Big Brother and now private companies

> Example of security tags....my daughter
> bought a pair of shoes...imbedded right in
> the shoe was the security tag....the cashier
> passed them over the pad to nulligy the tag.
> We then proceeded out of the store and the
> alarm went off...re-did the one shoe that
> was the offender 3 times before it stopped
> triggering the alarm.

> Three days later we walk into the store, my
> daughter wearing the new shoes, and upon
> leaving the store the danged alarm goes
> off...culprit was that same right
> shoe....now my daughter is being acused of
> trying to shoplift a pair of shoes. We are
> detained while they view tapes of the shoe
> area...we aren't on the tapes but still they
> don't buy the explanation and are detained
> for further investigation. Finally I am
> allowed to leave to go home and get the
> receipt (round trip took 45 minutes plus gas
> cost)...they check the receipt but as shoes
> aren't serialized they are arguing that this
> doesn't represent the shoes in
> question...finally after successive arguing
> and my temper rising they find out who was
> on the chech out register at the time of
> purchase and proceed to call her at
> home...she verifies the problem and we are
> free to go with no apologies from the store.
> The price: Time involved 3½ hours, cost in
> fuel for round trip, and totally bad taste
> in my mouth for the business.

This is an example of badly designed technology. While it is a hassle for you -- and would certainly annoy me quite a lot! -- my guess is that you'll be more reluctant to go back to that store and that store will lose your business as a result.

Obviously in your case there is no direct benefit to having the tags there, as presumably you do not steal shoes. :) However the existence of tags probably does reduce theft and thus reduces store costs allowing price declines.

I know some would say that these cost savings are all theoretical and not reality. I'd say this is very unlikely given that companies are there to maximise profits, and including tags and tag scanning devices is not a costless exercise.

Let's suppose you have two shoe stores who both experience theft. If both install tag reading devices and reduce theft, chances are the increased profit (from reduced cost) will be competed away by price reductions.

I'd say this would be the case in most cases where there's (1) a competitive environment, (2) fairly similar products, as is the case with most retailers, and (3) some technology or cost saving that can be easily duplicated or bought by competitors.

> A further step...lets look at Gillette's set
> up of snapping pictures as customers pick up
> RFID tagged products off the shelf. Once the
> picture is taken anf the RFID recorded then
> the customer is tracked to the checkout...if
> the customer doesn't pay for the product
> they will be tagged as they leave the store
> for a possible theft suspect...even though
> they may have changed their mind and set the
> product down again somewhere else in the
> store, or even took it back to the
> display...suppose they changed their mind
> and bought a competitive brand that had a
> better price....still they will be tagged as
> not paying for it and possibly stopped for
> questioning...

I think the likelihood of being stopped for questioning on that alone would be fairly slim, especially if they bought a different product.

Sure it may be that they may be watched, but where is the harm in that? Or more to the point, how is that a great leap from today, where cameras look at you in shopping centres, banks, casinos, and many public places.

> BUT..

> ....that is only the beginning. As more and
> more invasion of privacy comes along it will
> worsen. Already the picture laden id's
> (driver's licenses, health cards, etc) are
> in a database, and Gillette just took your
> picture...tied into a database they can now
> use your picture to get your total info
> (including medical data) just by accessing
> the databases that are related to photo
> id's. These databases for security and
> supposedly marketing purposes are often sold
> to third parties....Now you walk into
> another store and as you enter a reader
> picks up the RFID and it is auto entered
> into this store's database, searched, and
> your whole info file is now on record in
> this stores database(including priveledged
> info in medical records, etc)

Where do they get this information from? I find the idea that your priveledged medical records would be available to a store clerk as you walk into a store a bit far fetched.

> And the nightmare will just blossom....

> ....for instance....unknown to the store it
> has an employee who likes children....this
> employee sees a little one that he/she
> fancies and who were scanned by the RFID
> reader ...this offender now has access to
> home addresses, phone numbers, etc...then
> just how safe is the child?

> And the nightmare will continue.

Of course, this scenario can happen today. There are many organisations you give your personal details to -- driving authorities, banks, doctors, schools, your electricity company, and so forth.

It is quite possible that such people may work at any of these organisations, see your child and look up your details.

Does that stop you from using banks, schools, electricity, and any other service that requires your address? If not, why doesn't it?

I imagine it doesn't because while it's possible for the situation described above to occur, it's fairly unlikely. Just like it's possible for a drunk driver to crash into me while driving, I still drive a car because the chances of that happening are fairly slim.

What I'm trying to say is that it's fairly easy to imagine horror scenarios, but I'd say the majority of them are fairly unlikely.

If companies are there to maximise profits, why do you think they spend money on this technology? Surely it's not for the sake of invading privacy on its own -- that wouldn't be in line with maximising profits. With that assumption, I'd say it's done to either increase efficiencies or reduce costs, which increase profits. These profits can be passed on to the consumer through competition.

Just think what would happen if they weren't passed on. Let's suppose you have 2 shoe stores again, with the same cost structure. One then installs privacy-invading tags, reduces theft, but keeps prices the same to increase profit.

As a consumer, which would you shop at, given both are the same price but one gives up your privacy? Probably the one where your privacy is intact. Which in turn puts pressure on the other one to reduce prices.

- Thomas.