All posts
Category

Privacy.

How on-site processing makes video privacy the default, not a promise.

Privacy

The guardrails are arriving through bargaining, not legislation

More than 175 union contracts now contain AI guardrails, most aimed at keystroke and screenshot monitoring. The distinction between that and camera-based monitoring will not hold, and it should not.

Read Post
Privacy

Sixteen AI bills, and one of them names the bathroom

California's legislature passed 16 AI bills and 8 privacy bills in 2026, none of them law yet. One would ban workplace surveillance in bathrooms, and two would turn AI verification into a licensed function.

Read Post
Privacy

The government wrote down the risk itself

A federal privacy assessment for a system that fuses video, facial biometrics and plate data contains a sentence most vendors would never publish. It also describes exactly where the risk in computer vision has moved.

Read Post
Privacy

The problem was never the camera

Cities around Houston are exiting their license plate reader contracts. We build license plate recognition, so this one deserves a straight answer about architecture rather than a defence of anyone's product.

Read Post
Privacy

The camera backlash is a trust problem, not a camera problem

On the Fourth of July, residents in Lubbock protested to have their city's license-plate cameras removed. The lesson for everyone building safety tech is not about the hardware. It is about what you collect, where it goes, and who controls it.

Read Post
Privacy

The real divide in camera AI isn't capability. It's control.

A US city wants facial recognition on its buses, and the fight that broke out misses the point. The line between safety and surveillance was never the technology. It is who controls it, where it runs, and what it is pointed at.

Read Post
Privacy

Where does your video actually go?

The question that quietly stalls AI camera projects, and why keeping footage on-site turns privacy from a liability into the default.

Read Post