Facial Recognition for Garbage Sorting — Accepted Because It's Safe? The "Life Under Surveillance" That Has Become Routine in China

Waiting for the signal at the intersection. Passing through the entrance of an apartment building. Transferring money with a smartphone. Throwing away garbage.

Each of these is an ordinary scene from daily life. But how would you feel if these actions were linked to your face and accumulated as records?

It feels reassuring. It saves effort. It's a bit creepy. Yet, it becomes inconvenient if not used.

The surveillance society in China, as reported by Germany's public broadcaster ARD's news site "tagesschau" on October 1, 2026, was a world where such complex emotions coexisted.

What this report highlights is the reality that surveillance does not permeate society solely through coercion. It is convenient, safe, and reduces daily hassles. This appeal also becomes a force that makes people accept surveillance.

Even the way garbage is disposed of can reveal "who did it."

The original article introduces an estimate of 700 to 800 million cameras installed in public spaces in China. However, this is an estimate presented in the article and should not be treated as a confirmed exact number.

At an intersection in eastern Beijing, more than a dozen cameras are directed in each direction, recording the movements of cars, bicycles, and pedestrians.

The report also mentions an example where the sorting of garbage is photographed, and facial recognition is used to identify the person who put household waste into a container for paper.

What changes here is not merely the increase in cameras. The system evolves from one that observes "what happened" to one that identifies "who did what."

Some might agree if it's explained as reducing sorting violations and keeping shared spaces clean. However, it also raises another question: is it necessary to link and record even small actions in daily life to the individual?

The "safety" spoken of by residents cannot be overlooked

A 28-year-old woman featured in the original article says that surveillance technology has made her life safer and more convenient, and she has not had any bad experiences so far. She also feels secure when traveling from Beijing to another city.

Dismissing such voices as merely a lack of understanding of the dangers would misinterpret the reasons for the spread of surveillance.

Procedures are completed just by facing the camera. You can enter a building without taking out a card. The hassle of identity verification is reduced. The benefits for users are immediately apparent.

On the other hand, it is difficult to see how the collected information will be used in the future. Convenience is today's experience, but concerns about misuse or disadvantages are easily perceived as events that have not yet occurred.

Genia Kostka, a China researcher at the Free University of Berlin interviewed in the original article, also points out that the image of a state efficiently supporting its residents is important, not just surveillance.

Satisfaction with daily services leads to support for the system of collecting information itself. Here lies the intersection where convenience and governance connect.

The meaning of the same technology changes depending on the environment

However, focusing only on the convenience of facial recognition overlooks another important point of the original article.

The report also touches on the surveillance that has been advanced in the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region. In addition to information gathering through cameras, Wi-Fi routers, and police checkpoints, it introduces the use of facial recognition for entering and exiting homes and technology that identifies individuals from their walking patterns. Chinese authorities reportedly explain these efforts as counter-terrorism measures.

What needs to be considered here is the difference between identity verification chosen by oneself and surveillance that is unavoidable for living.

The meaning of the fact that "it is being used" changes between voluntarily using it because it's convenient and being unable to enter one's home without using it.

Moreover, the fact that one resident feels secure does not prove that another resident is not under strong pressure. It is necessary to look at how the benefits and burdens of the same system are distributed to whom and in what way.

Do not conclude with "Chinese people don't care"

The original article also features young people expressing anxiety.

A 20-year-old student says they had to submit their ID number, bank card, and phone number linked to their account to the university. They are worried but feel they cannot change it alone.

These words indicate that participation in the system and agreement with the system are not the same.

In fact, there are regulations in China that limit the use of facial information. The "Regulations on the Safe Management of Facial Recognition Technology Applications," enacted in June 2025, stipulates that facial recognition should not be the sole means of verification if there are other methods to achieve the same purpose. It includes providing reasonable and convenient alternatives for those who do not consent to facial recognition. It also specifies how to handle cases where there are other national regulations.

The existence of these regulations alone does not eliminate concerns about state surveillance. However, it is inaccurate to understand that "there is no discussion on the protection of facial information in China." It is necessary to separately verify the existence of regulations and whether options are secured on the ground.

On social media, concerns beyond "it's okay for now" are visible

There are also discussions about facial recognition and surveillance on public social media.

However, what was confirmed this time were not direct reactions to this tagesschau article, but past related posts about Chinese surveillance technology. The comments confirmed through searches are summarized and do not represent the overall trend of public opinion or social media in China.

