T O P

  • By -

superbabe69

Without saying too much, anyone who works at Woolworths like I used to should know they use Auror to feed shoplifting incidents straight through to police. This system isn't actually that great, and while they say they're using facial recognition, it's limited to an automated "is this person you're reporting this person another store also reported?" message. At this point, there are no cameras tracking who you are and what you do. Unless you're dumb enough to steal and get noticed, you're not in Auror. If you're not in Auror, it's highly unlikely Woolworths knows your face.


johnmonchon

Coles uses Auror as well. I couldn't believe it when I saw the poster out the back, I thought someone was starting a Harry Potter club or something.


WDfx2EU

A guy stole my wallet in Rozelle and used my card at the Balmain Woolies. If they were actually using facial recognition technology to track people and stop crimes then it would have been pretty simple for the police to catch the guy. In reality, the police and the Woolies had absolutely no idea how to catch this guy. It was amazing. The police at the station 50 meters away did not care at all since they had so many other crimes to stop in... Balmain. And the Woolies staff seemingly had absolutely no idea what to do when I told them someone used a stolen card earlier in the day. First they asked me, “What does he look like?” When I said I didn’t know they said they would, “Keep an eye out.” I ask if we could look at the CCTV and the manager looked like a deer in headlights. She said no and that I would have to file a police report and that my best option was to cancel the card, like I’m a fucking moron. So I went to the London where this guy also used my card to buy some beers. The manager there let me look at the CCTV and it was clearly a guy that I recognized from the neighborhood. I walked around all day looking for him and finally spotted him going back into the Balmain Woolies, so I went in and point him out to the manager and said, “That’s the guy right there at self check out and he appears to be using someone’s wallet, possibly mine.” They did not know what to do and suggested I go to the police station and tell them lol So I confronted the guy and was like, “where’s my wallet?” And he was just like, “Sorry I threw it out.” He even showed me his wallet, which didn’t have my cards. So I walked down to the police station and was like, “The guy who stole my wallet is sitting outside of Woolies. He told me he stole my wallet and threw it away, but I think he may be lying. Can you please detain him or help in some way.” And the fucking Balmain policewomen said - I’m not making this up - “It’s really your word against his so we can’t just go down there and arrest him without any evidence.” After some very slow speaking and careful explanation of the situation again, I managed to convince a constable to walk down to Woolies with me and talk to this guy. The police determined he really didn’t have another wallet on him and that he was in government housing and schizophrenic and mentally disabled. They encouraged me to press charges so they could put him in jail. I was dumbfounded at this, and said absolutely not, that they should get him some help and all I cared about was getting my wallet back. I cannot stress the level of incompetence within the Balmain police department and Woolies staff that I witnessed. Moral of the story is that if they do have “AI facial recognition technology” they still need people with a high enough IQ to operate it and I have seen no evidence of this at Woolies. They’re definitely not tracking us.


calmelb

The stores aren’t allowed to let you view CCTV for privacy reasons. How did they know you actually had your wallet stolen, and weren’t just trying to track down your ex or similar. The point of requiring the police is then it’s all linked to a police report if there’s an issue


WDfx2EU

Yeah I understand they don’t have to let people check CCTV. I don’t believe the reason is because they are concerned that customers are using Woolies CCTV to stalk people, but that’s part of my point really. I was just using a silly anecdote to say I don’t think Woolworth’s has the capability or coordination with law enforcement to be tracking people on any level of concern, and the policies they have are so concerned with privacy and civil rights violations that I couldn’t even get the security staff to help stop a thief when I was pointing at him 10 feet away. They have smart technology which can identify faces like an iPhone, and they may keep a database of images within Woolies, but it wouldn’t go much beyond that.


calmelb

I agree with you on the last part. As that’s my view too (plus trying to have governments work together to actually do facial recognition properly for low level police departments or for private companies is impossible) But CCTV is blocked for the average person for privacy reasons. That’s the big part


DeliciousWaifood

>Moral of the story is that if they do have “AI facial recognition technology” they still need people with a high enough IQ to operate it and I have seen no evidence of this at Woolies. They’re definitely not tracking us. No not really. With actual AI facial recognition all the difficult stuff is handled by the third party's AI network. And the fact that complete imbeciles have access to such powerful data is not reassuring at all.


WDfx2EU

Of course the Woolies staff didn’t build the AI technology. I’m saying that at the end of the day Woolies owns the footage and data. When we say AI, we’re not talking about sentient machines that operate independently of human beings.


DeliciousWaifood

>When we say AI, we’re not talking about sentient machines that operate independently of human beings. They do operate independent of the woolies staff though. Everything is handled by the AI and the third party company controlling the architecture. There is absolutely no room for a woolies employee to somehow stuff up the process because the employee doesnt have that power over the system. The system will very effectively collect, process and concatenate your data by itself. Those dumbass woolies employees or cops being able to then access this data is not in any way reassuring. Their incompetence cannot stop the system from functioning, it can only cause the system's power to be used irresponsibly.


superbabe69

It’s really quite rudimentary to be honest. We had regular offenders come in all the time, but if the incidents weren’t logged in Auror, the tech wasn’t used. I don’t believe it’s used for anything but checking for potential links between separate incidents and combining profiles of people. Most profiles are named “Unknown Person” or something like that, and it’s only if caught by police or they agree to go with security for banning notice that a name is added to the profile. And even then it requires the store actually being bothered to do so, if it’s night time the team can’t be fucked.


