Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by emodendroket | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

emodendroket

Well, suppose they became aware. Then what?

View on HN

Then we can stop going to stores and shop more online, since another upside of bricks-and-mortar is gone.

Hard to say if all the data collection that happens online is any better

Isn't that the point? No way out really.

Sure there’s a way out. Elect representatives who will vote to outlaw the use of facial recognition and other tracking technologies.

There are many things I wish they would do and this isn't at the top of the list for me.

That's kind of why we have broken laws.

People vote for what's on the top of their list, which is always one side of the abortion debate, the gun debate, the social justice/identity politics debate, or otherwise.

The stuff further down, in aggregate, matters a lot more, and is universally corrupt.

Not sure those are the top ones either but let's grant the point. What do you think voters should be doing instead?

Shop local, independent stores. Vote with your wallet.

How do I know local, independent stores aren't using face recognition?

I can get a home security face recognition camera for $30. This is no longer elite technology.

I'll take my chances with the panopticon.

Then it's time to build yourself a greenhouse

I think I understand your general point. However, I can’t help but feel like it’s a form of giving up. We should be “yelling” loudly to our politicians while boycotting retailers that implement this.

Or show up in one of those anti face recognition masks whenever you go shopping.

You've kind of been handed a readymade excuse to obscure half your face at all times. One of the big ironies of the 1/6 event that people were so committed to masklessness as a political statement that they filmed themselves commiting crimes without obscuring their faces.

Data tracking and collection has always been a thing for big brick and mortar stores, it's just that tracking technology has massively progressed in the past decade.

Yeah that’s all loyalty cards are about.

Normalize masks? Let them figure my face from that!

They're trying to recognize your face anyway. e.g. see https://pages.nist.gov/frvt/html/frvt_facemask.html It looks like the testing is still done in relation to synthetic masks, but I could see that shifting over time. Absolutely repugnant that the industry is targeting masked individuals, but it's happening none the less.

Mask, hoodie and a cooler and I'm sure they can't do crap. They can try gait but it's a losing proposition anyway.

The traditional Japanese bank robber getup (I guess because these were common items anyway) is surgical mask and sunglasses.

Then they will reject anti-virus software so we should be fine.

I tried telling random adults on the main street in my University town that Target was using non-disclosed facial recognition, about four years ago, for a while. The rate of response was less than half for people to show concern. I also somewhat-randomly discovered a local "facial aware" security system installer at the coffee shop. Once he noticed I was asking pointed questions about consent, he changed his tone and said "yeah I install a bunch of high tech shit" and ended the conversation. Weeks later I saw him driving by and rode my bicycle next to him in traffic making a scene (saying nothing that could be construed as a threat). He was a little shaken that time I hope.

As a US Citizen I am strongly opposed to non-disclosed facial recognition in commercial settings. The covid masking is almost like Greek-fable humor of the gods, rendering even ATM (perfect picture) facial recognition moot.

> Weeks later I saw him driving by and rode my bicycle next to him in traffic making a scene while saying nothing that could be construed as a threat. He was a little shaken that time I hope.

You tried to subtly threaten and shake up the owner of a local coffee shop, weeks later, as revenge for not entertaining your questions about the features of his security system?

I did no threatening or revenge, and you should definitely retract that statement.

You made a scene, while intentionally avoiding saying anything that could be construed as a threat (which is generally an attempt at subtle threatening), and you hope that you shook him up.

To remove that part: you hope that you shook up a local business owner for not entertaining your questions about the features of his security system?

Why so much respect for someone just because they're a business owner?

Sounds more like someone liked surveillance but got shaken up by sousveillance.

I would mention it if they were his neighbor or a cab driver as well.

It's not a matter of respect, but this person simply installed a security system for their safety. They're obviously not extremely technical. They're just trying to go about their day, serve their customers and make a living, and go home.

My point in that wording is that it's some random local person in the community, not the head of the NSA's PRISM program. It's actually crazy to try and shake that person up for installing security cameras in their coffee shop and not getting everyone who walks in to sign a consent form to be recorded.

ok we have to close this thread but I will say that a) you have several assumptions there that I know are not this case b) I own my actions and I repeat it here for the group c) many systems of law are changed over time; the law has not caught up to the tech, and it is up to people in daylight to make the world, not backroom deals or secret profiles. I will stick with that one - this is a Daylight Action if you see what I mean

> It's not a matter of respect, but this person simply installed a security system for their safety.

And OP asked questions about it and got brushed off. At least in most of Canada (not even EU), if you’re collecting personal info, you have to answer to how/what/why you collected it and provide notice of that too.

Following somebody on the street is less threatening than filming them for lifelong worldwide tracking and profiling

If you followed one specific person perhaps, but just doing that in your store? Seems like a stretch.

>saying nothing that could be construed as a threat.

>He was a little shaken that time I hope.

Choose one of these.

informed consent - pick two

.. expanded the sentence might be "shaken from his onerous and insular attitude to one of realization that others are not able to agree if they are not informed"

Surprising that these tactics did not work.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com