With a recent article raising concern over Bunnings, Kmart and the Good Guys use of facial recognition technology in their stores, how do you feel about it?
After reading this, I was alarmed to find a warning sign about this at the entrance of a few local stores around me. More concerning was that my local Kmart's sign was 'hidden' behind a pull up banner advertisement.
25/7 Update - It looks like Kmart and Bunnings are pausing their facial recognition surveillance for now.
Slippery Slope is in Aisle 5 Toy Dept.
You are wrong there. The last time I checked, they were in aisle 12.
really? you can't believe one of the biggest nanny states in the world would allow this? especially with people like the chairman at the helm.
A nanny state should object to this as it gives corporations and private entities more power.
Not saying we ain't in a nanny state (aren't they all by definition?) but this is corporate surveillance - capitalism's current trend - not state surveillance.
Aussie authoritarianism let’s companies collect the data, they just access it.
@80kinvestment: People would riot if the government started installing cameras for facial recognition.
If private corporations do it, no one bats an eye.
People were upset about Covid check-ins, but happily allow Google and Facebook to constantly track their location.
Governments have realised it's easier to let private entities gather the data, and they obtain it from them.
Anti government types want governments to stay out of their business when it suits them and subsequently step in when it suits them. How do you not understand this?
And yet most Victorians support him. Seems there’s a noisey minority who only give a crap about themselves whinging.
well, most of them did win the popular vote, it's not exactly something to brag about.
regardless, we will have to wait until november to see if you are correct
@[Deactivated]: Feel free to save this post. Even newscorpse think it’ll be a danslide. And they certainly aren’t card carrying members.
Long live the peoples republic of danistan.
Agree. This is terrible.
And how is this allowed with children?
Well how is it allowed at all
Lolol. This has been in place for years. I remember looking at it and put in a concept about 10+ years ago for a major retailer who shall not be mentioned. It's there to prevent theft and a part of the terms and conditions when you walk into the store.
Honestly, unless you are there to shoplift. Why would you care? You're going to be walking out into public areas anyway and nothing is stopping from people taking photos or videos of you in public areas either - regardless of what you think of privacy.
This argument is honestly one the most frustrating things ever bandied about.
If your not doing anything wrong, why do you care?
Like many others have said, this is just the thin edge of the wedge before accepting total corporate involvement in every aspect of our lives.
Of course nothing to worry about…now…not doing anything wrong, "helps catch thieves" great. Now your going to tell me that it's worth more catching and deterring thieves than it is to sell on hundreds of times…yeah right.
Probably should outlaw VPNs also right? If your not doing anything wrong, why do you need to protect your online traffic?
Come on… this kind of attitude is worrying at the least and a dangerous precedent at the worst.
Yup. Now it's only to catch thieves. Later it's to catch people who cross red lights. More authoritarian countries are already using this kind of technologies to arrest people who criticised the government.
On top of that, it means these stores have a huge database of every single person who ever entered their stores with exact timestamps when they shopped, who they shopped with, what they purchased, what they looked at and didn't buy.
Every week there's a media report of huge corporations getting hacked and massive databases with user information being leaked. There's no reason to believe this won't happen to Kmart or Bunnings.
@MrTweek: That's one big slippery slope of a slide you're putting out there.
You know anti-theft surveillance cameras have been around a very very long time. The difference is that rather than someone in the security backroom looking at the cameras trying to ID each face for known thieves, it's just AI controlled instead? This is literally the T&Cs of any retail shop you walk into that you will be recorded on video and that they have the right to identify you to ensure you are not a malicious customer. This has literally been the case since the 80-90s when video cameras became available.
@bchliu: You don't think it's a bit of a difference whether they manually look for know thieves and disregard the rest of the recordings, or whether they identify and trace every single person coming into the store and create a track record?
@MrTweek: Because.. it gives thieves a chance at shoplifting vs being caught? Have to remember that these cameras will only know your image, but can never relate it back to a person's identity (that's what the Aus Government does, however). We are only talking in relation to a retail store where they don't know that "Joe Bloggs" looks like "This" (image).
