Same over here, with local chains increasingly forced to shut their doors (primarily as a result of the COVID pandemic, and the various developments ever since). And I completely agree, for most people it's physically an unnoticeable change, but the change from: local, short-term, manual systems, to digitally transferable, long term, and automated ones, makes all the difference.

I'm quite confident most large chains were somewhat forced to have modern, GDPR-compliant systems in place (like Genetec for instance): undoubtedly allowing for integration of such analytics tools. And apart from that, they've had trackers in their carts (hidden in the locking-chain, or wheel-break assemblies) for as long as I can remember, and likely track user-location through app-use, or dedicated scanners too (for scanning products before you place them inside your cart); so I'm quite positive they utilize surveillance systems for that too.

Oh, did you want to opt out? Sure! You can. All you got to do is stop eating food!

I would just love to see those, that claim to be human, which are knowingly in support of these systems, try to justify the ethical ramifications in that statement alone. Which is "just" restricted to grocery shopping for now, but if the current trend continues, you'll effectively become a prisoner to your own home. And quite rapidly so, if Europol's ambitions to protect citizens from hypothetical adversary (kamikaze) drones, by use of drone swarms, atmospheric satellites and microphone meshes, becomes reality.

It's an insane timeline we're living in, and it's so easy to give up all faith; but perhaps that is exactly what they want us to do. For us to feel powerless, and believing we are incapable of making a relevant change. I share the same ambitions as you, and I believe most human beings do naturally; but it's becoming increasingly difficult when you have principles to stick by. I've already experienced this by transitioning away from big-tech platforms, and I would absolutely hate this translating into the physical world.

Surveillance surrounding car infrastructure is the most notable currently, but every larger public transportation hub has cameras all over too, together with on-board cameras in pubic transit vehicles, which are monitored in real time (despite moving around constantly). Perhaps you could give me a generalized description of your whereabouts and your activity, so I have a little bit more context on your surroundings. And yes, like I mentioned, it's technically not allowed to have private cameras facing the public space, but without enforcement, you might as well not have it (or actually incentivizes people to hide them).

I'm quite interested in your experience in Prague, and would love to hear more about it. From your description it seems cameras in Prague are very apparent, which I consider to be a good thing. Whereas in The Netherlands surveillance systems are often installed to be unobtrusive; including those installed by authorities or businesses (which are typically recording the store's entrance; and as a "by-product" the public space; and dome-style cameras are increasingly placed in public retail areas too: mounted (typically in groups) on poles, or to exterior of buildings).

A lot of ALPRs are well hidden here, and not uniformly recognizable (other than: being a fixed box-type camera, angled to capture the license plate (mostly the front: as to be able to capture the driver as well), and typically having an array of IR LEDs in or around the camera-body: lighting up the license plate). But as of recently, the national police has installed a mobile ALPR unit on my return-trip, and I've found myself in somewhat a similar situation to yours. Thankfully, they aren't typically placed within residential areas (at least not outside of cities, which often do have pedestrianized areas or environmental zones, only permitted vehicles are allowed to enter); but I'm sure they'll find a creative excuse for it in the near future.

I've tried taking a detour once, but noticed cameras above a bridge, that tick most of the boxes for being an ALPR, so it seemed to have proved fruitless (despite requiring me to pass through pedestrianized areas: slowing me down significantly). Cameras appear to be placed with care, seemingly using waterways as perimeters: forcing vehicles to drive over a bridge, underneath an aqueduct, or through a tunnel. Besides the initially mentioned ALPRs at gas stations (as you're forced to fuel up periodically), and parking areas or other endpoints (as you're forced to park your vehicle somewhere). It's honestly quite clever, especially when you can potentially narrow down activity using consumer-grade or business surveillance systems.

When I used it on GrapheneOS, it was to ensure untrusted apps (especially banking apps requiring Google Play Services) no longer remaining active after using them; but if you never close the work profile, they indeed remain active. But it's a good measure regardless: to ensure you don't accidentally give WhatsApp or whatever, permission to personal media; even if it means added inconvenience (which is the most common trade-off with privacy).

