Norway to track all supermarket purchases?

Post by awildfivreld » Sat, Jun 04, 2022, 7:56 PM UTC

MontyCarloHall wrote: post #210

Beltalowda wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fail to see how you can get this kind of data from anonymized supermarket receipts? Entirely different data collection methods: sure. But the entire point of this is that was too difficult ("time-consuming and error-prone", according to the SSB).

Issue national ID cards that contain a private key. For each citizen, the government would encrypt a mapping of their national ID number -> anonymized ID ("anonID") using their corresponding public key. The anonID could only be used to look up anonymized demographic data, updated when new IDs (and thus new encryption keys) get issued, once every few years. When checking out at the supermarket, your national ID number…

Post by verisimi » Sat, Jun 04, 2022, 8:05 PM UTC

hhjinks wrote: post #321

burnished wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You, uh, sorta can't. There is no unowned land left. You can squat but that is living as an outlaw. Also >You don't get to use any of society's infrastructure if you don't opt in, though. You don't represent the rest of us, so why are you pretending to the authority to make stipulations like this? I'd imagine if there were any outlands left to retreat to, you would at least have some bartering going on there at the f…

I'm not pretending to be an authority on anything, or representing anyone but myself. You can't just pick and choose which parts of society you want to comply with. If you do, you get incarcerated. As a direct consequence, interfacing with society's infrastructure is a soft opt-in, which will result in your incarceration if you don't live within the bounds of that society. So it's not a stipulation, nor do I require…

Post by specialist » Sat, Jun 04, 2022, 8:05 PM UTC

MontyCarloHall wrote: post #231

jvm___ wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're already being tracked by the grocery stores, wouldn't it be better to be tracked by someone who at least tries to have your best interests at heart vs. the grocery industry who just wants to sell you more?

Realistically, what is the worst possible consequence of a supermarket being able to track you? At worst, I suppose you be could be charged more for purchasing a certain item at that particular chain. I highly doubt this has ever happened, since it's bad for business. The usual consequence for getting tracked at the supermarket is getting a discount on certain groceries via a loyalty program, with zero downsides for…

Post by dgeiser13 » Sat, Jun 04, 2022, 8:09 PM UTC

bjornsing wrote: post #376

wiz21c wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As said in the article, we already share our data with the supermarket, google, etc and whatever other systems that binds all of them together. In that situation, I'm happy that government has access to the same data because it gives it a way to balance the private sector power. Now what is needed is the ability to opt out.

This angle is increasingly popular, but I think totally naive and even dangerous: When the shit hits the fan there is no “balance” of power between government and the private sector. History is not full of examples of corporations putting people in camps and working them to death, despite the government’s attempts to prevent it. The government has all the power (when it really matters).

Post by car_analogy » Sat, Jun 04, 2022, 8:19 PM UTC

bbddg wrote: post #180

leeroyjenkins11 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea behind the separation is that the government has the ability to make you do something with the threat of force. Not to say we shouldn't put protections from private corporations in place, but they can't legally imprison you.

You're just describing laws. Is the worry here that they could more effectively enforce laws because of this tracking? Is that a bad thing?