Again, the problem with your reply is that you've slippery sloped it so much to muddle the information limited to a retail store vs what a surveillance government can do (which includes Australia).
Because.. it gives thieves a chance at shoplifting vs being caught?
That's not the issue. I'm not a shoplifter, yet these camera will track me.
Have to remember that these cameras will only know your image, but can never relate it back to a person's identity
What makes you think that? They will not only know my image. They will also know at what time and date I've been to which store, they will know what I've been looking at, they will know what I've bought.
They can absolutely relate this information back to a person's identity, i.e. if that person ever paid by card or has their picture somewhere on the internet. And there is no way to tell whether they do this or not.
If they were completely transparent with what they do, have an external auditor looks at their mechanisms and confirm that these are solely used to detect shoplifter and every other video material is not processed and automatically deleted within 48 hours or something like that I wouldn't have too much of a problem with this.
But their policy is very murky and that is in most cases intentional - it let's them try out these things I mentioned above without having to publicly admit it.
They have all the tools for breaching privacy in pretty bad ways and they admit they are using them, without stating how.
It's pretty naive of you to blindly assume they are completely responsible and won't ever misuse any data, and won't ever have security breaches.
This stuff has always been happening since the 80s when video cameras were ok to be put into almost every major retail stores.
Again, manually looking at people isn't the same as tracking and identifying every single person that walks into a store. Stop pretending it is the same. It's very clearly not.
You cannot really go out into a common public area and NOT be surveyed by either government cameras, private cameras, commercial (retail) cameras etc
And that is the exact reason why this is a problem. Just because it was a problem before, that doesn't mean we shouldn't care that it's getting worse.
which if you do something anti-social, will be posted on social media
Yeah cool, but there's a difference between doing something anti-social in public and going to Bunnings.
What makes you think that? They will not only know my image. They will also know at what time and date I've been to which store, they will know what I've been looking at, they will know what I've bought.
So does every cookie tracker online whenever you go to any modern website. Even worse than what they do at an actual store because it builds up a total profile on you from not one site, but many.
They can absolutely relate this information back to a person's identity, i.e. if that person ever paid by card or has their picture somewhere on the internet. And there is no way to tell whether they do this or not.
They can't. It's against PCI-DSS to store Credit details of a particular person unless under authority given by the customer and their bank. The only way they can nab you is through a loyalty program if you've signed up that way or consented with your details to the store. Even then, the correlation between a tracked individual to them paying something at the counter with a loyalty program involves complex and expensive integration between several systems in order to do this. I don't know of any retailer at this stage that has gone to this level of maturity yet (they have bigger issues to resolve than this).
If they were completely transparent with what they do, have an external auditor looks at their mechanisms and confirm that these are solely used to detect shoplifter and every other video material is not processed and automatically deleted within 48 hours or something like that I wouldn't have too much of a problem with this.
Most of the major retailers do Annual or Biannual Privacy Impact Assessment on their digital data including this type of data. They do arrange auditing by third parties (similar to accounting audits) to ensure they are compliant with Privacy laws of Australia. Retention periods will be subjected to guidance by Privacy laws.
Again, manually looking at people isn't the same as tracking and identifying every single person that walks into a store. Stop pretending it is the same. It's very clearly not.
I never said it was the same. I said it was done in a much optimal fashion, automated and much better chance of catching would-be criminals.
Yeah cool, but there's a difference between doing something anti-social in public and going to Bunnings.
Yeah and Bunnings will be posting a Tiktok video of you walking and and buying manure for your garden to the tune of a Benny Hill theme whilst tagging you and sharing to your group of friends? That's more the reason why your replies have been nothing more than a slippery slope.
So does every cookie tracker online whenever you go to any modern website. Even worse than what they do at an actual store because it builds up a total profile on you from not one site, but many.
I can turn off cookies. I can delete them. I can use browser plugins that prevent this. I can use private browsing. 4 simple ways to stop this. None of these available for face recognition cameras.
the correlation between a tracked individual to them paying something at the counter with a loyalty program involves complex and expensive integration between several systems in order to do this
Sorry, but that's not harder to do than facial recognition itself. If they want to do this, they can. If they can somehow monetise this information, they will make the effort to collect it.