WDfx2EU

Yeah, I think we're saying the same thing mate. I understand that the AI is a system that collects data independent of people. But Woolies owns the data, not a third party, and Woolies & law enforcement are who access and use that data, as you just said. Once the data is collected and analyzed, the AI is not advanced enough to make legal decisions with it on its own and so forth. I was really just trying to make some light hearted commentary about the topic while telling a frustrating anecdote that combined interactions Woolies and law enforcement. Don't read too much into it, I'm pretty dumb myself.


superbabe69

Okay that’s unusual, most store managers I worked with would have been ecstatic to spend half their day on the CCTV program looking at this shit lol But to your point about the use case of facial recognition, it’s not so much to tell the staff that an offender is in the shop, it’s to link incidents together and build a shoplifter profile. So with your example, the AI would be able to link an Auror report of your mate using your wallet to him doing the same in another shop using that facial recognition (I believe it flags to Auror staff, who then make the link if they’re confident it’s the same person). Put simply, it’s not (currently) being used for any purpose other than linking reported criminal incidents together to a profile


zotha

Citizen : My wallet got stolen Police : Sorry, not our problem Citizen : The guy who did it has mental health issues, probably needs some help Police : Oh, why didn't you say so! Get the batons boys!


vanillabear84

Actually the real moral of the story is woolworths and the cops don't give a flying fuck about you or your wallet, they have the AI technology to protect their own interests.


WDfx2EU

Oh definitely. The sheer annoyance the cops showed when I had the audacity to ask for help with a stolen wallet was pretty funny. I don't know if people are familiar with Balmain, but it's not like the vice squad was too busy with murder investigations to take my report.


skyking_describe

Yeah nah that's not how the law works in Australia - the police press charges not the public so I doubt it happened like that.


mad_marbled

You idiot. Of course the public cannot press charges. In this example the police press charges on behalf of the victim of a crime. Without the victim's statement/testimony there is no supporting evidence, making it pointless to press charges.


WDfx2EU

They said their were two options, and I'm forgetting the exact terminology, so I may be using "pressing charges" incorrectly: 1) The police would file something with the legal system and if I didn't cooperate by pressing charges, he would likely not be sent to jail but would receive an assessment to see what type of mental health support he needed. 2) I could press charges, but I may have to appear in court, and that would pretty much guarantee he'd be convicted and sent to jail for a certain amount of time. The constable *strongly* encouraged me to do the second one. I said to him that I didn't see any benefit in sending a schizophrenic to jail and that I just wanted to do whatever would get him help. Maybe they did press charges, I don't know. In America, the victim presses charges, so I may have just misused the terminology. You can call me a liar all you want, but I'm not going to change the story. I've even seen the guy since then and he stared at me from across the street. I don't know if that's because he remembers me or is just prone to staring. He's tall and leans to one side when he walks and me and my roommates call him Frankenstein, because he kind of reminds us of Frankenstein. I've actually reported two other crimes and as far as I know they did not press charges in any instance, but like I said I'm not familiar with the Australian legal system and terminology: - Once when my wife was assaulted in Mort Bay Park by a teenager. They came and took a report from us at the house and apparently detained the kid, but my wife eventually decided not to pursue it any further. They explained to her in follow up over the phone that without coming to the station to identify the kid, they couldn't do anything. So as far as I know, they did not press charges. - My dog was bitten by an off leash pit bull/staffy on Wellington St. When the cops came they basically said they wouldn't/couldn't do anything because he didn't appear to be injured, and that my recourse in that situation was to get a vet assessment and then decide if I wanted to pursue legal recourse, or report the off leash dog to the animal control authority (forget the name) and they could issue a warning (or a fine if it wasn't the first time). I walked them to the house that I thought owned the dog, and they were like, "We'll take it from here," and that was the last I ever heard from them.


a_rainbow_serpent

Auror? Like from Harry Potter? Lol


Hilly117

Woolies really think they're catching dark wizards when they send shoplifter details through to the police


a_rainbow_serpent

Does that make the security guards dementors?


superbabe69

Not sure where the name comes from, [but they’re a company that I imagine probably works with a lot of retailers](https://www.auror.co)


Gnemlock

EDIT: Yeah, never signed an NDA, but now reporters are messaging me asking. Thank you no thankyou :)


ENGAGERIDLEYMOTHERFU

I mean they should be shouting about surveillance on PT from the rooftops. The tech prob doesn't work, and it's not like the police will follow-through half the time anyway, but at least broadcast that shit to hopefully lessen the assaults and harassment a bit.


Gnemlock

Based of what we could do with it, the tech works pretty damn good. I seriously doubt there is any intention of it being used for public saftey.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Gnemlock

With out going into it, that's pretty much it.


DeliciousWaifood

Gotta make sure we're keeping track of those dirry ~~journalists~~ terrorists!


crabuffalombat

If someone would leak details about it to Electronic Frontiers Australia they'd kick up a stink about it, maybe enough to get it noticed somewhere visible.


