Is the idea that I'm supposed to ask for some kind of consent from my wife before I'm allowed to ask google to show me photos of me and my wife, but I can go through my account and just select photos of me and my wife?