All babies look the same, out of anything private you could film by mistake, a baby seems pretty harmless.

Face recognition is uninuitively good. Google Photos was able to pick out faces from my baby photos pretty easily.

I was thinking about that a while ago and came to the conclusion that it's likely massively helped out by the narrow search space. They aren't trying to match between every single person, just the ones in your photo library which is an extremely small group compared to what most facial recognition is doing.

Google's face recognition can't tell the difference between my 5yo and my newborn. And, most hilarious, my 8yo could unlock my wife's iPhone with face recognition when she was 2yo.

Google Photos works in a near perfect extremely constrained closed system: your photos have fewer than a hundred faces, it likely biases uncertainties with more confidence due to those constraints.

Funny because I don't use the feature and in my review tab I have like 15 versions of myself that google thinks are all different people for me to individually name. Mostly different phases of facial hair.

Custom ads based on your baby facial expressions 15 years later?

Really? Mine lumps together completely unrelated people whilst failing to group together the same person.

Well. Until that film or metadata getting uploaded on Meta servers or checked by some local child-safety AI, getting flagged for inappropriate meterial and police knocking on your door.

I disagree with your assumption, but you also need to consider that the baby is going to be a person for decades.

Yeah and stupid babies are too stupid to consent anyway

Now hammer them with ads designed to guilt trip parents. +1 surveillance capitalism.

Yes, it does, the link to Data & Privacy is at the bottom.