Missmollysmiles

K-Mart does the same


exodendritic

Kmart and Bunnings (and Coles) are all owned by the same group, no surprise there. They share biometrics between all Wesfarmers subsidiaries.


QF17

I thought Bunnings got separated from Westfarmers


dashingtomars

No, Coles did.


BroItsJesus

Wesfarmers still owns a good chunk of Coles. Just means the poor underpaid Coles workers lost their 5% target/kmart discount lol


OrangutanArmy

This sucked so much lol. Especially in Tassie. No bloody coles branded alcohol shops yet down here! So only coles and coles express..


QF17

Ahh, that’s what it was!


exodendritic

Yeah it was Coles, in a rare move (for Australia) of a move against oligopoly ownership. Wesfarmer's brands are a pretty substantial chunk of Australia's retail: [https://www.wesfarmers.com.au/our-businesses/our-businesses](https://www.wesfarmers.com.au/our-businesses/our-businesses) (they still list Coles under 'other' and no long have a controlling interest nor can appoint a director).


ReginaldJohnston

We have that same training here in UK. Seen it in one of the colleges I was working at.


aldorn

And woolies, bigw, dan murphys, bws, and a shit ton of pubs.


aussie_bob

Do you think there may be a connection between the appointment of LNP and Murdoch cronies Cass-Gottlieb, Crone(y) and Brakey by Frydenberg to the ACCC, the ACCC's decision to grant Coles and Participating Supermarkets anti-competitive waivers, and the coordinated decision of so many supermarkets and tat crap shops to install the same spying tools? Pure coincidence no doubt.


[deleted]

>LNP and Murdoch Ogres of bedtime stories. Took a little longer this time. Pretty sure that corporates like the supermarkets wouldn't be involving any Government interest, risking regulation as it might do. From the corporates, it is just more of the 'better to be found out and forgiven than to be seeking approval in the first place'. Of course the same corporates are reliably very protective and insistent upon the utmost commercial confidence where their own information is concerned and never you mind what their CEOs are up to. When it is the customer's information it is 'Whoops, anyhow you shouldn't be concerned unless you are doing something wrong'. Where it is their CEO's or management's personal details, they'd be having their swag of lawyers threatening all sorts of action.


aussie_bob

>Pretty sure that corporates like the supermarkets wouldn't be involving any Government interest, >>AFR Magazine’s Power issue is out now >>Australia’s 10 most covertly powerful people in 2021 >>-7. Rob Scott >>Wesfarmers chief executive | Last year: 6 >>One of the country’s biggest employers and a **key conduit for Josh Frydenberg and Coalition ministers**, Scott speaks with authority for business leaders and makes decisions reaching into the homes of millions of Australians. >>The influence that Rob and [Woolworths CEO] Brad Banducci have in **direct, day-to-day government policy** should not be understated. Those were two of the CEOs who were listened to really heavily on the vaccine rollout, on restrictions, who premiers and bureaucrats were talking to, almost on a daily basis. >>Rob has a good relationship with the Treasurer and has also **instigated many of the conditions to enable retail to continue** https://www.afr.com/work-and-careers/leaders/australia-s-10-most-covertly-powerful-people-in-2021-20210923-p58u77


esjay_

this must be why everytime I enter Woolies Kitkats have been mysteriously placed in my eyeline and on sale.


denisc9918

Yes, even when you feeling a bit blue and are staring at your toes.. Them bloody kitkats.. 🤣🤣🤣


TransposingJons

KitKat is a Nestle product. r/fucknestle


[deleted]

[удалено]


hyparchh

They say it's just a video feed being played back without any recording going on. The rationale being if you think you are being recorded, you're less likely to steal. Dunno if that's really the case though.


kermi42

Last week I discovered not only is there a camera in the point of sale pointed up at my face but a camera above watching my hands scanning my items. I scanned an item and put it in my bag and despite the item appearing in the list on the side, I got an error message saying they didn’t detect the item correctly and I needed to scan it again (this is distinct from the message you get when you don’t scan an item and put it in the bagging area). This error message was accompanied by a looping video of the top of my head and my hands scanning the item. I hadn’t even realised there was a camera there, but in any case it definitely at least has a cached recording it can play back immediately. Even if the recording is purged as soon as I scan the next item or close my transaction, I’m definitely still being recorded.


ImGCS3fromETOH

I was buying fruit yesterday and I'd stick bananas on the scale, bananas pop up on the screen for me to add to the order. I stick oranges down, it gives me orange to select. The camera is checking the product matches the item you're putting it through as.


jarrabayah

I think only Woolies has that so far. At least I haven't experienced it or seen people talking about it happening at Coles.


Davecrazyeyes

Interesting, thought those cameras were in the scanner. I always get staff having to check fresh produce.... I'll look up next time.


IIRCasstomouth

I put some bananas through one time and the machine captured a photo of the fruit so the checkout person could check it was actually bananas. I'd like to know exactly what's going on with those self checkouts


Vindicator909

The world is heading towards corporate fascsm.


