It's not. Walmart Canada uses cameras for stock checking (https://focal.systems/). The kind of shopper behavior data they're selling is from transactions, not like, watching people shop.
> The idea that they need to physically watch people shop in stores in order to collect that data is just bizarre to see on HN.
I think it's because Walmart+BrowsingGoods tends tends picture the in-store experience. I keep doing that, even while I'm reading this thread about Walmart Online.
No. We have neither privacy nor even a right to privacy in the USA. The 4th amendment has never provided a comprehensive right to privacy, and it has been eroded beyond recognition by the Supreme Court.
Gen Z are indoctrinated into a world without privacy from a young age - their effects can be searched at any time by school employees and they are videotaped at all times at school. Their friends can look up all their Discord history at https://spy.pet/ Only Gen X / Millenials / other older generations had any privacy in the past.
These companies would love to have you believe these rights have been eroded enough to not matter. Human rights represent the most profound shift in human consciousness in modern history. These rights can only be eroded if people allow them to be eroded.
The 2nd amendment doesn't provide a comprehensive right to carry a fully automatic weapon and yet people fight for their right to carrying a fully automatic weapon. The writers of the Bill of Rights never imagined something like Digital Landscapes when writing the 4th amendment, but they did write about the right of the people to be "secure in their persons" and "against unreasonable searches". It is up to the governed to decide if this encompasses something like Digital Landscapes.
IMO the failure to respect the right to privacy is a quick path to empowering authoritarian, repressive, and tyrannical ideologies.
Uhh…what rights are you talking about that we actually have? We should have them, perhaps. But I don’t think we have what you’re talking about under our current laws and constitution. You’re talking like we need to prevent the loss of these rights, but I can’t find any evidence we have much left to lose.
A better framing might be “we need to enact these rights and then continue to protect them against erosion over time”.
Human rights, as a concept, transcend any silly paper documents that purport to "tell" us what "rights" we have. Of course, it really comes down to "who will protect that right", which is how we end up with so many situations where human rights are completely trashed.
Yes, the Bill of Rights primarily restricts governmental powers and doesn't apply directly to private companies but federal powers such as those granted by the Commerce Clause [0] have been used to defend and pass laws that protect rights in the context of private entities.
Example: Civil Rights Act of 1964 [1]
"Congress asserted its authority to legislate under several different parts of the United States Constitution, principally its enumerated power to regulate interstate commerce under the Commerce Clause of Article I, Section VIII, its duty to guarantee all citizens equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment, and its duty to protect voting rights under the Fifteenth Amendment."
Data protection and privacy is taken quite seriously in Europe - I wonder if there will be profound differences in cognitive ability between EU Gen Z and US Gen Z and Alpha in the coming years because of what you describe?
Practical differences in privacy aren’t much at the moment. Yes, GDPR should be powerful, but in reality European’s online habits, communications, and many purchases are still tracked, stored, and auditable by private data brokers. Perhaps Europeans have significantly less medical information sold to third party data brokers. And likely somewhat less of their purchase history.
After all, Europeans still use Discord/Reddit/etc. Much of the tracking is done by shady third parties with bots, who ignore GDPR. Or via browser extensions, malware, large-scale data theft and dumps, shady VPNs that get advertised heavily on YouTube, third-party tracking cookies, etc.
In some U.S. states there's a direct democratic processes that allow citizens to create and vote for legislation, apparently including California.
I'm not fully up to speed with politics in California or many of the states, but I wonder if there are groups working to create citizen driven legislation around consumer and privacy protections.
> What can we seriously do to protect our privacy these days
We can start by no longer trading privacy for convenience or discounts, and by no longer doing business with companies that do this sort of thing. In this case, by no longer buying anything from Walmart.
The only way we can get things back to a more sane place is a combination of legislation and customer rejection of these sorts of practices.
> do we even have privacy anymore?
We can (not 100%, but to a meaningful degree. 100% privacy has never been a thing), yes, by no longer voluntarily giving it up. But that also means giving up a lot of convenience (that also never existed until relatively recently). The choice is ours.
> We can start by no longer trading privacy for convenience or discounts, and by no longer doing business with companies that do this sort of thing. In this case, by no longer buying anything from Walmart.
