this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2024
157 points (100.0% liked)

Australia

3582 readers
295 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @[email protected] who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @[email protected] and @[email protected]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Apparently, Bunnings have my face on-file. I don't think I like that.

top 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

Only if you've been one of the people who abuse their staff, steal or have been banned Your face is scanned upon entry, it is then compared to that rogues gallery, if it doesn't match, the scan is deleted, if it flags against their rogues gallery, securty pays closer attention to you.

If its as they say, I have no issies with it . their is no corelation between who I am and the scan they took of me and its not in the Governemnts hands. I'd suggest a privacy commissioner audit would make more sense. We are scanned at aiports AND our data is stored, i have more concern about that

[–] [email protected] 18 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I'm getting sick of having to explain to people that "i'Ve gOT noTHIng tO HiDE" is naive bullshit when this comes up

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Doesn't always work, but I ask if they shit with the door open. If they say no, I argue they have nothing to hide, everyone shits

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Thats a strong point to make.

It probably smashes through that mental barrier people have between 'pOliTicAl' discussions and their personal lives in the most aggressive way. In an illustrative sense.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I just don't have a reply when some actual degen replies with "yes."

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Ask them if you can watch. Be very very creepily excited about it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

fwiw, personal privacy isn't the reason I close the door, it's consideration of others.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

I distribute gas masks and ear protection

[–] [email protected] 39 points 4 days ago (1 children)

"Protection against organised crime" my arse you could give the fucking cops footage of someone breaking into your house and raping your hamster while shouting their full name and address and they still wouldn't do shit.

This is about floggable data

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I don't think they were asking the cops to do anything, they just were refusing people service.

But I agree with your conclusion. If they weren't using the data for commercial reasons, they were using it as a deniable trial to see what they could get away with.

Fucking Coles is using Palantir and has their checkout face cameras, so I suspect in the wake of this we'll hear more about this sort of thing with other companies.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Had no idea about this with Coles. Fark.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

@eraitch @zero_gravitas If you do use the self-checkouts there you can put a sticky dot over the camera as you approach it. They love it.
And their "AI" exit-gates on the self-checkout pen that shut if it doesn't think it saw you paying can get in the sea too.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

My example was to highlight how utterly ridiculous their 'reasons' for capturing the data in the first place were. Not to mention none of it would stand up in court as evidence. Bald faced lie

[–] [email protected] 13 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I wonder what percentage of Australians will have stepped into a Bunnings over the past three years? It has to be above 90% of us, right? That's pretty close to a record of us all.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago

It's all wesfarmers, and i'm pretty fucking sure that shit doesn't stop at bunnings stores.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It's only 63 stores though. Not all of them

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It is now rolled out to all Bunnings stores. So now when you steal something they don't apprehend you, they store the footage and once you steal enough to get the cops involved they dump all that footage on the cops desk. People think they get away with stealing, time says otherwise.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I'm sorry, but this is about facial recognition, not an AI that can figure out if someone is shoplifting? They don't pay someone to sift through all that footage and note down when someone is actually stealing, that just doesn't happen. Let alone that the cameras don't have full coverage of the store. So your statement is just not accurate.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So I worked at Bunnings and you're right and wrong.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

I have never worked at bunnings, and you're also right and wrong.

[–] Couldbealeotard 1 points 2 days ago

So what do you think they are doing with the data?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 days ago

So ahhh, the massive fine?

Did they even get a wrist slap?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 days ago

No thanks to the federal government beefing up privacy legislation.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Does anyone know whether they published the ordered statement and where?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Article says they've got 30 days to publish it, and also that they're planning to appeal, so that might delay it further.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

The real question is...does this apply to my dog too?

[–] WhatAmLemmy 4 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Ah, perfect. Another corporation shits on your rights and this time they don't even get a "cost-of-doing-business" fine.

if just one person could be protected from trauma the use of facial recognition would be "justifiable".

Funny how gov & corpo's frame all their crimes as "for your protection".

"The electronic data was never used for marketing purposes or to track customer behaviour," Mr Schneider said.

I'd be willing to bet all that I own this is either a complete lie, or by omission.

Commissioner Kind said she didn't think Bunnings deserved to be financially penalised as they had good intentions when they rolled out the technology and were cooperative with the investigation.

Ahh. If only every criminal received leniency for "good intentions".

Example# 12753974 that we live in corporate plutocracies masquerading as "democracy", and there is a separate rule of law for the wealthy/corporations.

But don't worry, I'm sure the neolibs across LabLib will legalise these violations soon enough — maybe you'll need to scan your digital GovID™️ to enter any store; for your protection, ofcourse!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

If possible, support your local small businesses.

[–] Potatisen 1 points 4 days ago

They destroy it but you have no authority of their backup overseas.

[–] Bluetreefrog 1 points 4 days ago

Hoo-fuckin-ray.