From left to right, top to bottom: 2 fixed box cameras (most likely 2 generations of ALPRs: an older (larger/yellowed: which they won't bother removing, and instead keep for redundancy), and a newer (more capable) model), a 'Pan Tilt Zoom (PTZ)', and what appears to be a radar sensor (for detecting objects: possibly serving as a redundancy, during challenging weather conditions). I suspect the radar sensor got installed first (just for perimeter intrusion detection), they added the old ALPR next (to detect patterns in registered license plates); and the rest as an upgrade (including an increased field of view: through the PTZ's movable head).

Deploying its roughly $1.4 billion worth of reserves to support “mission driven” tech businesses and nonprofits, including its own

I mean, how else can you deplete a non-profit's reserves?

Oh, you can add new things, that's perfectly fine. I still prefer mobile users adding features, even if they are of an unusual object type; effectively being another type of fixme to desktop users. But instead of another desktop user integrating these elements, I rather have mobile users on the desktop as well; as to integrate their mobile changes when at home. If you're sightseeing, these applications are very helpful, for creating/editing POIs and effectively sketching out non-POI features; but the latter does require some work to integrate them.

My emails forced me to, locking me out of accounts I needed to access.

Microsoft had me fill this form, to "prove" I was the rightful owner of the account, after some suspicious login-attempts from an African country. The form included fields like: name (I don't think I supplied at creation, or a false one), other email addresses, previous passwords (which potentially yield completely unrelated passwords), etc.; only for the application to be rejected and locking me out of my primary email for a full month. After that outright violation, I immediately switched to Disroot, and haven't had any of said problems ever since. I backup all its contents locally using Thunderbird, and delete the origins from the server afterwards.

Many platforms have this messed up dark pattern, of revoking one's access to a real-world dependencies, unless giving in to the service's demands. Enforcement of 2FA is another one of those "excuses" for this type of misbehavior, and so is bot-detection.

Yeah, I think they employ a pretty sophisticated bot detection algorithm. I vaguely remember there being this 'make 5 friends' objective, or something along those lines, which I had no intention of fulfilling. If a new account, having triggered the manual reviewing process, doesn't adhere to common usage patterns, simply have them supply additional information. Any collateral damage simply means additional data, to be appended to Facebook's self-profiling platform... I mean, what else would one expect when Facebook's first outside investor was Palentir's Peter Thiel?

It's almost as if they're seeking to replace these with technology. They've purposefully neglected social services and will continue to do so, to lower the bar for AI and grant themselves an excuse for the poor "substitute". And this isn't at all restricted to the UK, in The Netherlands we're in the midst of it too: the same exact playbook. Modern surveillance cameras (like Axis' for example) have NPU's built in, or camera footage (even from legacy analog cameras, by use of encoders) is linked to either an onsite server, a cloud-service, or a combination of the two, facilitating the functionality. I hardly believe AI to be the limiting factor here, storage of footage is another story however. But I think they instead strategically place facial-recognition cameras, while the other cameras simply store abstractions from the footage. Of course if one of those cameras senses an event, which it recognizes might be of elevated relevance, it might store the raw footage. An example being: railways doing face-scanning for "depression detection", instead of implementing 'platform screen doors' of course...

Honestly, the tech seems quite impressive. But I wouldn't touch Amazon-backed smart glasses, which "could also provide health insights, such as detecting dry eyes or monitoring posture", with a ten-foot pole; especially when there's also entirely passive bifocals and progressives.

Apathy might not be a conscious decision, but rather a result of: preoccupation (work, finance, health, entertainment, etc.), hopelessly negative news feeds, consumption of news rather than active digestion of it, political tribalism (as repeating after the filter-bubble, requires less energy than forming your own opinion; alongside protecting one's ego), etc. Briefly put: many working-class citizens might lack the overhead, required to give a shit (about problems not directly affecting their personal lives; despite often guaranteed to come bite them long-term).