Most of the major retailers do Annual or Biannual Privacy Impact Assessment on their digital data including this type of data. They do arrange auditing by third parties (similar to accounting audits) to ensure they are compliant with Privacy laws of Australia
Lol, yeah. I've worked for a couple of such businesses and they don't give a shit about privacy. They'll do the bare minimum to not get sued and not a tad bit more. Even PCI DSS is a paper tiger in most cases with very limited options for enforcement.
@bchliu: They don't have a right to identify - what a load of manipulated fud portrayed as fact.
Sure you could have it as condition of entry or even demand finger prints as Disney does/did
https://www.kennythepirate.com/2021/08/20/are-biometric-fing…
BUT that is a condition of entry or a concession for entry. Your biometric identity is personal property.
But hey what do I know research Disneys Club 33 and see where it leads … not to a good happy and safe place.
@MrTweek: Social credit score anyone?
That's where it ends, where out of a crowd of 60k people the system can find the one person they're after and then arrange police to arrive so he can accompany them back to the station. Its not make believe, that happened 4 years ago in China.
Its not make believe, that happened 4 years ago in China.
The same thing happens now in Moscow:
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/06/13/dozens-detained-us…
People who attended an anti-war protest in the past are being arrested after walking past facial recognition cameras in metro stations.
Not arguing for either side. This is literally the reasoning behind it. As I wrote in the other reply: This stuff has always been happening since the 80s when video cameras were ok to be put into almost every major retail stores. The difference is rather than some creepy security guy reviewing all the streams of video, you now have AI that will be able to pick it up more precisely. These cameras do a lot more than just facial ID - it knows when you are literally shoving an item into your jacket to shoplift, or do anything suspicious.
I am just iterating that it is literally the state of the world these days: You cannot really go out into a common public area and NOT be surveyed by either government cameras, private cameras, commercial (retail) cameras etc. Walk into Westfields and count the amount of cameras pointing at you. Not to mention that almost everyone walking on the street also carries a camera with them (on their phones) - which if you do something anti-social, will be posted on social media. If you don't want this, then sorry to say - you might have to go dark and remove yourself from the grid because this is integrated into society in general.
(Sorry for sounding harsh, but again this is the REALITY of things that most people are still refusing to accept).
Sounds like you have never been misprofiled mate, it can also be abused by staff "I don't like this person, let's put them on the dodgy list".
It's also easy enough to correlate with your flybys/everyday rewards to achieve a match of identity. Kmart will be (probably already does) using a.i to monitor what items you pick up, how long you look at them and if you purchase or put them back; they will then conveniently email you with a "deal" on said product whether through a flybys reward, an app notification on your phone, subscribed mailing list or even specific junk-mail; If none of those work, maybe even a 'docket-deal' the next time you print a receipt.
Websites are worse? Well that's why many of us block what tracking these websites can achieve. I do not allow tracking cookies, I also do not accept the notification of cookies (even though I think that's useless) and I have even gone as far as blocking iframes to see the data I want to see.
If stores want to increase security then they should hire more staff and not do annoying idiotic stuff like put the checkout in the middle of the damn store (so annoying Kmart).
I think the people who accept it or even worse like it, are the consumerized sheep. Given the fact that these companies are trying to stay secretive about this; shows that in their market research we wouldn't like it as a whole.
It's also easy enough to correlate with your flybys/everyday rewards to achieve a match of identity. Kmart will be (probably already does) using a.i to monitor what items you pick up, how long you look at them and if you purchase or put them back; they will then conveniently email you with a "deal" on said product whether through a flybys reward, an app notification on your phone, subscribed mailing list or even specific junk-mail; If none of those work, maybe even a 'docket-deal' the next time you print a receipt.
If you're worried about all that, why are you even using a rewards program at all? The sole purpose of those is to find out exactly what you like and get you coming back to the store.
If stores want to increase security then they should hire more staff and not do annoying idiotic stuff like put the checkout in the middle of the damn store (so annoying Kmart).
