First of all, "biometric data" is a scary-sounding term that sounds like iris or fingerprint scans, when it's just... what people's faces and voices look and sound like. By this measure, my own brain is "collecting biometric data" on thousands of people a day while I walk down the street.

Second, in cases like the Nest camera or Google photos, presumably most of the people it's scanning don't match anything. It sure doesn't feel like a violation of privacy or consent for a computer to say, "I tried, but nope, face/voice not recognized".

Third, everyone being recognized has previously been identified by the user, whether someone tagging their friends in Photos, family members on Nest, or household members for Assistant. If I'm OK with a friend uploading an image of me to their own Google Photos, I don't see why I shouldn't allow them to run a facial detection algorithm to organize all the photos that contain me.

Now if Google were using all of this to build up a database of all the faces in the world matched to identities (as other sketchy companies have already done), then this would all be a problem. But there's zero evidence of anything like that, and that's not what this case is about. This isn't about misusing Street View or anything.

So it's hard to see this as anything but a political stunt? What's Texas's goal here -- to remove the helpful features that alert us when a stranger (as opposed to family member) is at our door, to distinguish voices in Assistant, and find photos of a particular friend in our photo library...? These are all genuinely useful features.