

The way Bunnings used facial recognition was as private as it could be … mostly. It is possible to run all of the facial recognition locally, but instead they run it on a central Bunnings-controlled server in Sydney. They only scan for faces of known offenders based on previous entanglements.
My concern isn’t surveillance, but mass surveillance. Because this is exclusive to Bunnings it doesn’t quite reach mass surveillance, but because the processing is centralized and Bunnings is so big it edges dangerously close.
This isn’t Flock, nor Palantir, nor Google.


They look at CCTV, take an violentcustomer.jpeg, and add it to the database.
EDIT: Oh I see what you’re asking. You misread my quote, what I said is “they only scan for” and not “they only scan”.