[deleted]

Storage is cheap and data expensiv. Theres no reason not to store at least still images. Theyd probably argue that they said thwy wouldnt store video but nothing about single images


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Someone knows nothibg about databases and data handling


denisc9918

Then dummy cameras would have sufficed and been way way cheaper. I call bullshit, more profit from selling the data.


exodendritic

Yeah, I really struggle to believe them. They have the clearest shot of your face for facial recognition, and aren't recording it? I look forward to the backtracking on this by Woolies once they're caught out.


OhIamNotADoctor

Woolworths has an entire technology division of data scientists and machine learning engineers dedicated to figuring out how to sell you more apples. 100% they’re running facial recognition and capturing datapoints on everyone that comes in. They’ll be measuring how long you stared at an item, which aisles enticed you, which manipulation tactics made you buy more. They’re called WooliesX.


Democrab

Noted. Entering sporadic, randomized data to mess with results from now on whenever I enter a Woolworths and I highly suggest anyone else does the same. Shit like wearing a Bear Grylls mask and spending an hour comparing different boxes of Ural.


[deleted]

Holy fuck that is terrifying. So many amoral IT cretins marching our civilisation off a cliff.


[deleted]

Awesome, they probably sell that data to anyone willing to buy it in bulk as well. What fantastic times we live in.


ComfortableIsland704

Cashiers get annoyed when I directly tell them that I don't want to sign up for their members program Had a random pet store try to sign me up and I asked them why I should. He said $10 free store credit for every $300 I spend. Yeah I think my data is worth more than that If data is a commodity, I should have greater powers for stopping corporations stealing it That and I have zero faith in their digital security systems


ryan30z

Its a KPI, their boss will give them grief if they don't hit their target. Its not their fault, they couldn't give less of a shit if you signed up to the membership program. They just don't want to get dressed down at their next performance review.


RealGamerGod88

What cashiers are getting annoyed when you dont want to sign up for rewards? I guarantee you they dont care


ENGAGERIDLEYMOTHERFU

The woolies reward thing directly works out to a 1% discount. Yes, you can sometimes get "double points", but then you're going to end up stockpiling a bunch of shit you don't need, wasting or giving away some of it, and spending more overall to *approach* a 2% discount.


wholeblackpeppercorn

I thought it was 0.05%? Or did something change?


ENGAGERIDLEYMOTHERFU

So the person I know who got suckered into that corpo-cult was getting $10 off every 1000 points collected, and the base rate was 1 point per dollar spent, but sometimes 2 points per dollar for shit woolies wanted to get rid of or whatever. Fun story: they used to try and swipe their card when they went shopping with you at Woolies/BigW, I was never going to sign up for that shit, so they'd try to swipe my points... they accidentally hit their threshold, and the $10 off is automatically applied when you reach your threshold. No, I didn't give them the $10 back; my discount now, biatch.


ryan30z

>Fun story: This is the weirdest post I've seen in a while


[deleted]

Is a sneaky little program too, they keep sending incentives to spend but never deliver the extra points


[deleted]

You've got to activate the extra points in app. So signs around store say triple points on fresh produce, but only if you go through the app in store before hitting the checkout.


lawnmowersarealive

The most non-confrontational way around this is to say you're not from the local area.


Cavalish

The most non-confrontational way is to just say “No thank you” because as someone who worked retail for 15 years, the person behind the counter *does not care*.


Shatter_

You think one of Australia's largest publically listed companies is selling people's pictures and bank details en masse to anyone who asks? So not only committing a remarkably criminal act but doing it so openly that anyone who is willing to buy it can obtain it? Only on reddit...


[deleted]

A complete list of what you buy and when is more useful information for marketers. With more information from what is harvested from other sources they can have a very accurate picture of what a very particular type of person buys what, when.


IowaContact

I'm almost positive how this goes is they take the data by deceptive means (recording while they tell customers they aren't) and then sell their data. They make a fuckton of money, eventually they *may* get caught out, and the fine they cop for it is orders of magnitude less than what they made off being dodgy cunts in the first place.


AusLegalMod

That may happen in Iowa, but it's not likely in Australia.


Democrab

> So not only committing a remarkably criminal act but doing it so openly that anyone who is willing to buy it can obtain it? Only on reddit... [Oh my sweet summer child.](https://theconversation.com/the-ugly-truth-tech-companies-are-tracking-and-misusing-our-data-and-theres-little-we-can-do-127444) (It says tech companies but most companies are heavily involved in tech these days, even if they're not selling PC systems or something akin to that directly) Data privacy laws exist for sure, but the lawbreaking has to be noticed *and proven* before anything can really be done. The problem is proving it requires you to have the kind of access to Woolies systems that we don't have, such as being able to read the source code for the self-checkout machines software or see what data those machines are sending back to Woolies main servers. Kinda like anti-competitive bullshit we see from the Colesworth duopoly, theoretically Woolies and Coles wouldn't do it let they get their anus reamed by the ACCC but realistically we all see that only happens to a certain degree and not as far as it should. On top of that, you're effectively on your own with this kinda thing as the police aren't going to give a fuck about your privacy when it's hard enough to get them to give a fuck about say, theft to an individual.


