Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google starts tracking what people buy in physical stores

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 252 posts

Re: Google starts tracking what people buy in physical stores

#181

Post by gvurrdon »

speedplane wrote: post #147
adjkant wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a fair answer, and I'm sure one that many share. Thanks for addressing the question directly - I see how for a minority of users, the switch makes sense. I guess for me, I don't care enough to make all those changes. As a Chrome user, the sync across things is nice, and I enjoy the interface. I'll take the ease at risk of someone having my data in a catastrophic situation. Obviously, your choice makes great se…

Another possible solution is to go through all of Google's privacy settings and opt-out of all their tracking. They're better than most about being upfront and giving you opt-out options.

Indeed, though AFAIK they still haven't implemented a 'stop constantly nagging me to turn the surveillance settings back on' option.

I've had the settings off for some time.

Re: Google starts tracking what people buy in physical stores

#182

Post by wiz21c »

jansho wrote: post #145
wiz21c wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love this question too. I think we're heading for a full blown "société de contrôle" (see Wikipedia). So the locus of power is changing. Before it was repression, now it is control. It's not inhernetly good or bad. But my gut feelings says that we're transtionning to that society. And while we're transitionning, the first movers, the fastest movers (Google, FaceBook, etc) have an advantage and therefore may look da…

> what are the forces that are here to balance the powers. Well there's no chance of a David vs Goliath so the only one I can think of is governments. Yeah...

Yep, I know that but somehow, at my age (and I'd say even at a younger age), one must think that change does exist and that change is for the better. So maybe there's a David somewhere... Right now I'm thinking about the Pirate Party, but I have no ideas of what they're doing...

Re: Google starts tracking what people buy in physical stores

#183

Post by pdkl95 »

adjkant wrote: post #120
gub09 wrote: post #66

This is probably an unusual opinion, but for me privacy is similar to freedom. Freedom is usually defined as a negative: people are free of oppression, have freedom of speech (freedom from speech being constrained), freedom of movement (not forced to stay in one place), religious freedom (freedom to believe what one will and not be limited in practice or assembly), etc. Privacy is the freedom from being watched, from…

I think it's important to note the definition of privacy you use is important. For me, in my daily life, all of this is completely "private". Google having my data in mass and an identity profile on me that no human will ever specifically look at is just as good as private to me. The fact that computers will be handing this data, not other humans, is an important distinction for me. No human will ever see my individu…

> the definition of privacy you use is important

Yes, it is. Defining privacy to mean the very opposite of "private" is pure doublethink/newspeak.

> Google having my data

You're not giving your data only to google. You're also giving it to anybody that hacks Google's servers to take their data at any point in the future (and anybody that buys it from the hackers), and any government (or other entity with sufficient power or influence) that orders (legally or illegally) Google to turn over their data, and anybody that Google might sell the data to should they have unfortunate financial troubles. This list will probably grow as the value of data grows and creative new ways to exploit data are discovered.

I commend Google for taking security seriously. You data is probably saver with them than than many business. However, they are still human so they make mistakes. Hacks will happen even with the very best well-funded security teams using impossibly good practices. When governments are involved, it may not even be Google's choice.

You need to remember that data doesn't go away, so the risk of who it may spread to only increases with time.

> other humans

Humans don't need to see your data for it to harm you. Your insurance company doesn't need a human to feed data from Google (or whomever) (possibly blinded through some sort of "rating service"?) through the machine learning and/or "risk assessment" heuristic du jour to raise your rates or deny coverage.

> centralized power

Pretending the world is just[1] - that your data will somehow be limited to only Google - gives Google a lot of power, that will be hard to reclaim. If by some miracle they are able to do better than most people throughout history that acquire power and only use their power for benevolent reasons, the same cannot be said indefinitely into the future.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis

Re: Google starts tracking what people buy in physical stores

#184

Post by TeMPOraL »

sverhagen wrote: post #64
mc32 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is possible to track the serials, if they wanted to; however, except for banks, I have not exchanged cash with a retailer who scans the bills at the point of transaction and if they did, they'd also have to tie a given ser no with me at the time of purchase. Since a particular bill will go through many hands, it'd be like trying to figure out who made a change on a system when it was done by 'root' or 'administrat…

Sigh, but Google will find a way...