I thought it was unusual but how is it annoying?
@eug: Who said I was worried? It's an example of correlating your identity. Just because I understand how it all works, doesn't mean common folk do.
How isn't the centre checkout annoying? Who want's to have to dodge other patrons and have to show their receipt to a greeter just to exit a store? If they're so worried about loss prevention the whole centre checkout concept is hypocritical.
I'm fine with them trying to advertise to me, it feels rather useless as I prefer to snag a good deal from price clearance sections, same with coles. I doubt I am their target customer. How ever I think they should be more transparent because I wouldn't like them advertising to others on my behalf ie: Sister starts getting advertisements of male gifts because kmart knows my birthday is coming up. Or using my data after I'm dead abusing the emotions of loved ones for a quick buck.
Did you not know that retail stores had cameras? Did you not know that they had security guards watching the camera stream and they were mentally "identifying" you?
What exactly are you saying has changed that should be outlawed?
That security guards jobs are being helped with computers?
Good question, but security guards don't do anything with that data. But imagine all this data stored, analysed and mined ad-infinitum by machine learning algorithms. If you purchase something with your store card or flybuys or whatever, now then they also have an identity/name to associate that image with.
So they would be able to tell that that person X came to this store 5 times in the last fortnight, spent an average 30 mins per visit but 80% of it was in the lingerie department.
Next thing their inbox starts to fill up with ads and coupons for lingerie.
They resell the data to other parties, then their "partners" send offers for roses, chocolates maybe even some jewelry.
The next time you purchase something the checkout assistant says "hello X, did you need any help with choosing some lingerie? oh and by the way there is a special on perfume too"
If you purchase something with your store card or flybuys or whatever, now then they also have an identity/name to associate that image with.
Does the OP suggest this is happening?
I agree customers should be able to opt out of that level of tracking
Does the OP suggest this is happening?
Is there a reason to believe it's not happening? One problem is that there is zero transparency around this. You have no idea what they are doing with your data.
I agree customers should be able to opt out of that level of tracking
But you can't.
Not sure if you've noticed: OZB and almost every link has cookies attached to do.. err.. exactly the same thing - electronically over the internet.
If that is the reason not to shop, then think you should also be stopping the use of this site, affiliated sites and every bargain that pops along.
Unless they are linking your face to your purchase where you used a loyalty card registered in your name there is nothing linked to you.
The system will only recognise you as male/female person #8335
Do you honestly think they are not? Noticed the new self serve checkouts at Wollies taking your image?
AU privacy legislation is 10 years behind progressive EU countries and US states.
Eventually AU companies will be banned from non-consenting PI collection (yes biometrics like your face) in the years to come. Shame it isn't now.
At Woolworths they aren't
And those self service cameras are not new nor are they recording or performing facial recognition.
“The image at checkouts is just a reflection on the screen and is not recorded. That hasn’t changed. Like most retailers, we do have CCTV in our stores, which is why we make reference to cameras in the updated privacy policy… We can also confirm that we do not use facial recognition of any type,” a Woolworths spokesperson replied on Twitter.
https://au.news.yahoo.com/woolworths-responds-to-shocked-cus…
That's a very stupid response, how much money do you earn? How many times do you take a💩 in a day?
Just because your doing nothing wrong, doesn't me you should be under 24 hr surveillance
$200k and typically once a day.
I don't care about being under surveillance if it deters the scum of the earth being in the same location as me.
Agree…
Also just remember this is only the surveillance you know about…
$200k
How's nursing treating you?
@MS Paint: you must be thinking of the nurses in those special movies, because hospital ones dont earn that much with the problems they have to deal with
@MS Paint: I was kind of only joking, but you did declare $200k which is way more than any nurse (i know i'm first degree and tired)
You earn too much and sh!t too little. What's the secret 🤔
Do you do non kmart work inside kmart, take dumps inside kmart? Do you live Inside kmart /someone else's private property?
I woulnd't care if i was filmed doing a shit either
unlucky on the person watching my vein pop a turd out
Hard disagree MS Paint. You're assuming the government is and will always be benevolent and not use this footage for nefarious purposes. And you are also assuming that the data they collect is secured sufficiently such that no bad guys will ever get access to it.
