71–80 of 369 posts
Whoever builds a wearable “sparkler” that is able to disrupt digital cameras or the underlying tech in a way that doesn’t require the user to wear a large scarf or similar is going to really usher in an interesting part of history.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pay cash, wear a hat and a mask in store, decline to give them PII. It’s a pretty simple and effective solution.
But then don't I become that guy from the xkcd comic whose license plate is all 1s and Is?
Walmart makes this rather obvious. I was walking down a medicine aisle the other day, and I looked up and saw my face on a screen with green lines outlining it.
Last time I was in a Walmart, it felt like they were doing everything they could to communicate they didn't want me to shop at their store. * Gates at the main entrances * Cameras everywhere * "Security" walking through the store in clearly marked uniforms * Self checkouts with UX that clearly communicates a lack of trust.
Well, suppose they became aware. Then what?
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…
So which retailers are doing this?
EDIT: elsewhere in these comments someone stated that Apple does not use facial recognition.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then we can stop going to stores and shop more online, since another upside of bricks-and-mortar is gone.
Or show up in one of those anti face recognition masks whenever you go shopping.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All that seems like they don't want you to steal at their store by giving deterrent cues. Which parts were practically inconvenient, or slow you down?
It's not about inconvenience or efficiency. It's the hostile signaling Walmart is communicating to their customers. I go to the Target just down the street, and it's the exact opposite experience.
I don't like getting treated that way, so I've started shopping more often at Lowes, even though it takes a couple minutes longer to get there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What’s the point of a smart phone if you only have WiFi and no gps?
WiFi calling
Kroger has felt especially intrusive for a couple of decades; it's almost as though they're going out of their way to be manipulative and creepy, right from the store layout where Pepsi is $87.00 at your feet and Coke is $0.75 at eye level, down to the personalized coupons they send you in the mail. But the big stores that don't have loyalty cards are still slurping up data; they just get it from your credit card and…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is common the world over. What is not common the world over is that there is this thing called exceptionalism which America uses to tell itself that they are the good guys in everything they do and in general better at everything they do. This is something I haven't experienced anywhere else. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism
I have never heard any politician here say "British people are x" or that "British people feel y". In America such expressions appear in almost every speech. Likewise for news headlines etc. In the UK the title would be "customers not aware" and the like. This is to give the (correct) impression that the entire nation has in no way been united by this fact. But in the US it seems more common to use terminology that l…
You haven't? Here's some speeches I found using "uk prime minister speech":
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49102495
>British people have had enough of waiting.
>Brexit was a fundamental decision by the British people [...]
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-leader-speech-...
>It will leave the British people wondering [...]