Your point is moot.

For the people by the people or did you forget?

It is definitely not going to work on any cop. There are still cops who are working in countries where privacy laws exist.

Why the fuck would it need to be public? Especially in a country like the US where most of the annual reports of companies aren't public where people can actually benefit form.

If you work for a company that company is responsible for the actions you take while working there. If you discriminate somebody in the library it is your library which is being targeted and then they will target you as well.

At least that's now it generally works in the world, variations can exist depending on the area you live in.

No they don't need to know who is working where. The public just needs to know where the money goes through. Annual reports of a lot more companies should be public.

You don't need to know who works at the library, you need to know the financial statements of the company together with the base on which the salary is based on.

It always baffles me when I try to find annual reports of American companies and they are just not made public unless they are public. But for things like non-profits, or government owned companies it is especially important as well. Sadly it is easy to get a non-profit in the US, so people abuse that. Becoming a CPA in the US is also very easy compared to at least NL.

Privacy doesn't exist in the US unless we are talking about companies.

Privacy is the word you are looking for.

O wait ... the US doesn't know privacy for everything but companies

I agree with that the abusive cops and ice is insane in the US, and it should be stopped. I also believe that the US is a corrupt nation in nearly every place of the government and surrounding instances.

But a question surround this, what if the US wasn't corrupt and the judges would actually follow the law (juries wouldn't be able to exist for most cases) and hypothetical if the US had privacy laws for everything besides businesses wouldn't this be the same punishable offence that would protect citizens?

In GDPR countries (among others) nobody is allowed to do something like this with face recognition because the law works for everybody. (Some people are trying to destroy this in some countries, though).

At the same time, if the government is allowed to use facial recognition and other anti-privacy measures to identify people where there is no ground to, then why shouldn't the people be able to do that?

Edit: I am not from the US and my look on life and trias political situations is different than what the fuck is happening in the US

As I wrote, the UK does not have the AI Act. This is also a case where EU GDPR and UK GDPR diverge.

Finally, I never claimed it's automatically illegal.

Yeah, and some of it is even true.

Most of it, in my experience. I do not know why this community is so committed to disinformation.

I know that because I do a lot of street photography and there is no law in the UK forbidding photography of people in public spaces,

I didn't write there was one. It sounds like you "know" that photography is "protected" because you need that to be true.

it’s quite easy for you to Google this

Indeed. For anyone who's not good at googling things, I recommend the UK ICO.

but I can’t provide you with a law condoning it as that’s not how it works.

That's true. You can't because you are wrong. You should know that your take on the GDPR is nonsense. It sounds like you violate it on a habitual basis.

Again show me in GDPR where it expressly forbids marching a face to a public dataset.

What do you mean "again"?

The GDPR forbids this in, of course, Article 6 and, more particularly, Article 9, but also gives exceptions.

The police yes, but he is speaking about a convicted criminal that want revenge when he get out of jail. Or even without getting out of jail, sending some of his accomplices to do the job.

What are they so afraid of?

The drug lord or mafia boss that sends killers to eliminate their families ?

You're doing nothing to fix it.

You seem to want to me prove that a law doesn’t exist where it’s much easier for you to show me a law doesn’t exist.

You can read this House of Commons debate on the topic Here

Police officers have the discretion to ask people not to take photographs for public safety or security reasons, but the taking of photographs in a public place is not subject to any rule or statute. There are no legal restrictions on photography in a public place, and there is no presumption of privacy for individuals in a public place

Or you can read This debate from the House of Lords.

The taking of photographs in a public place is not subject to any rules or statute. There are no legal restrictions on photography in a public place … and the Home Secretary … expressed our desire to ensure that people are free and able to take photographs in public places

Seems pretty simple really. Although I will concede that processing or personal identifiable information, even if done ok device, would likely be a breach of GDPR.

As for your assertion that I habitually break GDPR, yeah sure in this hypothetical scenario, but thankfully as a software engineer we have a team that handles this for us.

The plebs and the regime never have the same rights, in any country
FR is definitely used in GDPR countries.
For police it's so- called 'tightly regulated'.
For private use forbidden but 'there are exeptions'

Well yeah it is better to regulate it but that should include that you aren't allowed to use the data from it to track people etc.
We already have protrait right in the GDPR so it is already hard to use.

Based on trias politcal yes you do.

If your country is corrupt then yes the people with money have power. Not every country is corrupt enough for people to really buy into it.

the judges would actually follow the law (juries wouldn’t be able to exist for most cases)

A core tenet of the law is the right to trial by a jury of your peers.

Jury trials have a very similar flaw to democracy.

Think of an average person you know, how stupid are they? Now, realize that half the people out there are stupider than that.

An average randomly selected jury is going to be composed of 50% below average intelligence people.

Of the US law yes, but that's not the case everywhere.

I personally don't think juries should do more than give extra input to the judge. The judge should follow the law exactly and tif they don't, the average person should be able to file a complaint about them not doing their job and they should be investigated.

(I also work in a field (accountancy) where you can file complaints to be for very cheap if I don't do my job correctly)

In GDPR countries (among others) nobody is allowed to do something like this with face recognition because the law works for everybody.

IDK the specifics of GDPR (and GDPR is relatively new, so it will continue to evolve for some time...)

In my view: the police are public servants, salaries and pensions paid by taxes. They have voluntarily chosen to serve as public servants. Whole hosts of studies show that police who are actively involved with the communities they police, seeing, being seen, being known by the neighborhoods they work in, those police are more effective at preventing crime, defusing domestic disputes, etc. than faceless thugs with batons and guns who only show up when they are going to use their arrest powers to shut down whatever is going on.

If I were to write "my version" of the GDPR that I think the US should enact, there would be clear exceptions for public servants, including police and politicians. Now, you can get into the whole issue of "undercover cops" which is clearly analogous to "secret police" which may be a necessary evil for some circumstances, but that's not what is going on with OP's website. OP is providing a tool to compare photos to a public database of photographs of public servants - not undercover cops. By the way: performance is spec'ed at 1 to 3 seconds per photo comparison, so 9000 photos might take 9000-27000 seconds to compare, that's 2.5 to 7.5 hours to run one photo search.