You can also change incentives. If aggregating faces into a database makes you liable for the damage that happens when that database is used, the "Guatemalan farmer" (and any business that wants reasonably prices liability insurance) will go out of their way to avoid making that database.
I think this is a fairly uncharitable view of software engineering in these countries. Many countries by surveillance technology from others.
If I remember correctly, a similar app was used in Russia by stalkers to find lookalikes to their fancy (public persons, ex-lovers). This app empowers all sorts of creepy behaviour.
I think public access to the images of a person should be vetted by the person in question on a case by case basis, but that would destroy their business model.
Yep, found reference: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/17/findface-...
From the linked article:
> Kabakov says the app could revolutionise dating: “If you see someone you like, you can photograph them, find their identity, and then send them a friend request.” The interaction doesn’t always have to involve the rather creepy opening gambit of clandestine street photography, he added: “It also looks for similar people. So you could just upload a photo of a movie star you like, or your ex, and then find 10 girls who look similar to her and send them messages.”
If you make it accessible to everyone then you make sure you've got solid audit trail tech. Definitely notify face owner they've been looked up and by whom. A bit like LinkedId profile visitors work already.
Not that familiar with Guatemala but I'm guessing they have internet there, a technically inclined Guatemalan farmer with money to burn and the marketing degree to sell snake oil could setup their own facial recognition startup 10 years ago.
The tech side of these things is neither impressive nor all too novel, the application side on the other hand has pretty significant impact on the society we want to build and live in. Just like GDPR for pushing back against invasive tracking I really don't see why a legislative approach is seen as ineffective in these discussions. Is that because of arguments like "somebody else will do it anyway" / "bad actors still exist"? That seems like relatively bad points to just do nothing. Everybody could rob a bank if they felt like it, that doesn't mean we shouldn't legislate against it.
At most you can ban outcomes - persecution, discrimination, etc. But when every Guatemalan farmer can setup their own facial recognition startup - the genie is out of bottle.