Home Depot sued for 'secretly' using facial recognition at self-checkouts • Hacker News Board

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

#551

Post by moomoo11 » Thu, Aug 21, 2025, 11:26 PM UTC

ux266478 wrote: post #537

moomoo11 wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What genuine connections are you making waiting in line to get movie tickets and popcorn? Why not just walk to the theater to your seats and actually get excited for the movie? That ticket seller is doing their job and Gtfo. I think people are so doom and gloom about this stuff. Isn’t it better to just like go sit at the seats with your family or friends and enjoy the trailers and talk about the movie before it start…

The background noise that those social interactions constitute is valuable and important of itself. Bonded relationships are important, but it's a separate matter entirely. Otherwise relationships lived out over the internet would be equal and interchangeable with those lived out in person. It wouldn't matter if you talked to someone face-to-face or over email. The human experience shouldn't be picked apart piece mea…

Why not go straight to the movie and actually connect with people there?

I don’t get it. You like having middlemen? lol

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

#552

Post by stickfigure » Thu, Aug 21, 2025, 11:28 PM UTC

adamrezich wrote: post #494

stickfigure wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember the 70s and my experience was nothing like your mom's. Population centers have always been full of petty crime; rural places are still pretty free from crime. You can still move to plenty of towns with population The one big difference though is today we have school shootings, so folks are pretty humorless about guns near schools. I'd love to hear your ideas for how to solve that, because they keep happeni…

Your theory of urban/rural bifurcation is overly reductive. My city had a population of about 40,000 in the 70s (when guns were left in racks in the backs of trucks in the high school parking lot)—it's about twice that today. (I did however just return from visiting my wife's hometown in northern Idaho, which has a population of about 500, and indeed I did not feel the need to lock my car, despite keeping a firearm i…

> actual changes that transpired and the reasons for why they did

Well go on then. Let's hear your theory out loud.

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

#553

Post by nobody9999 » Thu, Aug 21, 2025, 11:37 PM UTC

moomoo11 wrote: post #96

47282847 wrote: post #92

I make it a point not to use self-checkout systems because I want to support human interaction even if basic, and contribute to jobs for humans. And cash (most self-checkouts here are card-only). I understand it’s a losing battle on all fronts.

Don’t you think it’s selfish when a small minority of people hold on to some fading ideals in a world where people are genuinely better off with more efficiency? Like imagine being in the era when electricity was becoming more prevalent and I’m sure some people were complaining about some ideal then as well. That said I do agree that self checkouts should not be using methods beyond what’s reasonably necessary.

>Don’t you think it’s selfish when a small minority of people hold on to some fading ideals in a world where people are genuinely better off with more efficiency?

I'm all for more efficiency. Me fumbling with self-checkout is the opposite of efficiency.

What's that? I should learn to do it better? How much would that cost in terms of both time and money? Multiply that by several hundred million, as compared with a few hundred thousand cashiers.

You're saying that (x)250,000,000 If so, your math seems a little off. AFAICT, the only folks who get the benefit of this "efficiency" are the store owners who, instead of paying folks to do the job, makes the customer do it instead.

What's that? Those savings are passed along to the customer? Give me even one example of this being the case. I've certainly never seen it.

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

#554

Post by lokar » Fri, Aug 22, 2025, 12:02 AM UTC

dml2135 wrote: post #491

lokar wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not a universal replacement for a clerk, but it can be very useful. I can be through the whole process at CVS (with some random item like a birthday card) in about 30 seconds.

It's funny that you mention CVS. I went to use the human checkout at CVS last time I was there because the line for self-checkout was so long, only to be told "in order to check out at this register, you need to have a CVS extra-care card". I no longer shop at CVS.

lol

You really have to be able to judge to self checkout ability of the people in line. Some will get stuck for 5 min before a clerk comes to do it for them.

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

#555

Post by autoexec » Fri, Aug 22, 2025, 12:03 AM UTC

MisterTea wrote: post #446

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…

> There are plenty of reliable young men who enjoy engaging in violence and will take low-paid jobs in store security. Bit of an assumption there. There is no easy answer for this breakdown. The cat is out of the bag and these losers aren't going to stop unless they are stopped and face real consequences. Though as you said, the stores do not want the liability of guards taking action so they are left with locking ev…

> Though as you said, the stores do not want the liability of guards taking action so they are left with locking everything behind glass and deploying privacy invading surveillance.

Stores have plenty of incentives to engage in privacy invading surveillance even ignoring shoplifting as a factor. If a store saw zero shoplifting they'd still deploy privacy invading surveillance because it's profitable for them to do it right now and it will only be increasingly profitable for them to do it in the near future.