And both of those assumptions have time and time again proven to be untrue ones.
What is a bad guy going to do with the knowledge that I purchased a length of rope, duct tape, handsaw and a shovel from my local bunnings?
And also assuming that the ML algorithms they're using for the facial recognition are actually worth anything, and aren't going to get easily tricked by shadows/facial hair/different perspective/etc.
Getting hassled by the staff/police, not because you'd done anything wrong but because some other person that looks just enough like you to the dumb computer had shoplifted in another state, sounds infuriating. Corporations are never really quick to correct 'clerical' issues like that, either.
@whatwasherproblem: I think they aiming at better than "just enough". I understand that this technology was used by a drone to take out a bad guy - the technology is better than you give it credit for.
And I don't think stores have a SWAT team to pound on suspects. Let me know the day you're hassled and I'll consider whether it violated your liberties. Until then, I don't think so.
Meanwhile, troublemakers aren't welcome. Sounds like a great policy to me.
If they don't let you in, report it and they can fix the problem. If that were ever to occur.
I think they aiming at better than "just enough". I understand that this technology was used by a drone to take out a bad guy - the technology is better than you give it credit for.
I can promise you that it's not.
@whatwasherproblem: Unsurprisingly, the promises of an internet stranger mean little to me.
Meanwhile, IMO the technology is awesome and getting better all the time.
(I'm not saying stores are using leading edge technology, but they also are not using it to violate liberties.)
You constrain the technology according to it's capability.
What we should be worried about is when the technology is at a stage where we can using robots to detain people.
…But when the technology is that good, I'd probably support that too.
Unsurprisingly, the promises of an internet stranger mean little to me.
Good on ya, chiefie. Let me back it up a bit then.
Remember that time that Amazon's facial recognition algorithm incorrectly matched 22 members of US Congress with mugshots of felons?
Or how about more recently at the end of 2020, where New Jersey police facial recognition incorrectly pined a black guy with the crime of shoplifting and trying to hit a cop? The actual culprit was a completely different person, but the innocent man still spent time in jail for the screwup.
Or heck, let's keep it super basic: how about the simple fact that you can perturb a convolutional neural network's inputs with random, small-amplitude noise (undetectable to the human eye) to get them to, say, think that a picture of a panda is actually a vulture, or a gibbon?
AI (and Machine Learning in general) is ridiculously over-hyped, and it becomes a massive problem when policymakers also get high on their own supply and start throwing caution to the winds. After all, if you're (incorrectly) convinced that facial recognition is accurate and more impressive than it is, then who needs sanity checks? You know, like double-checking to make sure that the people the AI says committed the crime were physically capable of being at the crime scene when it happened?
…But when the technology is that good, I'd probably support that too.
Cringe and soypilled. There are fools arguing that we're at that "the technology is so good!" point already, but I'm sure you're smarter than they are so it's not foolish at all when you say it.
We pretty much are under constant surveillance anyway. Google and apple are always listening through our phones and tracking our locatjons, our internet is monitored by ISPs who are required to feed that info to the government, in SA we have hidden cameras in some of our street lights in the CBD that police can use, most workplaces have cameras nowadays.
Not saying it's right, it just simply is
You can't compare it to being under video surveillance 24/7. That day is coming soon along with credit score just like China. Then cbdc's, after they'll tell you what you can/ can't eat. I'll have more freedom in prison, but don't worry everything will be fine.
I would of thought the past 2 plus years would of woken some people up but nah, eyes and eyes closed shut.
I love it. Incredibly stupid people doing incredibly stupid things in front of cameras, then getting a visit from the police the next day.
There is a lot of backlog to clear, but the world is slowly becoming a better place as we get the riffraff off the streets.
The better technology we put out there, the better life will be for decent people.
Theft is only the starting point. With this technology, plus data from various web sources, they can will build up a profile for each customer, and then use that to their advantage.
