> There is no expectation of privacy in public

This is claimed a lot but absolutely not true. Stop repeating this very obviously false statement.

Obviously false? I’m sorry but “private” and “public” are exact opposites to one another. Being “in public” is quite exactly where you don’t have a general expectation of being “in private”.

Yes, they are in opposition, but it is a non-sequitur to then associate it with privacy. And most critically, to consider privacy to be a binary attribute, rather than a multidimensional and graduated quality.

Do you believe you have the right not to have a satellite track or drone hover over you in public and share that feed, associated with your identity, with the whole world? I sure do. You should too.

And I want to add how quickly things have changed in this space. In 2005, only 2% of Americans had cellphones. By 2010 that was still under 30%. But by 2016, more than 80%. Not to mention that these phones' qualities have drastically changed as well. In 2010 you could walk around in public and would be very surprised if you found yourself in the background of someone's video posted online. Now I don't think anyone would be shocked, especially living in a big city (definitely would in a rural town). Let alone that video be high enough quality to recognize you. We can probably say the same about the number of CCTV cameras as well. Or even how much data was being gathered on the web.

I don't think enough people are internalizing how radically the world has shifted in the last 10-20 years. 10 years ago generative image models couldn't generate a black and white 32x32 image of a face. Now I can trivially transform a photo of my friend into a dog and make him bark. For most people this technology came out of nowhere because of the lag. The same goes true for other things like the internet, cellphones, social media, etc. Is it really that much of a wonder why there's so much craziness going on right now when so much has changed so fast?

And fwiw, speaking of satellites, there are now multiple companies (not governments. Companies) who's goal is to get a daily snapshot of the entire surface of the earth. They already have cameras where you can see clearly the color of cars from space. There are some where you can see people (albeit hard to see, but you only need to identify a dot to track it). We now should expect that resolution to increase, not only in number of pixels, but frequency. This technology can do a lot of good, just like ML, but at the same time it can be used for a log of destruction and oppression, just like ML. The question is if these technologies are going to go the way of atomics or the way of the internet. But even simply saying this, I, a dumb human who's barely more advanced than our chimp cousins and barely capable of communicating, have a hard time internalizing what this future world will be like, despite being only 10 or so years away.

Essentially what the sibling says. Does your expectation of privacy change when: you're taking the subway? When you're in an empty car? When you're at a concert packed with people? When you're tucked away trying to escape the crowd? When you're in a public restroom? What about if you're walking alone in the middle of the night and no one is around? What about in your house with your blinds open? Or in your front yard? What about in your front yard if you live 5 miles away from your neighbor?

If your expectation of privacy changes in any way with any of these options, then yes, you have an expectation of privacy in public. It is a spectrum, not a binary decision. But if you think it is a binary decision you're welcome to try to record people going to the bathroom in public restrooms and see what happens. I will not be covering your lawyer fees.

I'm free to take pictures of people in public. I'm not free to monetize / share them freely without consent. There is an argument to be made that this should be the case for stuff people post on the internet as well.