Hacker News Reader

Comment by mistrial9 | Hacker News Reader

Target physical stores still build profiles of shoppers using non-disclosed facial recognition? "theft prevention"

One of the alternatives is to just close stores bc of excessive theft, like Walgreens and CVS are doing in the Bay Area.

I'm not saying Target's implementation is justified, but surely there's a middle ground for scaling anti-theft ops and using technology responsibly?

San Francisco closings hit the national news a few months ago -- what's the state of it now? Any reopenings?

Do they not deserve to know who is coming into their store? Do I have a right to anonymity if I'm on private property?

There is an understanding between shopper and shop owner about what is happening on said property. The shopper normally does not expect that the shop owner would instantly know your entire biography + family lineage just by stepping onto the property.

How can he get that from just a photo?

From firms like this[1].

[1] https://www.vice.com/en/article/5dmkyq/heres-the-file-clearv...

You collect cell phone IMEIs and sell it to a data broker that aggregates multiple sources to pinpoint strong associations that lead back to a shopper's home. In return you get demographic data on your customers.

Yes, you do have a right to expectation of privacy. A verbal contract is still required for filming you. Open ended contracts aren't valid as well.

We don't live in ancapistan.

> verbal contract is still required for filming you

I mean that's obviously not true. Otherwise they wouldn't have security cameras.

Those are typically written contracts - as in the sign with a camera when entering buildings.

sure - posted plainly to the public. "caveat emptor" While we are at it, where are those records kept? Who sells them, to whom? What happens when there are factual errors in a private profile on members of the public? What other restrictions are placed on members of the public due to undisclosed records? What political affiliations do the owners of TARGET have, and do they use their company assets for political purposes, or private law-enforcement activities? Politics and law-enforcement are regulated acitivities, for historically important reasons, right?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com