Hacker News Reader

Comment by pugworthy | Hacker News Reader

In exploring my state (Oregon), I'm seeing an interesting pattern to where they are frequently located. Specifically, at home improvement store parking lots.

And in most cases, the ones at home improvement stores are the only ones in the city. Salem (the state capital) only has them at Lowes. Eugene is an exception with many cameras (including Home Depot and Lowe's).

I'd be interested in when these cameras were placed. If recent, I'd wonder about an ICE/immigration response.

Just zooming around the map, here's a handful of citys I've seen...

Lowe's: Albany, Salem, McMinville, Vancouver WA, Fairview, Eugene, Bend, Redmond, Medford

Home Depot: Sherwood, Hillsboro, Beaverton, Cedar Mill (Beaverton), Tigard, Vancouver WA, Portland (multiple), Gresham, Oregon City

* Edit * Ah here's an article about this: https://www.404media.co/home-depot-and-lowes-share-data-from...

View on HN

Montana is an interesting state. Very few cameras state wide (20), and all but 3 are at Lowe's and Home Depot.

Because those places have a huge problem with shoplifting. At least that's the story they tell.

I imagine there's some truth to that. But if I was someone wanting to setup some ICE action, I'd probably be drooling at the thought of accessing that data being a central gathering points for day laborers looking for work.

https://www.wsj.com/business/retail/home-depot-immigration-i...

As I understand it, these stores are very likely to be gathering points anyway. You don't need surveillance to tell you that. Someone could walk in posing as a contractor and ask where to find cheap workers too.

Home improvement stores have a LOT of theft, especially in some cities. People try to walk out with power tools and expensive gear all the time.

Maybe? It would have to be a pretty big theft to go to all the trouble of finding the vehicle on camera, identifying the owner, figuring out if the thief was the owner, etc.

They aren’t going to do all that if it’s a relatively small value theft. And the big value stuff is usually locked down.

And if it’s for their own protection why be part of a bigger network shared with law enforcement for whatever they (LEO) wants?

There is no maybe about it. These thefts are well-known and spur the defensive measures you're talking about. It goes beyond just locking things up. There are AI systems tracking your movement through the store, and they can even immobilize your shopping cart on the way out if they think you didn't pay. Some tools also have RFID based activation schemes, without which they can't be used.

It is the job of the police to investigate thefts. Therefore it kind of makes sense why they might want to put up cameras in high crime areas. We just don't want the cameras to be abused. I don't want to be tracked and have the contents of my house itemized by systems like this. Is there a less intrusive way to prevent crime, perhaps by posting a security guard? I think so. But what does it cost, and would you rather pay for that or deal with the camera?

Why not Target and Walmart then? Or Costco?

The stuff on their shelves is less valuable. They also get more traffic and seem to have more security cameras and staff. Target has had a lot of thefts. If I'm not mistaken, Target had an AI system to track faces of shoplifters and the accumulated value of the stuff that was stolen. Costco won't generally let you in if you don't have a membership, and there are people at the entrances and exits at all times.

Have you not seen the stores like Walgreens that have very basic toiletries behind glass? This stuff is very location dependent and some cities (most?) are still normal. Many stores including Target and Walmart are using AI to track shoplifters. They have had to resort to adding up thefts over time until it totals over $1000 or something, because theft is so pervasive. That's not the kind of theft you need outside cameras for, but these stores see it all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com