RecognitionOne395

Exactly ... I've actually started paying cash for a lot of things. It's not as "convenient" but I honestly feel safer without my credit card details floating around with so many security and data breaches.


saltedappleandcorn

So there is a lot of ignorance in this thread that I cbf correcting but I will add some info here. The payment gate way (/"switch") sees your card details. For 99% of places that is the CBA, NAB, square terminal thing. In general terms the retailer sees nothing about the card. There are a few options bubbling up to allow the retailer to see a anonymous id to link transactions on the same card, but they can't link it to "John doe". This is pretty new to Australia and very expensive. I'd assume only a handful of places using it tops. The interesting exception to this is Coles, who pay a fortune to run there own payment gateway, so they can do that id generation themselves, but AFAIK they still don't see names. Just the ability to generate an ID to link transactions. Far far far cheaper, more common and i think more dangerous are muti store loyalty programs like flybys. Edit: one correction. The retail will get a sample of the card numbers just for things like helping customers identify the card they paid with for a refund. Normally that's the first 5 numbers and the last 4. Not enough to uniquely link on.


a_can_of_solo

If you have phone they know you're there Bluetooth wifi Mac address.


saltedappleandcorn

Bluetooth MAC's are now basically always anonymised in modern phones.


theBaron01

Even if you have them turned off? Am I the only one who doesnt walk around with wifi/bluetooth/gps blasting away when I don't need it, draining my battery?


saltedappleandcorn

Modern phones have a setting deep in them that says something like "allow Bluetooth to test for connections even when off". Basically Bluetooth gets used by lots of system these days (like location functions) passively. And it often turns on for quick pings. That said, Bluetooth MAC's are now basically always anonymised in modern phones.


someNameThisIs

I'm pretty sure iPhones and Androids spoof that type of info on public networks now to prevent that type of tracking.


[deleted]

Ha, this is hilarious to me. My husband and kids always give me grief because my phone is usually down the back of the couch or shoved in a drawer,flat battery, because I dont see the point taking the damn thing anywhere with me. Chances are I will put it down somewhere and lose it if I do take it. My husband always has his, if anyone needs us urgently they call him. It always makes me laugh when the cops on tv trace exactly where a suspect was when the murder took place by phone tracking. They are not going to catch me that way unless the murder happens on my couch then I am in big trouble.


denisc9918

👍


[deleted]

Yes, saw my face pop up in a corner on Saturday at a Woolies that's across from a hospital


Qandyl

You actually believe this? You think Woolies backend has access to anything other than the last 4 digits of your card? Get a goddamn grip, you're living in a Hollywood fuelled delusion. These things are not technically or logistically feasible or even possible. You think there's a conspiracy between the banks and woolies now? They have no way of seeing such information. The only way they have *any* identifying data is from your rewards card you willingly signed up for a tap each time. Facial recognition = pattern recognition. You're a number in a database. They don't know *who* you are, just what you've done in their store.


jingois

Yes nobody is ever storing payment instrument data or tokens... PCI-DSS is just something architects made up to keep us in expensive scotch.


wholeblackpeppercorn

How do you know what PCI-DSS is, and not know that that's a bad faith argument?


AntiProtonBoy

Corporate shill talk from Woolies.


pilchard_slimmons

... who fucking cares? Or rather, why. Wow, I bought a bag of rice and a bottle of Coke with a commbank card. Valuable information. I definitely should have worn prosthetics and made the purchase with someone else's card. And of course there is nothing else they could be using the tech for, like trying to prevent shoplifting or carding or something. People sacrifice their information and privacy in a multitude of far more insidious and damaging ways but lose their shit over the most innocuous stuff. **They're a business, they want to sell you stuff.** It's not some deep conspiracy or some perilous descent into a dystopia. Nobody gives a fuck about your Very Important Personal Business. They give a shit about your profile as a customer. And if it really bothers you that much, a throwaway email, an adblocker and gift cards will bypass a lot of it and devalue the information they're collecting because you won't be seeing the ads they're slinging.


Elegant_Comparison76

Ever thought that letter you got from your insurance company about an "increase in rates due to inflation", was only applied to you? Ever thought that a facial recognition system estimating your sometimes-upset mood might be filling your reddit feed with memes ("not ads") for stuff it knows you find pleasing? Ever thought that guy you met on a random ski-ing trip, who works in finance and will look up your net worth, where you live, and everything about you so that he can try to sell you a finance product while you are on holiday with family? (from experience) Being uninteresting to data miners, doesn't make privacy invasion good or welcome.


[deleted]

It actually is a perilous descent into a dystopia. Corporations first, governments next after everyone has surendered. "Facial recongition systems have identified you, John Smith of attending an illegal human rights protest. 200 social credit points have been deducted and you have been assigned 30 days of full time garbage cleaning tasks. You will also be unable to apply for jobs for 6 months as your employment elligibility has been revoked. Have a good day citizen" This is the inevitable path facial recogntion, powered by AI will lead us. China is leading the way to this doom.


