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

Home Depot sued for 'secretly' using facial recognition at self-checkouts

petapixel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 627 posts

Re: Home Depot sued for 'secretly' using facial recognition at self-checkouts

#51

Post by AngryData »

ProllyInfamous wrote: post #40

Home Depot's self-checkouts are using this facial ID to build/maintain their shoplifting database — this tracks thefts by the same person across multiple visits, and is used over time to build up a case against errant self-checkout-ers (i.e. to get them above a theft threshhold, at which point prosecution becomes easier). There is also CCTV AI (whether artificial intelligence, or actually indians) which can intervene…

Im not sure we should allow such premeditated charge stacking, it is just further weaponizing the law and fueling our prison industrial complex for zero gain to society. Who is to say many of those people wouldn't have stopped after being caught and charged the first time? Imagine if cops sat on the side of the road not pulling people over, just recording minor traffic offenses in a file, and then a year or so later drop 10+ charges on a person all at once and turning the collective charges into felony reckless driving charges? People would be outraged and nothing of worth would be gained.

Re: Home Depot sued for 'secretly' using facial recognition at self-checkouts

#52

Post by mlyle »

m463 wrote: post #42
delichon wrote: post #3

The green box around his face in the image is evidence that it detected a face, but not that it had collected or stored identifying biometrics. It would be legal for a POS device to detect any face, e.g. to help decide when to reset for the next customer. But as I understand it, this would usually be enough to trigger discovery, where he could learn the necessary technical details. Even if this suit fails, the store…

It still "recognizes a face" and shows this. Legal terms do not have to be scientific or engineering terms.

Detecting a face is not the same as recognizing a face in either engineering parlance or typical usage.

If I don't determine this is a face that I've seen before, I've not recognized the face (maybe I have recognized that there is a face there).

To recognize entails re-cognizing: knowing again what was previously known. Simply noticing that something is a face does not satisfy that; it is only detecting. Without linking it to prior knowledge, recognition hasn’t occurred.

Re: Home Depot sued for 'secretly' using facial recognition at self-checkouts

#53

Post by pixxel »

add-sub-mul-div wrote: post #19
bgwalter wrote: post #12

Don't use self-checkouts. You do all the work, slower than the cashier, and are treated like cattle. Often there is a supervisor breathing down your neck and demanding the receipt before the exit doors open. Now there is facial recognition.

I drive to the store, pick things up off the shelf, carry them all around the store, take them to my car, drive home, bring them into the house, but moving the items twelve inches across a bar code reader is "work"? I need some low paid worker to do that trivial part so I can feel some sort of status of having been served?

[dead]

Re: Home Depot sued for 'secretly' using facial recognition at self-checkouts

#54

Post by pests »

AngryData wrote: post #51
ProllyInfamous wrote: post #40

Home Depot's self-checkouts are using this facial ID to build/maintain their shoplifting database — this tracks thefts by the same person across multiple visits, and is used over time to build up a case against errant self-checkout-ers (i.e. to get them above a theft threshhold, at which point prosecution becomes easier). There is also CCTV AI (whether artificial intelligence, or actually indians) which can intervene…

Im not sure we should allow such premeditated charge stacking, it is just further weaponizing the law and fueling our prison industrial complex for zero gain to society. Who is to say many of those people wouldn't have stopped after being caught and charged the first time? Imagine if cops sat on the side of the road not pulling people over, just recording minor traffic offenses in a file, and then a year or so later…

Target is also known for building cases over time until more serious charges can be used.

Re: Home Depot sued for 'secretly' using facial recognition at self-checkouts

#55

Post by widforss »

AngryData wrote: post #51
ProllyInfamous wrote: post #40

Home Depot's self-checkouts are using this facial ID to build/maintain their shoplifting database — this tracks thefts by the same person across multiple visits, and is used over time to build up a case against errant self-checkout-ers (i.e. to get them above a theft threshhold, at which point prosecution becomes easier). There is also CCTV AI (whether artificial intelligence, or actually indians) which can intervene…

Im not sure we should allow such premeditated charge stacking, it is just further weaponizing the law and fueling our prison industrial complex for zero gain to society. Who is to say many of those people wouldn't have stopped after being caught and charged the first time? Imagine if cops sat on the side of the road not pulling people over, just recording minor traffic offenses in a file, and then a year or so later…

What you're describing is essentially the exact point system used for traffic infractions in many countries over the world. Driving 10 km/h above the speed limit? No biggie, you pay a fine. Do it three times? We take your license.