In related threads on Reddit, there was a view that privacy might be sacrificed for safety. In another thread, it was pointed out that the idea of "no problem if there's nothing to hide" only applies under current rules.

What these opinions have in common is the anxiety about how records will be used after they are made.

Actions that are not problematic today might be evaluated differently due to future changes in the system. The initial purpose of data collection and the purpose of later use might diverge. The debate suggests that these possibilities should be considered when discussing the pros and cons of surveillance.

On the other hand, the sense of security felt by local residents introduced in the original article and the caution gathered on overseas public forums are not voices collected under the same conditions. They cannot be simply lined up as votes for or against.

Still, the difference between perspectives that prioritize immediate safety and those that prioritize future freedom can be discerned.

What Japan should consider is beyond "how many cameras are there"

It's easy to conclude this story as a unique event only in China. However, the motivation to make identity verification convenient and to streamline crime prevention is also relevant to service design in Japan.

Japan's Personal Information Protection Commission has also published documents and public relations materials regarding the use of cameras with facial recognition functions for crime prevention and safety assurance. Cameras that recognize faces are also a subject for consideration in terms of systems and operations in Japan.

Here are the points to be questioned when introducing similar technology in Japan.

First, what is the purpose of collecting information? Confirming the identity of a person entering a building and connecting movement histories in the city have different purposes and impacts.

Next, who can access the information? If it is not clear how much is shared among facility managers, service companies, contractors, and administrative agencies, users cannot make informed decisions.

Furthermore, can mistakes be corrected? If someone is mistakenly identified as another person or if their actions are wrongly questioned, a system is needed where explanations can be sought and human re-verification can be conducted.

And whether the option not to use it is realistically possible.

Even if alternatives are provided, if they take an extremely long time, are far away, or require special procedures each time, it cannot be said that there is a free choice.

While the few seconds saved during introduction are often highlighted, explanations about what is provided for those seconds and to what extent use is permitted should be equally clear.

After choosing convenience, can you choose again?

The report on China's surveillance society showed that people do not necessarily accept surveillance solely out of fear.

Life has become safer. Procedures have become easier. There have been no problems so far. Such feelings need to be respected as voices of the residents.

At the same time, not having problems yet and not having problems in the future are not the same.

In a society where life becomes convenient just by facing the camera, what truly needs to be confirmed is whether the freedom not to face the camera remains. After starting to use it once, can you stop? Can you know how the records are used, correct mistakes, and object to disadvantages?

Along with the convenience of technology, is the system that supports re-selection also in place? This is a question that is becoming relevant for Japan as well.

Sources and References

1. tagesschau/ARD "Überwachung in China: Gesichtserkennung an der Mülltonne"
   Dated October 1, 2026. Introduced estimates of camera numbers, street scenes in Beijing, garbage sorting, surveillance in Xinjiang, and statements from residents and researchers.
   https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/asien/china-ueberwachung-106.html

2. China's National Internet Information Office & Ministry of Public Security "Regulations on the Safe Management of Facial Recognition Technology Applications"
   Facial recognition-related regulations enacted in June 2025. Refer to Article 10 on alternative methods and Article 12 on coercion, etc.cac.gov.cn
   https://www.cac.gov.cn/2025-03/21/c_1744174262156096.htm

3. Personal Information Protection Commission "Regarding the Use of Camera Systems with Facial Recognition Functions for Crime Prevention and Safety Assurance: List of Materials"
   Published materials regarding the use of facial recognition cameras in Japan. The confirmation points in the latter half of the text are a summary of this article's points, considering these materials, and not a detailed explanation of the law.ppc.go.jp
   https://www.ppc.go.jp/news/camera_related/

4. Reddit・r/China "As facial recognition spreads, PRC citizens voice privacy concerns"
   Past discussions about facial recognition and privacy. Comments questioning the exchange for safety were referenced within the range confirmed by search results.reddit.com
   https://www.reddit.com/r/China/comments/e28hb9/

5. Reddit・r/AI4tech thread on China's tracking technology
   Comments expressing concern about future rule changes in response to the idea of "nothing to hide" were referenced within the range confirmed by search results. Not a direct reaction to the original article.reddit.com
   https://www.reddit.com/r/AI4tech/comments/1q65i4r/