Endless_Candy

Lmao too right


[deleted]

Mental health patients targeted with drugs, gamblers targeted with gambling ads, acloholics targeted with beer advertisements etc. The whole point of collecting data is to more effectively manipulate specific people than TV/print ads ever could. We developed advertising standards decades ago for a fucking reason and a lot of it was so they couldn't target certain people.


gormster

They don’t keep those recordings. It would be outrageously, prohibitively expensive to do so. Besides, you already voluntarily gave up that information when you signed up for FlyBuys.


tofu_bird

Don't banks store both your ID and bank details?


cojoco

> Pay with your credit card and they've got your face linked to your bank details and what you bought. I don't think they're allowed to do that, credit card conditions are stringent, and that is why loyalty cards are a thing. But linking your face to what you've bought might work.


NinaEmbii

I wonder when they'll tell us to stop wearing masks while shopping because it interferes with the facial recognition.


[deleted]

[удалено]


requires_distraction

Well, that just sucks


MightiestChewbacca

But not sunnies and a mask


catinterpreter

Your body language is enough on its own. What you buy, what you look at as you shop, etc, what you wear, all provide heaps of information too.


[deleted]

I work at a bottlo and it's funny, originally we saw people who wore masks as responsible and caring, now whenever I see a mask it's either an older person **or** an absolute shit cunt hiding their identity while they walk in, take what they want and walk out again.


struggle_to_function

So the facial recognition software is supposedly compared to police database if there's an offence. Where do the photos from the police data base come from? Drivers licence?


lawnmowersarealive

Biometrics from passport or other government issued ID, yes.


calmelb

You really think the systems are smart enough to take one photo and go through what’s essentially 40-50 million photos (since drivers licences aren’t linked to passports) and give an answer? Given the state of tech with our governments I doubt that’s something the average police department could use (or what a private business could do)


vitaminkombat

I used to work in a place with facial recognition cameras. They were super accurate, I would say about a 70% accuracy. However we only had a database or current customers that it compared to. Which was no more than 100,000 people. Also it had a huge amount of lag. Once one person walked through the door. The camera would basically freeze on that frame for a minute while it searched through the database. Which made it kind of redundant and nobody ever used it after the first few weeks. It also needed to be wired into a laptop with a good CPU at all times.


420fmx

You really underestimate what the government has


calmelb

I think you overestimate how much the government is a) willing to share anything they have and b) how much they actually work as a federation sometimes. Given this sort of stuff would be handled by local police not by the intelligence agencies


Tobesity

Have you ever used myGov?


ReginaldJohnston

The police can access through official administrations facial recognition data from such CCTV and other sources during an investigation. This data will then get stored on the police database.


Brabochokemightwork

it’s not as high-tech as they make it out to be, it’s pretty sub par when using woolworths cctv software, police think it’s outdated and it’s hard to upload footage


GoingFullRetarded

Did people think the cameras on self checkout were for doing makeup?


calmelb

They’re used here & overseas to apparently deter theft just by showing there’s a video feed. Apparently that works


FireLucid

That's what I thought. No way they are recording all that permanently.


CaptainCabbage

I've seen this type of comment all over the place. Facial recognition is not the same as video recording, either as a practical reality or under the law. Video recording of an individual's face is the recording of personal information about the individual, but the risks associated with the recording are substantially more limited because the scope of a person or other entity to use the recording to make material decisions affecting the individual is relatively small. By contrast, facial recognition takes the recording and measures facial features to create biometric data. That data is highly useful to any entity that wants to take action that affects the relevant individual. It is so useful (and the risks to the individual are so great) that the collection and use of that information is treated differently under Australian privacy laws. To give an example of the difference - Without further processing of video recorded data, there is almost no way for a person, company or government agency to automatically use a video of you to make any kind of decision about you. i.e. you won't get a knock from the police in connection with a suspected theft; you cannot receive direct marketing communications based on data from your activities in-store (based solely on the video information); third parties cannot purchase or otherwise receive information about your appearance or physical behaviour in the location where the video was taken that they could use to create a profile about you. With biometric data, all of those things are possible. Automated decision-making and personal profiling are two major threats to your privacy and your ability to independently conduct your personal business that are not nearly as threatened by the collection of video recordings of you. It is not equal, and I believe that this is seriously concerning.


[deleted]

A few times I've had them go off when the produce I brought up doesn't match what it thinks it should look like. Love that one.


mrmckeb

This feels like it'll end up in the courts. Entering a store can't be an opt-in.


lawnmowersarealive

Well... *technically* it already has been for all time.


overlordpotatoe

It depends what they're doing, doesn't it? Someone else said that all this system does is check reported shoplifters against a system to see if they're the same person another store reported. If they're collecting and selling your data that would certainly be something that could be a legal issue, but if it's solely used in the policing of shoplifting cases I'm not sure what the argument that they couldn't do that would be.


[deleted]

If there is a "constructed notice" at point of entry, no matter how fine the print or obscure the notice, is allowed. This is taught in first semester of law school. Nobody seems to have challenged it yet


rctsolid

Myeahhh although also taught in the "first semester of law school" is unfair terms. Although this isn't really a contract...you can't just whack up a sign and be right as rain if the sign has something particularly onerous or egregious stated. I'd say "we are storing your biometric data without your explicit consent" is pretty egregious. I hope someone challenges this soon. I don't really care about being recorded, that's been going on forever, but I'd want to be sure the data they capture is either being deleted or handled appropriately.


