4 ms·

I hope that everyone that is trying this out and/or is excited about the technology is aware that they are basically giving away their biometric data. The way y

I hope that everyone that is trying this out and/or is excited about the technology is aware that they are basically giving away their biometric data. The way you talk, your physical dimensions, your behavior, everything that makes you you can now be monetized (if we’re lucky). I know the same argument can be made for buying stuff online - but in the physical world you cannot really change your appearance without ridiculous costs/time involved.

ncallaway 7y ago
But...they same could be said of walking into a regular supermarket too. Many supermarkets already have a large amount of CCTV inside of them. Some of these are already mining the data for the concerns you describe (often without the audio aspect). What makes this worse than that?
- stefco_ 7y ago
  I suspect that this sort of project requires them to develop tools that significantly lower the barrier to performing automated biometric data gathering. It is also easier for them to link your body to your digital presence and identity since you need to use your Amazon account. A store using this sort of tech could therefore much more easily monetize your biometrics. In any case, we desperately need regulations to govern government/corporate use of individuals' biometrics.
- mirceal 7y ago
  yes. you are right. what makes a supermarket “better” is that their tech is not yet there + you can in theory pay with cash making it harder to link your identity with your characteristics. we need strong privacy laws so that the penalties for collecting/abusing biometric data is a strong deterrent for whoever does this kind kf thing.
  - agertw2 7y ago
    I can't believe that people are cheering this sort of thing on. You walk into many chain stores now and a big TV is positioned right up front to show you that your face is being scanned as soon as you walk into the store. It's no longer overhead/recessed/obscured. People simply have faith that this whole thing cannot end badly? You know who else is under constant surveillance? Prison populations. But hey, that's not us. After all, we're free! Are we ready for global microchipping now? How convenient everything will be! We'll just have faith that the system won't fail or be abused, because the benevolent corporations, governments, and banks are simply trying to improve our lives, to disrupt global commerce and pave the way toward a brighter, smarter future. Do we need microchips in our arms anyway? We've got them in our credit card and bank card and personal ID and cell phone and smart watch and fitbit, and all the other gizmos we're fixing to our bodies to improve user experience. 5+ points of electronic contact conveying all manner of information to bluetooth, wifi, and cell networks with greater precision than ever before, thanks to the 5G rollout, which is clearly for our benefit. There are no drawbacks, or the benefits outweigh the drawbacks, or that's just the price of progress, or that's just the way things are, and we have nothing to hide after all so why bother contemplating any negative repercussions when we can simply consume. It's what we're here for. It's easier now than ever before to consume with maximum efficiency while minimizing human contact, so we can get back to the more important parts of life like plugging into social media feeds to get our daily dose of social engineering. "We need strong privacy laws" - I've heard that one before. It's hard to enforce laws when the law enforcers are the ones breaking them. Laws for me and you though, yes. But think of all the terror! We need to scan our faces to the terror databases so our protectors can shield us from all the terror. It's for our safety. Please, think of the children.
  - ncallaway 7y ago
    Yea, I'm absolutely onboard with privacy laws that make this kind of mass biometric recognition illegal or subject to very strong constraints. The point I (poorly) tried to raise wasn't: "well, grocery stores could do this too, so it's not a problem". Rather, it was more: "shouldn't this be even more alarming, given that it can already happen at most stores across the country".

ncallaway 7y ago

But...they same could be said of walking into a regular supermarket too. Many supermarkets already have a large amount of CCTV inside of them. Some of these are already mining the data for the concerns you describe (often without the audio aspect). What makes this worse than that?

stefco_ 7y ago
I suspect that this sort of project requires them to develop tools that significantly lower the barrier to performing automated biometric data gathering. It is also easier for them to link your body to your digital presence and identity since you need to use your Amazon account. A store using this sort of tech could therefore much more easily monetize your biometrics. In any case, we desperately need regulations to govern government/corporate use of individuals' biometrics.
mirceal 7y ago
yes. you are right. what makes a supermarket “better” is that their tech is not yet there + you can in theory pay with cash making it harder to link your identity with your characteristics. we need strong privacy laws so that the penalties for collecting/abusing biometric data is a strong deterrent for whoever does this kind kf thing.
- agertw2 7y ago
  I can't believe that people are cheering this sort of thing on. You walk into many chain stores now and a big TV is positioned right up front to show you that your face is being scanned as soon as you walk into the store. It's no longer overhead/recessed/obscured. People simply have faith that this whole thing cannot end badly? You know who else is under constant surveillance? Prison populations. But hey, that's not us. After all, we're free! Are we ready for global microchipping now? How convenient everything will be! We'll just have faith that the system won't fail or be abused, because the benevolent corporations, governments, and banks are simply trying to improve our lives, to disrupt global commerce and pave the way toward a brighter, smarter future. Do we need microchips in our arms anyway? We've got them in our credit card and bank card and personal ID and cell phone and smart watch and fitbit, and all the other gizmos we're fixing to our bodies to improve user experience. 5+ points of electronic contact conveying all manner of information to bluetooth, wifi, and cell networks with greater precision than ever before, thanks to the 5G rollout, which is clearly for our benefit. There are no drawbacks, or the benefits outweigh the drawbacks, or that's just the price of progress, or that's just the way things are, and we have nothing to hide after all so why bother contemplating any negative repercussions when we can simply consume. It's what we're here for. It's easier now than ever before to consume with maximum efficiency while minimizing human contact, so we can get back to the more important parts of life like plugging into social media feeds to get our daily dose of social engineering. "We need strong privacy laws" - I've heard that one before. It's hard to enforce laws when the law enforcers are the ones breaking them. Laws for me and you though, yes. But think of all the terror! We need to scan our faces to the terror databases so our protectors can shield us from all the terror. It's for our safety. Please, think of the children.
- ncallaway 7y ago
  Yea, I'm absolutely onboard with privacy laws that make this kind of mass biometric recognition illegal or subject to very strong constraints. The point I (poorly) tried to raise wasn't: "well, grocery stores could do this too, so it's not a problem". Rather, it was more: "shouldn't this be even more alarming, given that it can already happen at most stores across the country".