Re: Home Depot sued for 'secretly' using facial recognition at self-checkouts

#56

Post by Ekaros »

AngryData wrote: post #51
ProllyInfamous wrote: post #40

Home Depot's self-checkouts are using this facial ID to build/maintain their shoplifting database — this tracks thefts by the same person across multiple visits, and is used over time to build up a case against errant self-checkout-ers (i.e. to get them above a theft threshhold, at which point prosecution becomes easier). There is also CCTV AI (whether artificial intelligence, or actually indians) which can intervene…

Im not sure we should allow such premeditated charge stacking, it is just further weaponizing the law and fueling our prison industrial complex for zero gain to society. Who is to say many of those people wouldn't have stopped after being caught and charged the first time? Imagine if cops sat on the side of the road not pulling people over, just recording minor traffic offenses in a file, and then a year or so later…

Seems like proper punishment is only way to get deterrent effect. Or the courts to do their job. So to me this sounds like workable way, stack up the habitual offenders and send them to jail for a few months to few years setting them on straight path.

Re: Home Depot sued for 'secretly' using facial recognition at self-checkouts

#57

Post by m463 »

mlyle wrote: post #52
m463 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It still "recognizes a face" and shows this. Legal terms do not have to be scientific or engineering terms.

Detecting a face is not the same as recognizing a face in either engineering parlance or typical usage. If I don't determine this is a face that I've seen before, I've not recognized the face (maybe I have recognized that there is a face there ). To recognize entails re-cognizing: knowing again what was previously known. Simply noticing that something is a face does not satisfy that; it is only detecting. Without lin…

but just think about other things.

Like the google 'incognito' mode that wasn't private browsing, and google was found guilty.

engineers might say "of course it's not private" but the court opinion differed.

common sense to a normal person might not match engineer thinking.

Re: Home Depot sued for 'secretly' using facial recognition at self-checkouts

#58

Post by fluoridation »

Ekaros wrote: post #56
AngryData wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Im not sure we should allow such premeditated charge stacking, it is just further weaponizing the law and fueling our prison industrial complex for zero gain to society. Who is to say many of those people wouldn't have stopped after being caught and charged the first time? Imagine if cops sat on the side of the road not pulling people over, just recording minor traffic offenses in a file, and then a year or so later…

Seems like proper punishment is only way to get deterrent effect. Or the courts to do their job. So to me this sounds like workable way, stack up the habitual offenders and send them to jail for a few months to few years setting them on straight path.

I feel like if the rules are going to change like this, they should change fairly. A few months in jail for what would have been petty crime if not for the repetition seems excessive. If right now there's a lower cash value threshold for prosecution, the fair thing is that there should be a lower rate threshold. For example, someone shouldn't be jailed for stealing a thousand dollars worth of batteries over the course of ten years, I don't think.

Re: Home Depot sued for 'secretly' using facial recognition at self-checkouts

#59

Post by fluoridation »

widforss wrote: post #55
AngryData wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Im not sure we should allow such premeditated charge stacking, it is just further weaponizing the law and fueling our prison industrial complex for zero gain to society. Who is to say many of those people wouldn't have stopped after being caught and charged the first time? Imagine if cops sat on the side of the road not pulling people over, just recording minor traffic offenses in a file, and then a year or so later…

What you're describing is essentially the exact point system used for traffic infractions in many countries over the world. Driving 10 km/h above the speed limit? No biggie, you pay a fine. Do it three times? We take your license.

No, not "do it three times". "Get fined for it three times." That's the key difference; there's feedback from the system that's supposed to act as a corrective. What's being discussed here would be taking away someone's license sight unseen, with no previous lesser punishment having been administered.

Re: Home Depot sued for 'secretly' using facial recognition at self-checkouts

#60

Post by bigstrat2003 »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #7
FridayoLeary wrote: post #5

Sounds like the guy is fishing here. Theres no proof in the article that Home Depot is actually storing his information. I'm personally pretty suspicious about the cameras at self checkouts and at the entrance of supermarkets, but this lawsuit looks like a waste of time, or this is a really badly written article.

Not our first rodeo. Post 2010 we ask for evidence data collection is not happening, and not being sold for $$$.

You can't prove something is not happening, nor even provide evidence. So that would be a quite unreasonable standard if that truly is what you think we should enact.
Post reply on HN