They'll build a "better" cash register which bundles counterfeit money detector and serial number scanner in the same package. Combined with facial recognition on the cameras and accurate timestamps on both CCTV and the cash register, you have your perfect money tracking system right there.

Re: Google starts tracking what people buy in physical stores

#185

Post by 0x45696e6172 »

mc32 wrote: post #58
Cyphase wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cash is an anonymous payment system which cannot be traced ... I just wanted to point out the possibility of tracking serial numbers on bills. Obviously it's not going to be as reliable, at least not now, but it could be made more so; for instance, if there was a sudden movement to use more cash for privacy. Of course, that seems unlikely; most people like the convenience of plastic/digital payments, and there's a…

It is possible to track the serials, if they wanted to; however, except for banks, I have not exchanged cash with a retailer who scans the bills at the point of transaction and if they did, they'd also have to tie a given ser no with me at the time of purchase. Since a particular bill will go through many hands, it'd be like trying to figure out who made a change on a system when it was done by 'root' or 'administrat…

Something like half of the supermarkets in Denmark scan all money bills they receive supposedly with the purpose of defeating counterfeit money. However it could easily do OCR on the serial as well. Combine that with CCTV records, and and it does not offer much more privacy than credit card payments.

Ironically I started to appreciate it, after I received a fake bill from a different store.

Re: Google starts tracking what people buy in physical stores

#186

Post by 659087 »

evolve2k wrote: post #119

> The new tracking system was created in consultation with “incredibly smart people” to ensure it's not invasive. He described the program as “secure and privacy safe.” It's not "incredibly smart people" you need; it's "highly ethical people".

Agreeing to work on mass surveillance/manipulation tech isn't something highly ethical people do.

Re: Google starts tracking what people buy in physical stores

#187

Post by thr0waway1239 »

speedplane wrote: post #146
AznHisoka wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MasterCard and Visa not only make money from each credit card transaction but to add insult to injury, they make money selling that transaction data as well! That's what I call a ludicrous business.

I've heard that this is not a very big business for Visa/Mastercard. That's because the credit card processors don't get many details on the purchase, they just know the amount, the user, and the bank they are sending the money to.

That's because they can't do much with this info since they aren't also a giant ad network. Now imagine the same data in the hands of a company which has built one. They should probably start charging more :-)

Re: Google starts tracking what people buy in physical stores

#188

Post by thr0waway1239 »

thinkling wrote: post #4

FTA: "Google says it has access to roughly 70% of U.S. credit and debit card transactions through partnerships with companies that track that data." Wow.

My first thought was: why only 70%?

This may be a case where the savings (i.e. money from selling data in return for a big pile of cash) are actually passed on to the customer - e.g. transaction costs are lower for Visa/Mastercard for merchants, which is why they sometimes don't accept Amex and Discover.

It would be interesting to see if Visa and Mastercard have some clause which prevents Google from buying data from AMEX and Discover (competitive advantage for them because then Amex and Discover's transaction costs aren't subsidized) in return for agreeing to part with their data. Said another way, what's preventing Google from also getting data from Amex or Discover? Its not as if Google is going to say no.

Re: Google starts tracking what people buy in physical stores

#189

Post by Sophira »

thinkling wrote: post #4

FTA: "Google says it has access to roughly 70% of U.S. credit and debit card transactions through partnerships with companies that track that data." Wow.

This was absolutely the most worrying part for me. How in the hell did Google get access to that much?

Re: Google starts tracking what people buy in physical stores

#190

Post by a_imho »

birracerveza wrote: post #171
a_imho wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you implicitly agree to their ToS when you enter a partner store? It's a technical detail of creative lawyering. They must have covered the legal aspects and factored in the fines in case they get a slap on the wrist. I guess it is the same thin line you have between tax evasion and tax optimization and Google has a nearly unlimited budget to try to move this line in their favor.

But it's not like agreeing to a ToS allows you to do illegal things, stalking being one of them. And yes, the definition keeps fitting more and more Google's tracking methods. I know that I sound dramatic, but all of these kind of things that we have let Google do would be considered HIGHLY illegal if instead of a company it was a single, private individual.

Not dramatic at all, it is stalking, it is unethical but defining illegal is very complicated and up to the elected bodies.

Powerful entities should not be above the law but in practice they are, no point denying that. I'm sure everyone has an explanation according to taste how come double standards can be the normal.

Post reply on HN