Who says the city's retention period would be smaller than Flock?

Furthermore, do you realize that you're free to photograph people in public and sell those images, no permission required: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nussenzweig_v._DiCorcia

People seem to struggle to wrap their head around the fact that privacy laws don't prevent people from recording them in public. You can be recorded at any time in public, by the government or another private person.

The city's scope is smaller than Flock's - it's a city, not a multi-national corporation.

Yes, I'm aware of what "expectation of privacy" means. I've been a photographer for ~25 years.

> People seem to struggle to wrap their head around the fact that privacy laws don't prevent people from recording them in public. You can be recorded at any time in public, by the government or another private person.

This isn't about recording in public - it's about building a comprehensive dataset containing the movement and association history of the entire US population. Not only is that without a warrant, it's being collected prior to any accusation being made.

> People seem to struggle to wrap their head around the fact that privacy laws don't prevent people from recording them in public.

Maybe this needs to be restricted in some capacity, then.

"Anyone can record you at any time in public" is vastly different from "a single entity is recording you over time and locations across the country/state/city"