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

Barred from Grocery Stores by Facial Recognition

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 75 posts

Re: Barred from Grocery Stores by Facial Recognition

#31

Post by LordDragonfang »

AdamJacobMuller wrote: post #9

This is conflicting, on one hand it's certainty within the right of a store to bar people who shoplift, it's really an imperative to do so. The petty crime issue the retailers here are trying to counter is a real one. But this application it feels like falling down an increasingly slippery slope. Sure, today, it's just "send an alert and the store can do what it wants" but how long until that transforms into a de fac…

>He had just chased after three shoplifters who had taken off with several packages of laundry soap.

>Mr. Mackenzie adds one or two new faces every week, he said, mainly people who steal diapers, groceries, pet supplies and other low-cost goods.

I feel like this especially highlights how dystopian this is. This isn't a tool being used to prevent organized theft rings[1], this is ratting out people who can't afford diapers.

I agree fully with the need for regulation here. The solution here isn't "allow grocery stores to ban desperate poor people from being able to use grocery stores", it's to fix the problems leading to the desperation.

(And maybe the path to that involves giving these still-wildly-profitable retail stores incentive to turn their considerable lobbying sway in that direction)

[1] I personally encountered a few organized theft rings while working retail. They overwhelmingly steal small, high-value/margin things like makeup, perfume, and skin care. Not bulky, low value things list here.

Re: Barred from Grocery Stores by Facial Recognition

#32

Post by AdamJacobMuller »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #11
AdamJacobMuller wrote: post #9

This is conflicting, on one hand it's certainty within the right of a store to bar people who shoplift, it's really an imperative to do so. The petty crime issue the retailers here are trying to counter is a real one. But this application it feels like falling down an increasingly slippery slope. Sure, today, it's just "send an alert and the store can do what it wants" but how long until that transforms into a de fac…

I think that stores would be far more willing to remove facial recognition if there was a guarantee, a social contract, that shoplifter = police on the scene immediately = arrest = minimum 30 days imprisonment regardless of object size, without bail, sentence time increases by 30 days for each repeat offense within the last three years. Problem solved; we can focus on community programs to reduce the desire to shopli…

30 days on a first offense is excessive I think, but, you have the right idea.

First offense == warning (with police response, handcuffs, etc).

Second offense == 24 hours in jail.

You need to not wreck someone's life for a first offense because if you put a relatively poor but otherwise law abiding person in jail for 30 days after the first offense you're going to destroy their life to the point where the only path for them in the future is crime. Scare them enough to the point where they realize "I don't want this life" but put them in a position where they can avoid it.

Re: Barred from Grocery Stores by Facial Recognition

#33

Post by gjsman-1000 »

AdamJacobMuller wrote: post #32
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that stores would be far more willing to remove facial recognition if there was a guarantee, a social contract, that shoplifter = police on the scene immediately = arrest = minimum 30 days imprisonment regardless of object size, without bail, sentence time increases by 30 days for each repeat offense within the last three years. Problem solved; we can focus on community programs to reduce the desire to shopli…

30 days on a first offense is excessive I think, but, you have the right idea. First offense == warning (with police response, handcuffs, etc). Second offense == 24 hours in jail. You need to not wreck someone's life for a first offense because if you put a relatively poor but otherwise law abiding person in jail for 30 days after the first offense you're going to destroy their life to the point where the only path f…

I agree, you are right. I would do that, with maybe 30 days and multiplying for the third offense onward because there has to be a point where the consequences get severe (third strike). But that's just my opinion - my point is more that there has to be something, significant, consistently enforced and stores wouldn't feel the need to do things like this.

Re: Barred from Grocery Stores by Facial Recognition

#34

Post by Gamemaster1379 »

qbasic_forever wrote: post #10
chomp wrote: post #5

Mixed feelings here. First, the false positive issue. Second, the network effect, being locked out of buying anything to eat if you shoplift. Third, the potential to track my movement to local stores that use the service, even if I am a non-criminal. On the other side, shoplifting is becoming lawless and stores are at their wits' end. What are they supposed to do to combat shoplifting? The law certainly isn't deterri…

Is shoplifting actually increasing? Data trumps anecdotes. Combatting it is easy, you need to pay someone to stand at the door and check receipts. But stores don't want to spend money on labor and instead just want to whine and claim there is nothing that can be done, we need to hire more police, etc. to make it someone else's problem.

> Data trumps anecdotes That's just it. The way politicians solved it is by making theft under a certain dollar amount a lesser offense so nobody bothers reporting it anymore.

Apparently one way of reducing crime is by making certain types of theft not illegal.

> pay someone to stand at the door and check receipts ... And if the person refuses to have their receipt checked? Is the store going to risk liability of their employee or being sued by the customer if they're injured? Very real risks and not worth letting a person just walk out. My local grocery stores have receipt checkers and I still see people walk out with full carts. Security will stand in front of them but the thieves just walk around them because even security isn't allowed to touch shoplifters

Re: Barred from Grocery Stores by Facial Recognition

#35

Post by gumby »

AdamJacobMuller wrote: post #28
gumby wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can easily see a system like this ending up like credit rating bureaus with a few large companies aggregating data into a score which stores can use to deny entry. I'm sure the big three credit bureaux are developing precisely this product. The stores need not even ban you: they could adjust their prices on a per customer basis to cover their expected risk. Come to think of it, the insurance companies could get i…

> I'm sure the big three credit bureaux are developing precisely this product. Probably. Again I'm super libertarian but the 3 credit bureaus in the US need a corporate death penalty. > they could adjust their prices on a per customer basis to cover their expected risk I'm not sure that works because the risk here is someone just refusing to pay the displayed price at all, regardless of what it is. If anything, store…

> More affluent people would be charged more for the exact same box of crackers.

