The biggest concern I have at news one of our Supermarket duopoly members have adopted face recognition software is what their contract allows for.
Because we have a duopoly and because most human beings require food, the chances of this impacting you is enormous, and it gives incredible powers and opportunities to marketers and State agencies.
Northcote National Party candidate accidentally let this desire slip during his devastating interview with Simon Wilson…
Bidois is strategy manager at Foodstuffs, which owns Pak’N Save, New World and Four Square. “Half the population shops at a Foodstuffs store. Imagine what you can do with that.” What, indeed?
…the Supermarket chain has claimed this is for security reasons to weed out shoplifters.
Sure, it can be used for that, but what about everything else?
Can a state agency ask for footage?
Can WINZ or MSD ask for that information?
Can the Police access it without a warrant?
Who else has access to this footage?
Where is it stored?
When does the footage get deleted?
Does it ever get deleted?
Allowing one side of our Supermarket duopoly to harvest data from facial recognition that can be on-sold to others or collected by State agencies is beyond Orwellian.
This is Big Brother in your supermarket shopping trolly.
These issues are already being debated overseas…
The report warns that new technologies, such as facial recognition software, will open up new opportunities for advertisers and marketers but also pose significant new risks.
Dr Suelette Dreyfus, from the school of computing at the University of Melbourne, said data about people’s movements and behaviours collected by shopping centres, retailers and advertising companies could be combined with new technologies that included physical biometric identification, mood analysis and behavioural biometrics.
This, she warned, would remove consumers’ ability to not give their details or use a pseudonym when when dealing with an organisation that collects data, like a supermarket. That has the potential to undermine one of the key protections of the Privacy Act – the right not to give your details.
Dreyfus also said the biometric analysis technology now used for security was being repurposed to monitor the mood of individuals and their responses to advertising. It could also be used by employers to monitor the mood of employees.
“This technology is being sold and implemented despite the clear privacy and ethical issues with its implementation and the questionable value of the measurement itself,” she said.
Data Rights Watch is urging the development of an opt-out register for people who do not want their movement data used for commercial purposes. It is calling for a compulsory register of entities that collect behavioural biometric data.
…why isn’t this debate being had in NZ?