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

#556

Post by autoexec » Fri, Aug 22, 2025, 12:08 AM UTC

frumplestlatz wrote: post #487

brookst wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying you would continue shopping in a store where you regularly saw violence against people who might be thieves, on the assumption you’d never be mistaken for one?

No, I’m saying that I would prefer to shop at a store that uses shopkeeper’s privilege to detain thieves using reasonable force. The legal limits are very clear and simply enacting violence “against people who might be thieves” is not within them.

The job of a security guard is to observe and report. Let the multi-billion dollar companies like walmart and home depot pay for actual law enforcement to be on hand when a security guard observes a suspected shoplifter. The security guard isn't paid enough or trained enough to get physical with customers.

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

#557

Post by autoexec » Fri, Aug 22, 2025, 12:15 AM UTC

adamrezich wrote: post #441

boppo1 wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how did we 'forsake' it?

When my mom attended the same high school I graduated from, in the 70s, kids who were hunters would leave firearms in racks on the back of their pickup trucks in the high school parking lot. Not only did said firearms never once get stolen or used to shoot anyone, but, such a thing was simply unthinkable. When I attended the same high school in the 00s, we once were put on a district-wide lockdown because some kid at…

I'm going guess that at some point between the 70s and in 00s a lot of children were murdered in schools by people with guns.

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

#558

Post by autoexec » Fri, Aug 22, 2025, 12:24 AM UTC

wat10000 wrote: post #517

MisterTea wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I won't speculate on how we forsook it, but clearly something was forsaken. I cant sum it up properly but three things come to mind: Fear - we have been filled with fear, this in turn leads to more people forsaking responsibility and wanting the government to act as a nanny to protect them, which leads to a lot of childish behavior whether it be people acting helpless or people aping being big and tough. So fear le…

I think it’s the news. Our monkey brains can’t comprehend a world with billions of people in it. Stuff on the news is rare pretty much by definition. It gets rarer the broader your news gets. National news has stuff that’s much rarer than local, and world news is rarer still. But your monkey brain doesn’t get that. It sees a story about somebody getting murdered and it does, holy shit somebody got murdered, this is b…

The news intentionally pushes stories to make people afraid, but I think that's only part of the problem. There's a ton of well-earned distrust in the institutions which are supposed to protect us. Our "justice" system is corrupt from top to bottom. Agencies that should be working to protect the public are instead helping corporations exploit them. Even our representatives don't actually represent us or our interests and vast numbers of people already don't see any point to voting in a clearly rigged system while the rest are gerrymandered and disenfranchised by it.

For most of American's history each generation was better off than the previous one, but that's no longer the case. People's standard of living is in decline. They are forced to watch their children struggle in ways they never had to. The things that made people feel safe and stable and part of a community like homes and jobs with pension plans are out of reach for most people. More and more people are sliding into poverty.

All of this leads to a situation where people increasingly feel that they have to look out for themselves and that makes people fearful and distrustful.

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

#559

Post by 1659447091 » Fri, Aug 22, 2025, 12:27 AM UTC

lostlogin wrote: post #504

mothballed wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally agree with the sentiment but it can put you in a very hard place. I was accused of shoplifting by a gigantic dude who moved in to detain me as I was going into my car. Could have gotten Walmart badge or paraphernalia from anywhere (most walmarts aren't that aggressive but this one was). I could have told him to eat shit and it was clear he was willing to get violent. At that point I would have had to decide…

I might be misinterpreting the situation, but the idea of going on a shopping expedition with a gun is absolutely foreign to me. The whole situation is wildly outside my experience. I live in New Zealand.

> the idea of going on a shopping expedition with a gun is absolutely foreign to me

If you ever visit Texas take a look around the entrances to stores, shops, restaurants, bars etc. You should see large white signs with a "gun-buster" and a 30.0* code. or a large "51%" symbol in red. It would be incredibly rare to see a person with an open carry gun thou

30.05 is to tell people that "constitutional carry" (carry without a LTC) is not allowed on the property. A person with a License to Carry may carry on the property.

30.06 says a LTC person may not conceal carry on the property.

30.07 says a LTC person may not open carry on the property.

The 51% lets people who carry know that the establishment has a liquor/beer permit and receives 51% of income from sales of alcohol. Meaning it's a felony to bring a firearm onto the premises. The others are misdemeanor trespass

Then you may see a reminder 46.03 sign at places like schools, sporting venues etc as a reminder that weapons (not just guns) are not allowed.

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

#560

Post by autoexec » Fri, Aug 22, 2025, 12:31 AM UTC

y-curious wrote: post #408

dkiebd wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

observe and report. That's it.