Or less, because they buy more stuff, and luring them into your store, especially for repeat visits, is worth it.

This is how it works today, just not to this level of granularity. Poor people can't buy the value size because they don't have the cash flow. Costco customers save a lot of money -- but they have big enough houses to store the large sizes.

It's really expensive to be poor.

Re: Barred from Grocery Stores by Facial Recognition

#36

Post by geodel »

moolcool wrote: post #26
AdamJacobMuller wrote: post #9

This is conflicting, on one hand it's certainty within the right of a store to bar people who shoplift, it's really an imperative to do so. The petty crime issue the retailers here are trying to counter is a real one. But this application it feels like falling down an increasingly slippery slope. Sure, today, it's just "send an alert and the store can do what it wants" but how long until that transforms into a de fac…

This isn't conflicting, it's just shit. This has no place in a free society, and I have zero time for any arguments to the contrary. Technology has all the promise in the world to improve and enrich our lives, but instead it's turning our world into a digital panopticon where we're constantly tracked and targeted. I'll bet you any money that this tech is going to be used for advertising as well, if it isn't already.

Yeah, society is not really free until it gives free grocery supplies to every one.

Re: Barred from Grocery Stores by Facial Recognition

#37

Post by notaustinpowers »

yieldcrv wrote: post #22
currency wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are people being added to the database? Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? How is abuse prevented in this system? There absolutely should be an open review and appeal process. After that: If you're homeless, you can't get groceries delivered. In a food desert you might not have alternatives. I personally believe shoplifting is not as bad as is being portrayed recently and this a solution in search of a problem.

Homeless people can get groceries delivered, you dont need a home just a waypoint, or deliver to a nearby address and wait for the delivery driver. I do it all the time. And yes, my comment specifically factored in food deserts, everything about a higher cost of going to places with food factored in everything you thought of and was written specifically for your rebuttals.

Ah yes, just have the homeless pay a $9.99 delivery fee, plus tip, plus an app service charge, plus inflated pricing in the app. Rather than just walking into the store and buying it themselves. So now that $0.99 packet of ramen now costs, at a minimum, $10.99.

Re: Barred from Grocery Stores by Facial Recognition

#38

Post by flutas »

qbasic_forever wrote: post #10
chomp wrote: post #5

Mixed feelings here. First, the false positive issue. Second, the network effect, being locked out of buying anything to eat if you shoplift. Third, the potential to track my movement to local stores that use the service, even if I am a non-criminal. On the other side, shoplifting is becoming lawless and stores are at their wits' end. What are they supposed to do to combat shoplifting? The law certainly isn't deterri…

Is shoplifting actually increasing? Data trumps anecdotes. Combatting it is easy, you need to pay someone to stand at the door and check receipts. But stores don't want to spend money on labor and instead just want to whine and claim there is nothing that can be done, we need to hire more police, etc. to make it someone else's problem.

> Combatting it is easy, you need to pay someone to stand at the door and check receipts.

Which won't help because they can't actually do anything, they have no right to actually see your receipt. They can't require it, they can't use it as probable cause, and they can't detain you.

Worst they can do is ban you from the premises.

Store's like Costco and Sam's Club can require it because it's part of your membership agreement.

Re: Barred from Grocery Stores by Facial Recognition

#39

Post by geodel »

LordDragonfang wrote: post #31
AdamJacobMuller wrote: post #9

This is conflicting, on one hand it's certainty within the right of a store to bar people who shoplift, it's really an imperative to do so. The petty crime issue the retailers here are trying to counter is a real one. But this application it feels like falling down an increasingly slippery slope. Sure, today, it's just "send an alert and the store can do what it wants" but how long until that transforms into a de fac…

>He had just chased after three shoplifters who had taken off with several packages of laundry soap. >Mr. Mackenzie adds one or two new faces every week, he said, mainly people who steal diapers, groceries, pet supplies and other low-cost goods. I feel like this especially highlights how dystopian this is. This isn't a tool being used to prevent organized theft rings[1], this is ratting out people who can't afford di…

> it's to fix the problems leading to the desperation.

That is beyond the scope of store owners. They are not the one collecting taxes and deciding on resource allocation in society.

Re: Barred from Grocery Stores by Facial Recognition

#40

Post by pessimizer »

AdamJacobMuller wrote: post #9

This is conflicting, on one hand it's certainty within the right of a store to bar people who shoplift, it's really an imperative to do so. The petty crime issue the retailers here are trying to counter is a real one. But this application it feels like falling down an increasingly slippery slope. Sure, today, it's just "send an alert and the store can do what it wants" but how long until that transforms into a de fac…

> But this application it feels like falling down an increasingly slippery slope.

The slippery slope could go farther than a ban from the premise for retail theft. People are being barred from banking in England based on political speech. Don't grocery stores have the right to choose who they do business with? What if they don't want transphobes, Brexiteers, or people of Russian descent shopping there?

Post reply on HN