Imagine you're a new dad, you're sleep deprived, heading to Kmart for nappies at 8pm because you ran out unexpectedly. Your profile suggests you deal with stress by eating. Suddenly, as you go through the checkout, all the candy bars light up and the prices change.
"Candy bars, were $1.50, now 50c! For the next 5 minutes! Price only valid for MS PAINT".
You have been working on your impulse control, and normally can resist them even though it's hard, but when it's a deal like this. So you cave. After all, it's just one candy bar, and you're so tired.
Now multiply that by 100 times a day.
And that's only one example. The real one to be afraid of for extreme OzBargainers is being targetted as a Low-Profit-Customer. All those deals we take advantage of, the *was $50, now $5".. they don't make the company any money. They are good for us, but break even at best for the company we get them from.
As the situation is now, a customer is a customer, so we hide in among all the other people who shop and spend big. But once tracking starts, they will start implementing the 80/20% rule. They won't ban people from shopping, at least not right away, but they will put minimal effort in and charge more for basic items.
Trust me, this is just the start.
I'm guessing you're trolling, and that you don't actually read the things you reply to. Or if you do you can't understand them. So you say whatever you need to dismiss it, whether that's 'nonsense!' 'lunacy!' 'Conspiracy hogwash!' or any of the many variations of conversation stoppers.
Because anyone with half a brain could see this isn't a conspiracy theory.
A conspiracy theory would be that they are doing all this so that the higher ups can watch you enter your pin and then steal your identity. You know a conspiracy theory because it only makes half sense. Usually theres an easier way of doing it, and the benefit/cost doesn't make practical sense.
But this.. This is common sense. It's logical, pragmatic. It's the end game, maximisation of the Market Equilibrium Price Equation. It's business.
The only way this doesn't get done, is if it's no longer needed because there are better ways (Like if internet shopping completely takes over and brick and mortar shops cease to be a thing)
What about if they know you earn $200k per year bank and are happy to not shop a deal but are a sucker for some endorsement or bragging?
'You've been sent to the store by a grumpy other half, haven't been laid in months because both you and your partner aren't in the mood; earlier you drank some Belle bathwater but your private time was cut short to pickup said nappies. Before the impulse buying display is in sight all the prices change to double, or even triple the price so the few patrons before you are visibly in shock. As you approach you hear a familiar song and see Belle's face displayed only to you. Being the heightened hormoned infused alpha you are, you grab 5 of everything; not only to simp for Belle but also to show dominance and psychologically brag to the customers around you. Giving yourself that slight dopamine hit because you may not get to finish your private time later'.
It's like the whole marketing tactic of $40 - $60 - $150. They want people to buy the middle, but some would pay $150 just because it's more expensive. Or how some companies had trouble selling a service/item until they literally doubled the price.
Who said these companies would use it just for "good" things? They ONLY care about money, if they can make more profit from you they sure as shit would.
My partner knows everything I look at and buy, because once I buy it ads immediately start popping up on her instagram page for whatever it is.
I definitely don't want this kind of tracking because they'll also know every product I look at while walking around the store, not just what I buy. It can then be transformed into being bombarded by advertising for those products and special pricing, particularly if I looked at something more profitable.
Data harvesting has gotten completely out of control. I'm for anything that reins it in at all at this point. Privacy should be a basic right.
With this technology, plus data from various web sources, they can will build up a profile for each customer, and then use that to their advantage.
First of all, brick and mortar stores are already building a profile on their customers and using that data to their advantage. What do you think loyalty programs (eg. FlyBuys) are? People aren't ignorant as to how loyalty programs work, it's a two way street - and people largely don't care. I don't.
The only way this doesn't get done, is if it's no longer needed because there are better ways (Like if internet shopping completely takes over and brick and mortar shops cease to be a thing)
Yeah, see it's interesting that you said that. Because, unlike the above, I don't think most people realise the extent that customer profiling happens when shopping online. Not only are all your online shopping habits captured in excruciating detail (every item you visited, how long you spent on an item page, etc etc) but all supermarket giants have social network 'cross-site' trackers installed on their websites, so those details are cross referenced with your Facebook, Google, etc profiles (if you use those social networking sites) which obviously maintain a profile of you in infinitely more excruciating detail.
