11–20 of 24 posts
What these tools do is "generalize", which is essentially the same as "discriminate". (If someone makes generalizing assumptions about another person, then whether this is based on shopping-behavior, or skin-color, is not relevant.) Hence such tools should be forbidden, or at least their use restricted.
While obvious to say, use cash.
If your purchase habits are uniquely trackable, upon switching to cash you'd need to modify your purchasing habits sufficiently to disassociate them from your past-self. Good luck!
While obvious to say, use cash.
Assuming you've never used non-cash, you mean? If your purchase habits are uniquely trackable, upon switching to cash you'd need to modify your purchasing habits sufficiently to disassociate them from your past-self. Good luck!
I do not think that's quite right, at least in this instance. For the study in the article, the use of a single credit card number links purchases together, which is what enables the de-anonymization. If you pay with cash, there's no purchase identifier, so it is more difficult (impossible?) to link multiple purchases to an individual (anonymous) person. This potentially changes, if people are tracking serial numbers on bills.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
May not be long before shops go cashless. With increasing numbers of people using the magic plastic - cash may fade out over time. Also, bank notes (at least in the UK) sometimes have serial numbers so it isn't wholly foolproof.
In the US, banks and most businesses who accept cash track the serial numbers of 50 and 100 denominated bills. I would imagine that banks keep a handle on the serials of their 20s as well, which are by far the bills most commonly dispensed from ATMs.
Most banks don't include the 2 I use, one of which is not small, nor does the grocery store that's the target of many of those $100 bills.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
May not be long before shops go cashless. With increasing numbers of people using the magic plastic - cash may fade out over time. Also, bank notes (at least in the UK) sometimes have serial numbers so it isn't wholly foolproof.
In the US, banks and most businesses who accept cash track the serial numbers of 50 and 100 denominated bills. I would imagine that banks keep a handle on the serials of their 20s as well, which are by far the bills most commonly dispensed from ATMs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Assuming you've never used non-cash, you mean? If your purchase habits are uniquely trackable, upon switching to cash you'd need to modify your purchasing habits sufficiently to disassociate them from your past-self. Good luck!
> If your purchase habits are uniquely trackable, upon switching to cash you'd need to modify your purchasing habits sufficiently to disassociate them from your past-self. I do not think that's quite right, at least in this instance. For the study in the article, the use of a single credit card number links purchases together, which is what enables the de-anonymization. If you pay with cash, there's no purchase ident…
My role in the house is to buy the cat food and the hard liquor. I imagine someone at the supermarket statistics centre studying my shopping habits and wondering how one family can survive on whisky and Friskies Chicken & tuna dinners.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the US, banks and most businesses who accept cash track the serial numbers of 50 and 100 denominated bills. I would imagine that banks keep a handle on the serials of their 20s as well, which are by far the bills most commonly dispensed from ATMs.
"[citation needed]" Most banks don't include the 2 I use, one of which is not small, nor does the grocery store that's the target of many of those $100 bills.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"[citation needed]" Most banks don't include the 2 I use, one of which is not small, nor does the grocery store that's the target of many of those $100 bills.
My work experience includes working in retail where we hand recorded the numbers on large bills each night and in the morning. I'm pretty sure banks track these numbers; what makes you believe yours don't?
What makes me sure the banks I use don't suitably track the numbers is that I show up to them with $20s just acquired from an ATM (saves time) and they don't take any actions that would allow recording of the numbers of the $100s they give me in return. The bills just come out of a slot in the usual drawer, the teller only count them by hand to make sure they're all $100s and that she's giving me the right number of them. I'd add that many people would notice if she ran them through an OCR machine before handing them over....
What you're talking about sounds more anti-counterfeiting efforts, $100s having of course the highest payoff, and at worst case they only reveal that person X shopped at that establishment the day before. Which I suspect is not typically damning, e.g. that I shopped at a grocery store without any details as to what I bought suggests that I'm a human that eats food, little more.
I wouldn't say I'm "paranoid" about this sort of thing, i.e. I pay cash locally more to avoid credit card fraud than to keep details about myself private, but I read the appropriate SF when I was young, and being a hacker in the sense of this forum I pay close attention to these things. As of yet in my corner of SW Missouri there's no sign of them.