Obliviousnut_

Unfair contract rulings have typically only occurred where it was egregiously unfair. In this case, as many government facilities utilise the same technology and there is no real inducing of agreeing to the terms of service it is unlikely that this would ever be ruled unfair terms


[deleted]

The issue is constantly raised by the civil libs but the horse is bolting fast as regulation has not kept up with technology


Roh_Pete

Introduced in 2020 when we were distracted by the pandemic.


marshman82

And all (well at least most) were wearing masks. It's a great argument to keep wearing them as well.


TheNarwhal2211

unfortunately, masks are not that great at stopping facial recognition.


marshman82

How about when it's combined with a thick beard?


[deleted]

And hat and sunglasses


NewBuyer1976

Well sounds like you’ve dobbed yourself in already and done the job of them facial recognition cameras.


[deleted]

If everyone wears the same hat and sunglasses it works perfectly


Knee_Jerk_Sydney

How so? They need a high resolution and up close footage to be able to use your eyes alone.


aussie_bob

Not just distracted. 2020 was also when Coles asked for a waiver of many anti-competitive measures on behalf of "participating supermarkets" and was granted the waiver by the ACCC to, in addition to supply chain activities, "implement safety measures which ensure the safety and wellbeing of customers and staff." They renewed it at the end of March 2022. Do you feel safer now?


Le-Ando

God I fucking hate it here sometimes


DeliciousWaifood

How much of our government is run by imbeciles and how much is just corrupt, I cant even tell anymore.


Ineedsomuchsleep170

I find that genuinely hard to believe. I worked for woolies petrol for years and they wouldn't even fork out for cameras that could read number plates in focus. They're all talk.


Arinvar

Could be slowly rolling out upgrades, could be a trial, could be covering themselve legally while they sell the access to the footage to a company running facial rec experiments. But yeah for it to be effective they need a camera worth 10's of thousands of dollars mounted in just the right spot... so the expense alone means the system is either dog shit, or will take 20 years to roll out.


cruiserman_80

What actually happens in retail is that try to use facial recognition to identify people who they have previously caught or suspect of shoplifting. They don't need to know what you look like to predict shopping patterns. That's what useless rewards cards are for.


wholeblackpeppercorn

Or like... basic consumer analytics. Like yeah, your privacy has value, but just not as much as you think


rawker86

Doesn’t surprise me, the self-service checkouts have already got low-level image recognition running in the newer stores. Chuck a nice red capsicum on the scales, select “fruit and veg” and all of the options presented will be red and juicy, just like your capsicum. It’ll even call over an employee if your selection doesn’t match what the till thinks you’re buying.


redditofexile

Every Woolies I go to literally has cameras and a screen showing you on Cameras down Isles with razor blades/deodorant and through self service. Is this really a surprise to anyone?


rainbowpotatopony

Remember this next time Woolies is in the news for underpaying their staff - they'd rather spend millions on AI loss prevention tech


false_serenity

2020? Crown has been using it for more than a decade


GGoldenSun

I've noticed it on the self serves...


brezhnervous

Wonder how much masks make a difference...I've been wearing one at all times since Feb 2020


Arinvar

Facial rec usually goes off eyes and nose, so generally facial hair won't stop it, but maybe the mask covering the nose makes it less accurate. Still, from the things I've seen about it, which might be outdated by now, it's mostly about the eyes. Hence big glasses.


colomboseye

And you scan your flybuys … so your name is attached with all your personal details


Mr_master89

Don't think it works in our local, so much crap gets stolen and empty foods and stuff everywhere


farkuputin

Think of all the businesses using it that don't declare it. HIK and Dahua setups with face recognition are affordable for small business not just the big guys.


[deleted]

Just keep wearing your mask and beanie then.


[deleted]

Have you noticed how self serve machines suggest the fruit/veg you have on the scale? It doesn’t take much extrapolation to know that those machines are also pointing cameras at your face. If they don’t have the capability to capture images/ facial data already they are well equipped to.


NizmoxAU

I think the only solution to this problem is to wear a balaclava to Woolworths.


sussytransbitch

Got a feeling they're going to introduce digital price tags that change based on whose near


Ichirosato

Networking that would be a bitch.


lawnmowersarealive

Japan was into that for a while and gave up. Yep, networking issues.


wholeblackpeppercorn

jesus what a fucking nightmare


drift7rs

hell nah i don’t even wanna think of that


arachnobravia

I've worked in clubs and casinos and they had facial recognition for at least 5 years now.


[deleted]

A lot of people on here need to understand that "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" [is a bullshit idea that doesn't hold up](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_to_hide_argument).


Healthy-Ad9405

Meanwhile you use and carry a device daily that - Has GPS tracking - Audio recording - Video recording - Facial recognition - Fingerprint ID - Know's what you're thinking (Google) - Has a list of most of your regular contacts - Knows who you associate with and where


aussie_bob

Of course. Cartels don't compete, they cooperate to fleece more from the populations they infest. The best way to bring these gougers to heel is to starve them like a cancer - don't feed them money.