Before anyone suggests I've got my tin foil hat on, you can visit coles.com.au or woolworths.com.au yourself and ask the browser you're using to show the trackers installed on those websites. It's quite easy to do. Once you do that, do some googling to understand what those trackers are actually doing. For example, here are the trackers that Safari on my iPhone reports it has blocked on coles.com.au: https://i.ibb.co/xXvCxQG/Screenshot-1.png
So why do Coles and Woolies install those social media trackers on their websites? Simply, it's mutually beneficial. Now Facebook/Google know your shopping habits, and now Coles/Woolworths know a hell a lot more about you so they can advertise to you better. On a side note, and not surprisingly at all, Google Chrome (unlike most other web browsers) does not block trackers by default, because why would Google want to cannibalise their own business?
Trust me, this is just the start.
TLDR; you're making a song and dance about 'facial recognition' in brick and mortal stores being a slippery slope, when online shopping tracking is already (and will continue to be) so much more pervasive. As I've demonstrated above, even Facebook and Google profile your activity through the Coles and Woolies websites. And more importantly, again; I think most people don't care. On a personal note, I care enough that I don't use Facebook (including Instagram, etc), but not enough that I don't use Google (I can’t live without Search, Maps or YouTube).
And if you do care, and you were one of the ones who voted "Damn that sucks, I won't be entering those stores any more" in the poll, that's your prerogative, but realise you'd do much better to close your Facebook and Google accounts (and stop using Google Chrome) if tracking worries you that much.
And if you do care, and you were one of the ones who voted "Damn that sucks, I won't be entering those stores any more" in the poll, that's your prerogative, but realise you'd do much better to close your Facebook and Google accounts (and stop using Google Chrome) if tracking worries you that much.
Absolutely.
In fact, I'm always an advocate for alter-egos for most online stuff now. Pretty much everywhere tracks you as you venture around online. So a better course of action than boycotting is to isolate the you that's being tracked and getting up to mischief online, from the you that has things like a 9-to-5/professional reputation/contacts/etc. It's not foolproof, but it makes you harder to track and/or dox if you're disciplined and start properly segregating online stuff.
@whatwasherproblem: Within the comments, there are a few stating it is already happening, so why bother fighting it.
I think that is a shame since it's better to tackle a monster when it is little. That is what I think you're doing @whatwasherproblem.
Thanks for pushing the message uphill.
Don't bother trying educate the stupid. They'll have the horse blinkers on for the rest of there life 🤣😂
I have Amazon account for last 15-ish years and not a single time I've seen an ad that would offer me to buy something I was not already searching myself, they seem thinking that I always want buy one more Rolex and I want it be exactly the same as the one I bought a week before.
And that's the most technologically advanced company on the planet. So don't worry about ads.
Surveillance on the other hand is a real concern but… wear a mask :) Isn't Covid great when you can use it for your advantage?
In 2000, the internet was clunky static pages. If it had video, it was really just a series of lowres images flashed one after the other.
In 2020, business's were running their whole operation online, and doctors are doing entire consultations over webcam.
Things change. It doesn't happen overnight, but it does happen. As bargain hunters, we should all be aware of what direction retailers are headed in, so that a) We have time to set ourselves up so that we don't get trapped by this BS, and b) to take advantage of the chaos that happens during every transition, and work it to our benefit.
I was reading something a couple months ago. They can already track us pretty well with the free wifi even if we do not connect to the network.
I think more tracking happens when you use rewards cards or your bank card to make purchases. As someone who was assaulted at work by a shoplifter, I think this is a great idea and thanks to these cameras jail time was served by the offenders.
If it was just about stealing shit the ol cameras do a good job 😀😉
I watched a lady fill up her bag in Kmart , she didn’t realise i was watching,by the time i could alert security she had just walked out the store.
So when i pointed her out they said she’s a well known shoplifter and they couldn’t do anything as she had left the store.
So why didn’t they check her on the way out if she’s well known and who made up the law that once they leave they can’t be charged if caught.
