6 ms·

Indeed. This isn't new. It's everywhere. The cameras retailers use with their surveillance systems are coming with facial recognition built in now. [1] And lo

by rpeden 9y ago

Indeed. This isn't new. It's everywhere. The cameras retailers use with their surveillance systems are coming with facial recognition built in now. [1] And lots of retailers, banks, etc, are using systems that track people's visits across multiple locations. [2] You'll see a lot of these systems being sold as fraud/loss prevention solutions. The reason for this is that it's a relatively easy sell this way - customers can count how many thieves they've caught this way to easily determine the ROI they're getting on the system. Once the systems are in place, it's relatively easy to start using them for marketing related purposes. Not all uses of systems like these are necessarily unethical. Consider a case where you want to set up a rule like 'if the average lineup length at the checkouts exceeds 5 people, call backup cashiers'. The problem is that once you have something like this in place, it's very tempting for company execs to want to use the data for legal but less than ethical purposes. [1] https://www.axis.com/ca/en/solutions-by-application/facial-recognition https://www.axis.com/ca/en/solutions-by-application/facial-r... [2] https://www.facefirst.com/solutions/face-recognition-predictive-analytics/ https://www.facefirst.com/solutions/face-recognition-predict...

fps 9y ago
Just yesterday I was hearing news of how most of the retail giants and lots of smaller retail stores are going out of business due to competition from ecommerce. If that means the end of practices like this, then good riddance.
- clarkmoody 9y ago
  Perhaps, but it simply means the survivors will become more desperate to gain an edge. We've seen this exact behavior with online news sources cramming more and more ads and trackers into websites.
- z2600 9y ago
  But, aren't ecommerce sites collecting this information and more from your browsing? I don't think it's possible to say one is much better than the other, just that we expect tracking online, not in the real world.
  - BoorishBears 9y ago
    They're even more accurate than facial recognition at building a profile of what demographic you fit in
  - parhurs 9y ago
    There is the point that in the "real world", social norms haven't yet adapted to the requirements of privacy (although you could also view it as societal norms allowing too much tracking). For example, if I wanted to use a mask to conceal my face from trackers, I would be ostracized. There are analogues in the virtual world of course, but it's usually harder in the physical world.
    - beachbum8029 9y ago
      This also works http://www.instructables.com/id/The-Invisible-Face-Mask-/ http://www.instructables.com/id/The-Invisible-Face-Mask-/
      - dmitrygr 9y ago
        some modern cams (at least traffic ones) no longer use AGC and will not be fooled by this
- fixermark 9y ago
  It's likely traditional retail that falls by the wayside is going to make room for more competitive retail that leverages this information to its advantage in a way ecommerce sites can't. Consider Amazon Go (https://www.theverge.com/2016/12/5/13842592/amazon-go-new-cashier-less-convenience-store)---after https://www.theverge.com/2016/12/5/13842592/amazon-go-new-ca... setting up an account with a store, users enter, grab what they want, and leave. The system of cameras and biometric trackers observing the store figures out after-the-fact what you grabbed and charges it automatically to your account through a sensor fusion including face recognition. That's a level of convenience rivaling ecommerce for things people want to grab by hand (often produce and small items, for example), and it's completely enabled by this category of technology.
fixermark 9y ago
That's always going to be tempting, and the only real tractable solution is for society to have a larger conversation on the ethics so the law can catch up with it. Note that some ethical consensus is key---without it, companies can just price "Well, some customers think image recognition is creepy" into the risk model and do it anyway. Compare privacy concerns---people talk big about their concerns over privacy, but in practice, we're still in a world where a survey-taker can get very personal information from a random individual at a mall by offering a free candy bar. Until and unless people arrive at a common consensus that their personal information---including their face---has value or they have a proprietary right to that information, even in public, there's no real tractable solution to this problem. ... because there's no real agreement that there's a problem to solve.
- throwaway91111 9y ago
  Woah, i'd give away a lot of information for a candy bar. I get nothing from ads; they lower the quality of everyone's life.
  - fixermark 9y ago
    Often, you're more-or-less getting the content surrounding the ads from the ads, albeit indirectly. My local gas station upgraded its pumps recently to allow it to play video ads on the screen used to do the credit card transaction. I don't doubt it's partially the reason that gas station is still operational when similar non-franchises vendors in town have gone under.
    - throwaway91111 9y ago
      Often times i don't give a damn about the content it sponsors. I'd much rather be able to do my business without being assaulted by ads, which often have little to do with reality, and often act as an alienating and dehumanizing force. It's very difficult to see the good. I would rather have no content than ad-supported content. of course, nobody will ever offer that! You can't sell ads if people can opt out, and too many big players think they're the only way. Thank gas station should have charged more or folded than sell you shit you don't want, won't want, and will never spend money on.
jhonovich 9y ago
"The cameras retailers use with their surveillance systems are coming with facial recognition built in now. [1]" Your source in the marketing material of an IP camera manufacturer. We research that space and I can guarantee that less than 0.1% of IP cameras have facial recognition built-in or running. These manufacturers, like Axis, whom you cite, would love for such capabilities but they are still very uncommon.
- rdudek 9y ago
  Can't they still use the feed from regular camera and have another system to facial recognition from that feed?
- alasdair_ 9y ago
  >We research that space and I can guarantee that less than 0.1% of IP cameras have facial recognition built-in or running. While I'm sure this is true (since the majority of IP cameras in the world are cheap things little more than webcams), do you have a number for retail stores specifically? I know many of the larger chains spend a lot of money on their cameras and movement detection and other intelligence has been onboard those for at least 15 years.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
- Mz 9y ago
  It is HIPAA, not HIPPA. It stands for "Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act." I get your basic point and I don't disagree that we need more privacy protection. But, no, we do not "need HIPPA" for all personal information.