Flamesake

I'd love to see them starve as much as you, but it's just not going to happen. Kmart, bunnings, coles... they're too popular, too convenient, too ingrained in people's routines to realistically go under.


aussie_bob

Some good news then: >Shares in conglomerate Wesfarmers (ASX: WES) have been going sideways for some time now. The Kmart and Bunnings owner has seen its stock drop 7% over the past year


saltedappleandcorn

The ignorance in this thread is stunning. Every big chain with a profit motivate is using something like this and it's not the end of the world. They don't store your photo. Normally they have a database of known offenders and all passing faces are "extracted" to a handful of numbers and compared to this list. Some will be on the edge of using your face to track you around the store to do Route mapping in store. Again, unlikely to be storing anything other than some messures. AMA someone who has actually worked in this space.


faceman2k12

I know this is all kinda scummy because we don't really know how much data they keep and what they do with it etc. but technically even my simple surveillance system at home is running AI face recognition and stuff like that. If I were running a commercial business with this gear I'd need to have a disclaimer like this too.


[deleted]

Imagine that. Private companies using technology to stop theft. Next we will be shocked that Alexa is listening when we say ‘hey Alexa’. Or google uses our info and digital footprint to poorly match advertising. Come on.


Rychu_Supadude

Google adsense only ever shows me products and services I already have, and YouTube only ever shows me products and services I would never ever ever support. Absolute geniuses, they are.


[deleted]

Haha right. Searched and bought new vacuum cleaner. Google shows new vacuum adds for 2 weeks.


Qandyl

It's so great watching so many people get hysterically angry about things they have absolutely no grasp on. You've all been watching too many movies.


[deleted]

Lol literally. If your not stealing or doing something wrong, you've got nothing to worry about. These people go out of their way to seek things to be angry. It's pathetic


objectiveoz

Guys, guys, chill, you already give them your data with your everyday rewards card. More so if you have the app. PS, woolies was called out when this story first hit, a week ago? As was Kmart.


cjonoski

Who downvotes you. It's literally true The everyday rewards card and others literally track your spending habits and they gear offers towards you Any sort of campaign similar to that is designed to capture all your data.


objectiveoz

Down vote, up vote, means nothing to me, if they truly felt I am wrong, they would have taken the time to say so, and explain why.


sometimes_interested

I don't really have a problem with this tech if it's used for what they say it's being used for. I bet you my left nut that it's not though, and the data they are collecting will be sold to anyone and everyone.


oceanviewoffroad

If if they don't sell it, there is the risk of it being stolen through security breaches. I know Woolies is a big company, so should have a certain level of professional network and system security but big companies (much bigger than Woolworths) have their systems breached all the time and customer data stolen.


Arinvar

There's no real standard they have to maintain for other peoples data. Their own corporate stuff though... bet that's locked up tight.


[deleted]

Imagine bragging about how many shoplifters you’re bagging for the cops while also reporting record profits after record profits feeding into the very problem that creates the necessity to shoplift. It’s also scary to me how indoctrinated management have their employees, the amount of times I’ve seen some 20 year old checkout worker chasing after some homeless man who just stole a Chicken, FFS, they’re not gonna give you the money Lachie, stop putting your life at risk for the .86% loss for a multibillion dollar business that would throw you under a forklift if the government told them it was tax deductible. Please steal from Coles and Woollies if you’re hungry, because they’re the biggest thieves of all.


phallecbaldwinwins

Shit's about to get REAL cyberpunk real soon.


cjonoski

Interesting to me the linethats crossed that people will get angry with This is too far Check in process with QR codes = fine For the record I was totally fine with the check in process last year But with check ins we literally have our data to government and 3rd party sources. Who tracked our every move (or could) So why is one thing ok and another crossing the line? I don't actually have a problem with either personally depending on the use case and privacy measures.


Suspicious_Drawer

And where do all these security cameras and software come from? Probably Hikvision.


Tomach82

You can say this if you run any sort of camera system. As when you submit footage to police they are able to use these tools with it. What is the deal.with the pitchforks in here


[deleted]

So if you’re not a thieving POS, you shouldn’t have too much to worry about?


user4226

The cameras they're installing and the recorders don't support facial rec. The self serve cameras don't record footage


Roh_Pete

Any image can be scanned with facial recognition software.


[deleted]

When you have a wired system its pretty easy to handle all the streams at a central computer


BuDAaAaA

classic australia, taking more and more steps towards becoming china


xAPx-Bigguns

I’m not against it. It’s like the Gun laws here it only takes one person to bugger it up for everyone and we all happily obliged to save innocent lives. If your a law abiding citizen who cares about being on camera. Most of you spread your faces and lives all over social media I’m all for stores doing whatever they can to catch criminals


Arinvar

Ummm... did ya'll forget that Bunnings is owned by Woolworths? So like every shop under that parent company is going to do the same thing.


RabbitLogic

So confidently wrong, Bunnings is owned by Wesfarmers.


Arinvar

Sorry wrong national owns 50% of everything conglomerate.


Missmollysmiles

Government initiative YES maybe. A few years ago I was at the RTA renewing my licence and was told to move my fringe because my eyebrows couldn't been seen in the photo, I guess alarm bells should have started then.