3 ms·

As much as I agree with you to some extent, every store you walk into, and make a purchase from, whether it is a 7-11 or Costco, knows you. Especially true of g

As much as I agree with you to some extent, every store you walk into, and make a purchase from, whether it is a 7-11 or Costco, knows you. Especially true of grocery stores where frequent shopper cards and tracking is used to determine not only the ads you see, predict your purchases, but also overall product placement within the store as well. A good example of just how well stores know us: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/16/how-target-figured-out-a-teen-girl-was-pregnant-before-her-father-did/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/16/how-targe...

abawany 11y ago
I agree that this example is disturbing. However, you can shop at most stores with cash and no memberships, which I believe would make tracking more difficult. Further, tracking used for recommendations is one issue but in my mind, the idea of collecting semi/non-repudiable information about customers such as ID card numbers and date of births is more disturbing to me, particularly from an ID theft point of view.
- jeffmould 11y ago
  I get what you are saying. On the other hand I don't personally have a problem with driver license number or date of birth being shared. These two pieces of information are so easy to collect on an individual that it is almost impossible to prevent at some point. For example, my grocery store sells alcohol, you have to be 21 to purchase, and the cashier will scan your id into the system. So even if you don't have a shopper card and are paying cash, they have still collected identifying information. While they are not legally required to store and collect the info, they are legally required to verify that you are at least 21 years of age and take advantage of that to correlate. I also place some value in my grocery store knowing what I buy and the frequency at which I may purchase those products. Every week I get an email from them with a list of sale items specifically targeted at me including products previously purchased and ones I may be interested in based off those products. So to me being able to save a couple dollars here and there simply by them knowing what I purchase and when is worth them having the information. In the end I could care less if someone knows what I buy at the grocery store every week and what little information my store has on me (I pay cash at the grocery store out of habit) would be useless to a thief unless you plan on stealing my groceries or are looking for a discount on milk.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > However, you can shop at most stores with cash and no memberships, which I believe would make tracking more difficult. As long as you don't show your face, sure. http://www.computerweekly.com/news/4500253499/Almost-30-of-retailers-use-facial-recognition-technology-to-track-consumers-in-store http://www.computerweekly.com/news/4500253499/Almost-30-of-r...
  - abawany 11y ago
    According to my read of this article, it seems that this pertains to the UK in 30% of the retailers there. Also, 70% of the consumers expressed discomfort with most of the tracking techniques with the highest disagreement pertaining to intimate tracking techniques such as facial recognition. I feel that this strengthens my point rather than weaken it. These UK stores are doing this subtly without telling the consumer - when the consumer is asked, s/he expresses alarm.
    - dragonwriter 11y ago
      > I feel that this strengthens my point rather than weaken it. To the extent your point is "people don't like to be monitored", sure. Your point seemed to be, at least in part, "avoiding ID-based memberships is an effective means of avoiding monitoring", and to the extent that is the point, the fact that stores are (subtly or not) employing techniques like facial recognition weakens that point.
      - abawany 11y ago
        I think you have oversimplified my position. My specific complaint was related to Costco demanding government-issued ID to start a membership. Frankly, I am not sure what your article or statement is intended to show: that we should just accept it because stores are doing it "subtly" in spite of the customers' objections?

abawany 11y ago

I agree that this example is disturbing. However, you can shop at most stores with cash and no memberships, which I believe would make tracking more difficult. Further, tracking used for recommendations is one issue but in my mind, the idea of collecting semi/non-repudiable information about customers such as ID card numbers and date of births is more disturbing to me, particularly from an ID theft point of view.

jeffmould 11y ago
I get what you are saying. On the other hand I don't personally have a problem with driver license number or date of birth being shared. These two pieces of information are so easy to collect on an individual that it is almost impossible to prevent at some point. For example, my grocery store sells alcohol, you have to be 21 to purchase, and the cashier will scan your id into the system. So even if you don't have a shopper card and are paying cash, they have still collected identifying information. While they are not legally required to store and collect the info, they are legally required to verify that you are at least 21 years of age and take advantage of that to correlate. I also place some value in my grocery store knowing what I buy and the frequency at which I may purchase those products. Every week I get an email from them with a list of sale items specifically targeted at me including products previously purchased and ones I may be interested in based off those products. So to me being able to save a couple dollars here and there simply by them knowing what I purchase and when is worth them having the information. In the end I could care less if someone knows what I buy at the grocery store every week and what little information my store has on me (I pay cash at the grocery store out of habit) would be useless to a thief unless you plan on stealing my groceries or are looking for a discount on milk.
dragonwriter 11y ago
> However, you can shop at most stores with cash and no memberships, which I believe would make tracking more difficult. As long as you don't show your face, sure. http://www.computerweekly.com/news/4500253499/Almost-30-of-retailers-use-facial-recognition-technology-to-track-consumers-in-store http://www.computerweekly.com/news/4500253499/Almost-30-of-r...
- abawany 11y ago
  According to my read of this article, it seems that this pertains to the UK in 30% of the retailers there. Also, 70% of the consumers expressed discomfort with most of the tracking techniques with the highest disagreement pertaining to intimate tracking techniques such as facial recognition. I feel that this strengthens my point rather than weaken it. These UK stores are doing this subtly without telling the consumer - when the consumer is asked, s/he expresses alarm.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > I feel that this strengthens my point rather than weaken it. To the extent your point is "people don't like to be monitored", sure. Your point seemed to be, at least in part, "avoiding ID-based memberships is an effective means of avoiding monitoring", and to the extent that is the point, the fact that stores are (subtly or not) employing techniques like facial recognition weakens that point.
    - abawany 11y ago
      I think you have oversimplified my position. My specific complaint was related to Costco demanding government-issued ID to start a membership. Frankly, I am not sure what your article or statement is intended to show: that we should just accept it because stores are doing it "subtly" in spite of the customers' objections?