How does one reconcile this with jaded cynicism of "regulations for thee but not for me"?
Furthermore, does this regulation target the hardware products themselves, the software performing the recognition, the biometric data itself, the transfer of this biometric data, aggregate ("anonymized") biometric data, the processing of biometric data? There is a lot to talk about here.
I’m fine with Microsoft’s motives being hurting rivals with regulation, if it gives me more privacy rights. In fact that’s great, because their coffers are much larger than the eff or whoever else could take up this lobbying effort.
There is a big difference between collecting telemetry (data about the product you're using) for improving the product internally and collecting private data for reselling to the highest bidder.
Here's the thing; Microsoft is a large corporation with lots of assets to protect. This kind of sketchy technology can easily be (is already?) a race to the bottom in terms of privacy and morality, and a big company has more to lose.
Incidentally, big companies also have economies of scale in complying with regulation.
So they can be all for facial recognition tech AND benefit from the regulation of it.
Furthermore, does this regulation target the hardware products themselves, the software performing the recognition, the biometric data itself, the transfer of this biometric data, aggregate ("anonymized") biometric data, the processing of biometric data? There is a lot to talk about here.