One of the problems I see with this is that they don’t have a measurable way to know how many people choose not to buy from them or visit their stores due to these practices, there should be a way to say: “you lost a sale due to you invading my privacy”. I personally haven’t been on a WalMars, target, walgreens or any large retailer in years.
True, but that's about having a goal of changing a company's behavior. Which is a fine goal, but not necessary in order to claw back a good amount of privacy.
I avoid doing business with companies that abuse their customers because I want to avoid being abused, not so much to get them to become less abusive (but if it encourages them to do that, then gravy).
We can have a meaningful amount of privacy right now. We just can't have it without giving up a some optional conveniences.
32 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 74.1 ms ] thread4 Hours Earlier here: Costco, same.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40601934
Yet.
> Now, the company will share data about consumer behavior much earlier -- including people who browse but don't actually make a purchase.
If it's purely about transactions, then how is it even possible for them to do that? It's not.
The idea that they need to physically watch people shop in stores in order to collect that data is just bizarre to see on HN.
I think it's because Walmart+BrowsingGoods tends tends picture the in-store experience. I keep doing that, even while I'm reading this thread about Walmart Online.
I’m not happy to see this sort of thing. What can we seriously do to protect our privacy these days, do we even have privacy anymore?
No. We have neither privacy nor even a right to privacy in the USA. The 4th amendment has never provided a comprehensive right to privacy, and it has been eroded beyond recognition by the Supreme Court.
Gen Z are indoctrinated into a world without privacy from a young age - their effects can be searched at any time by school employees and they are videotaped at all times at school. Their friends can look up all their Discord history at https://spy.pet/ Only Gen X / Millenials / other older generations had any privacy in the past.
The 2nd amendment doesn't provide a comprehensive right to carry a fully automatic weapon and yet people fight for their right to carrying a fully automatic weapon. The writers of the Bill of Rights never imagined something like Digital Landscapes when writing the 4th amendment, but they did write about the right of the people to be "secure in their persons" and "against unreasonable searches". It is up to the governed to decide if this encompasses something like Digital Landscapes.
IMO the failure to respect the right to privacy is a quick path to empowering authoritarian, repressive, and tyrannical ideologies.
A better framing might be “we need to enact these rights and then continue to protect them against erosion over time”.
We are free to pass laws establishing a right to privacy from corporations, but I don’t believe the 4th provides any existing protection.
New protections of privacy from corporations are desperately needed in the digital era.
Example: Civil Rights Act of 1964 [1] "Congress asserted its authority to legislate under several different parts of the United States Constitution, principally its enumerated power to regulate interstate commerce under the Commerce Clause of Article I, Section VIII, its duty to guarantee all citizens equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment, and its duty to protect voting rights under the Fifteenth Amendment."
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Clause
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964
After all, Europeans still use Discord/Reddit/etc. Much of the tracking is done by shady third parties with bots, who ignore GDPR. Or via browser extensions, malware, large-scale data theft and dumps, shady VPNs that get advertised heavily on YouTube, third-party tracking cookies, etc.
Wait, what? What exactly does this show you?
Not doing anything is basically accepting it.
I'm not fully up to speed with politics in California or many of the states, but I wonder if there are groups working to create citizen driven legislation around consumer and privacy protections.
We can start by no longer trading privacy for convenience or discounts, and by no longer doing business with companies that do this sort of thing. In this case, by no longer buying anything from Walmart.
The only way we can get things back to a more sane place is a combination of legislation and customer rejection of these sorts of practices.
> do we even have privacy anymore?
We can (not 100%, but to a meaningful degree. 100% privacy has never been a thing), yes, by no longer voluntarily giving it up. But that also means giving up a lot of convenience (that also never existed until relatively recently). The choice is ours.
One of the problems I see with this is that they don’t have a measurable way to know how many people choose not to buy from them or visit their stores due to these practices, there should be a way to say: “you lost a sale due to you invading my privacy”. I personally haven’t been on a WalMars, target, walgreens or any large retailer in years.
I avoid doing business with companies that abuse their customers because I want to avoid being abused, not so much to get them to become less abusive (but if it encourages them to do that, then gravy).
We can have a meaningful amount of privacy right now. We just can't have it without giving up a some optional conveniences.
Ironically, not long after, they had a video ad that locked to the viewport as you scrolled. It made the content less than 50% of what you could see.
I did not continue to read.