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

401–410 of 627 posts

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

#401

Post by Manuel_D »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #325
bevhill wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Peak COVID never ended. It's more important now than ever to stay vaccinated, maintain social distance, and mask up.

COVID is down from its peak, as I understand. It's just very much not gone, and by no means less nasty. We had the opportunity to wipe it out with a short, synchronised global lockdown, and we squandered it, and now it's like plague.

A short global lockdown? China pursued the zero COVID policy for two years. Even highly restrictive measures weren't enough to stem it.

COVID is no longer a novel virus and its deadliness has vastly decreased. Yes it is by any reasonable understanding of the phrase, COVID is "less nasty". At its peak, 20,000 people were dying each week due to COVID in the US. Presently that figure sits around 200.

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

#402

Post by fyrabanks »

respondo2134 wrote: post #356
dml2135 wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting rid of checkout clerks, forcing customers to use self-checkout, and then surveilling and policing said customers to make sure that the unpaid labor they are now performing is done flawlessly is just so dystopic. IMO, if you want to have self-checkout, you need to accept a higher rate of loss. That's the tradeoff for replacing your employees with robots and forcing labor onto the consumer. You can't have your…

self-checkout at a grocery store is so maddening. There are enough edge cases (discounted items, multiples, lack of barcodes, special deals) to make it painful if you have anything more than a few staples. And I'm sure it's also part of the disgusting push to barcode & box produce which is a negative for everyone but the suppliers & stores. >> IMO, if you want to have self-checkout, you need to accept a higher rate o…

I was at a Whole Foods last year and was tired from driving for about 6hrs straight. I scanned one item, set up a paper bag on the right, and then mindlessly bagged every other item in my cart without scanning. I paid probably $3-4 on a $60 purchase.

As soon as I got to the hotel and figured it out, I went back to correct the mistake--but imagine getting harassed or taken to the back for a careless error? I'm sure that happens more often than I hear about.

(PS I am genuinely surprised their weight sensor, that flags an attendant, didn't go off. That thing usually trips if you breathe on it funny.)

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

#403

Post by krunck »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #295
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…

> There is also CCTV AI (whether artificial intelligence, or actually indians) That's a new one. It's clever but I feel guilty having laughed.

Why guilty? The Indians are doing their job that stupid tech companies pay them for. The phrase has nothing to do with Indians but rather with unmasking the "AI washing" done by companies trying to drive up stock prices.

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

#404

Post by OptionOfT »

speedylight wrote: post #278
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…

Not just easier, they’re probably waiting until the cumulative value leads to felony theft charges.

Without justifying the theft, isn't it weird that they get rid of cashiers at registers which would scan your items, and thus prevent theft, put computers in place and then rely on software to shift the burden of solving theft to the public?

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

#405

Post by andy_xor_andrew »

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…

I was wondering this as well. The green box could simply indicate it detected a face, using something like YOLO, or even a simpler technique like some point-and-shoot cameras use to decide where to focus (on faces, obviously).

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

#406

Post by HankStallone »

dml2135 wrote: post #339
neilv wrote: post #76

I'm pretty sick of misguided/enthusiastic Loss Prevention people, and these digital systems amplify their hijinks. The most conspicuous one recently was at one upscale grocery chain within the last year. There was what I took to be a dedicated LP person who seemed to be lurking behind the self-checkouts, to watch me specifically, and I stood there until he went away. Then, as I was checking out, this employee came up…

Getting rid of checkout clerks, forcing customers to use self-checkout, and then surveilling and policing said customers to make sure that the unpaid labor they are now performing is done flawlessly is just so dystopic. IMO, if you want to have self-checkout, you need to accept a higher rate of loss. That's the tradeoff for replacing your employees with robots and forcing labor onto the consumer. You can't have your…

The small-town Dollar General I visit turned the second, usually-idle checkout lane into a self-checkout about a year ago. A few months later, they turned it off and haven't used it since.

I suspect it just didn't make sense to have an employee outside smoking or sitting in the break room scrolling on a phone while the customers went through and maybe paid for their goods, when that employee could simply run the checkout counter.

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

#407

Post by criddell »

speedylight wrote: post #278
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…

Not just easier, they’re probably waiting until the cumulative value leads to felony theft charges.

How would that work? If they have video from a year ago that looks like a person pocketing some item, what good is that without them showing that the person actually had possession of the item after they left the store?

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

#408

Post by y-curious »

dkiebd wrote: post #383
MisterTea wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> yet bearded street person with big trash bag full of product makes them think of lovable Santa? They do not want to confront trash bag man for good reason. What happened is people who don't give a fuck and have no problem with using violence realized there's nothing stopping them from loading up bags of goods and walking out of the store. "Oh you want to stop me? just try mother fucker." Even so called security gua…

Don't know how it is in the states but in most places in Europe using violence against a violent person is likely to end up very badly for you, even if you are a guard and have the necessary permits and training. You are not going to risk being fined or jailed to stop some criminal from shoplifting from a store that is not even yours.

What is the role of a security guard if not to wield violence? Their equipment implies a capability for violence. Are they unable to perform their job legally in Europe?

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

#409

Post by vwcx »

fyrabanks wrote: post #402
respondo2134 wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

self-checkout at a grocery store is so maddening. There are enough edge cases (discounted items, multiples, lack of barcodes, special deals) to make it painful if you have anything more than a few staples. And I'm sure it's also part of the disgusting push to barcode & box produce which is a negative for everyone but the suppliers & stores. >> IMO, if you want to have self-checkout, you need to accept a higher rate o…

I was at a Whole Foods last year and was tired from driving for about 6hrs straight. I scanned one item, set up a paper bag on the right, and then mindlessly bagged every other item in my cart without scanning. I paid probably $3-4 on a $60 purchase. As soon as I got to the hotel and figured it out, I went back to correct the mistake--but imagine getting harassed or taken to the back for a careless error? I'm sure th…

Given that Prime now displays itemized orders purchased at Whole Foods, imagine getting your Amazon account flagged/banned for your mistake...

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

#410

Post by peaseagee »

tehwebguy wrote: post #370
hollerith wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Even so called security guards want no part of trash bag man because there is a high chance of violence and most humans do not want to engage with that. There are plenty of reliable young men who enjoy engaging in violence and will take low-paid jobs in store security. (There are many more who don't actively enjoy it, but don't mind engaging in it and consider being competent at violence an important part of being a…

Or maybe they just don’t want any violence in their stores at all? I will avoid shopping somewhere that has regular ass whoopings way more than I would avoid shopping somewhere with regular shoplifting.

So I guess you've never frequented Waffle House ;-)
Post reply on HN