by rpeden 9y ago

fps 9y ago

Just yesterday I was hearing news of how most of the retail giants and lots of smaller retail stores are going out of business due to competition from ecommerce. If that means the end of practices like this, then good riddance.

clarkmoody 9y ago
Perhaps, but it simply means the survivors will become more desperate to gain an edge. We've seen this exact behavior with online news sources cramming more and more ads and trackers into websites.
z2600 9y ago
But, aren't ecommerce sites collecting this information and more from your browsing? I don't think it's possible to say one is much better than the other, just that we expect tracking online, not in the real world.
- BoorishBears 9y ago
  They're even more accurate than facial recognition at building a profile of what demographic you fit in
- parhurs 9y ago
  There is the point that in the "real world", social norms haven't yet adapted to the requirements of privacy (although you could also view it as societal norms allowing too much tracking). For example, if I wanted to use a mask to conceal my face from trackers, I would be ostracized. There are analogues in the virtual world of course, but it's usually harder in the physical world.
  - beachbum8029 9y ago
    This also works http://www.instructables.com/id/The-Invisible-Face-Mask-/ http://www.instructables.com/id/The-Invisible-Face-Mask-/
    - dmitrygr 9y ago
      some modern cams (at least traffic ones) no longer use AGC and will not be fooled by this
fixermark 9y ago
It's likely traditional retail that falls by the wayside is going to make room for more competitive retail that leverages this information to its advantage in a way ecommerce sites can't. Consider Amazon Go (https://www.theverge.com/2016/12/5/13842592/amazon-go-new-cashier-less-convenience-store)---after https://www.theverge.com/2016/12/5/13842592/amazon-go-new-ca... setting up an account with a store, users enter, grab what they want, and leave. The system of cameras and biometric trackers observing the store figures out after-the-fact what you grabbed and charges it automatically to your account through a sensor fusion including face recognition. That's a level of convenience rivaling ecommerce for things people want to grab by hand (often produce and small items, for example), and it's completely enabled by this category of technology.

fixermark 9y ago

That's always going to be tempting, and the only real tractable solution is for society to have a larger conversation on the ethics so the law can catch up with it. Note that some ethical consensus is key---without it, companies can just price "Well, some customers think image recognition is creepy" into the risk model and do it anyway. Compare privacy concerns---people talk big about their concerns over privacy, but in practice, we're still in a world where a survey-taker can get very personal information from a random individual at a mall by offering a free candy bar. Until and unless people arrive at a common consensus that their personal information---including their face---has value or they have a proprietary right to that information, even in public, there's no real tractable solution to this problem. ... because there's no real agreement that there's a problem to solve.

throwaway91111 9y ago
Woah, i'd give away a lot of information for a candy bar. I get nothing from ads; they lower the quality of everyone's life.
- fixermark 9y ago
  Often, you're more-or-less getting the content surrounding the ads from the ads, albeit indirectly. My local gas station upgraded its pumps recently to allow it to play video ads on the screen used to do the credit card transaction. I don't doubt it's partially the reason that gas station is still operational when similar non-franchises vendors in town have gone under.
  - throwaway91111 9y ago
    Often times i don't give a damn about the content it sponsors. I'd much rather be able to do my business without being assaulted by ads, which often have little to do with reality, and often act as an alienating and dehumanizing force. It's very difficult to see the good. I would rather have no content than ad-supported content. of course, nobody will ever offer that! You can't sell ads if people can opt out, and too many big players think they're the only way. Thank gas station should have charged more or folded than sell you shit you don't want, won't want, and will never spend money on.

jhonovich 9y ago

"The cameras retailers use with their surveillance systems are coming with facial recognition built in now. [1]" Your source in the marketing material of an IP camera manufacturer. We research that space and I can guarantee that less than 0.1% of IP cameras have facial recognition built-in or running. These manufacturers, like Axis, whom you cite, would love for such capabilities but they are still very uncommon.

rdudek 9y ago
Can't they still use the feed from regular camera and have another system to facial recognition from that feed?
alasdair_ 9y ago
>We research that space and I can guarantee that less than 0.1% of IP cameras have facial recognition built-in or running. While I'm sure this is true (since the majority of IP cameras in the world are cheap things little more than webcams), do you have a number for retail stores specifically? I know many of the larger chains spend a lot of money on their cameras and movement detection and other intelligence has been onboard those for at least 15 years.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

Mz 9y ago
It is HIPAA, not HIPPA. It stands for "Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act." I get your basic point and I don't disagree that we need more privacy protection. But, no, we do not "need HIPPA" for all personal information.