So that leaves if they have stuff in there bag while in store they can only retrieve it as they havnt technically left the store to be charged with theft…..
If someone could explain me why Kmart has checkouts in the middle of the store..
Maybe so there is more camera footage as they leave.
These cameras are probably good enough to detect "guilty behaviour" as they leave
I've heard this "can't be charged" thing before and don't think it's correct.
I witnessed someone leaving woolies with an unpaid trolley load and the self checkout supervisor just reset the register for the next customer.
I mentioned to a police officer, who said it isn't just ignored. Everyday, the store gets the video footage of the thefts and send it to the police. Each thief gets a visit the next day.
I detect a whiff of urban legend.
@SlickMick: I was more interested in the second part of your legend - your friend the police officer.
Does every store (Woolies, Coles, K-Mart, Big W, Aldi. etc etc etc) really send video to the local cop shop every day?
And how do the cops recognise the miscreants by the next day - so they can pay them a visit?
And what happens then?
@jackspratt: apparently it is the same handful of continuous offenders that are continually visited.
I can't speak for every store, and whether it's everyday depends whether it happens everyday - I should have said everyday there was an incident. I just know 1 business that has a continuous arrangement with the police - they're working on finding a better solution since it's very time and bandwidth consuming.
edit: sorry didn't read to the end - there where more questions…
I don't know what happens then, my friend doesn't give me a detailed report.
who made up the law that once they leave they can’t be charged if caught.
There isn't such a law. You just can't randomly stop and search people, even if you suspect they stole something.
If you know they stole something - ie personally witnessed the theft - then you can detain them and wait for the cops. But you better be 100% sure, or you might be the one getting arrested.
But do you look vaguely similar to someone who does?
That is actually a great response, we don’t use facial recognition for anything other than identifying criminal acts. Do you know how often our staff are abused or assaulted (often by repeat offenders), do you know how many people try and walk out on a daily basis with trolleys full of stock or walk in with a docket they have found in the car park and will pick the items off the shelves and take them for a false refund. The facial recognition cameras have already contributed towards bringing shrinkage loss down by over $20 million in just the last year.
Those who trade freedom for security deserve neither.
The ability to be anonymous is very much a freedom.
I thought this was mostly for advertisers, not security anyway? They have plain old CCTV for that and given their motivation to stop shoplifters when they're found I doubt they'll be following them up after the fact, and that would require personally identifying information to be known from their face print
Wear a mask and sunglasses. Problem fixed. It's not like they are going to ask you to remove your mask.
What I dont get is that the "i WoNt bE gOiNg tHeRe AnYmOaR" people dont want to give Kmart their details but will then get on Fartbook, Instascam, TikTok, etc. on their iPhone/Android smart device and give these companies more information than what Kmart could hope to collect.
These are probably the same people that willingly hand over all their personal details and shopping habits to "cash back" sites in exchange for a worthless $3 gift card to a place they dont shop. But noooo… don't let Kmart use facial recognition to help hunt down recidivist shoplifters.
who would have thought wearing a mask would have so many benefits
Some celebrities have been doing this way before 2020.
its all a ploy to get the anti-maskers/anti-vaxxers/conspiracy people to wear masks
Like your logic.
How else can us sheep pick each other out from the normal people.
You assume people are dumb enough to do all that.
You can be on the internet and use fake details….
It won’t take long before your glasses fog up and you trip over something wearing a mask.😂
Or wear a balaclava or stocking if you want to be extra safe.
What I dont get is that the "i WoNt bE gOiNg tHeRe AnYmOaR" people dont want to give Kmart their details but will then get on Fartbook, Instascam, TikTok, etc. on their iPhone/Android smart device and give these companies more information than what Kmart could hope to collect.
You know that there are people who don't do any of that for this exact reason? Just because some people are hypocrites about this problem, that doesn't it's not a problem at all.
Woolworths are also using similar technology at their self serve checkouts. I wonder if there is anything you can buy to place over the camera when using the checkout?
Yeah, it's called "your thumb". They are free as well.
I can't believe privacy legislation doesn't outlaw this. Forget about same sex marriage being a slippery slope… this is the slippery slope.