Slashdot Mirror
Shopping Centers Track Customers Via Cell Phone Signals
oschobero writes "According an article from the Times, customers in shopping centers are having their every move tracked. Using cellphone signals, the system can tell when people enter the center, how long they stay in a particular shop, and what route each customer takes. The system works by monitoring the signals produced by mobile handsets and then locating the phone by triangulation." The particular tracking device described by the article is made by an English company called Path Intelligence.
I would say just turn off your phone, but I think the signal still carries.
Or you could just leave it at home.
The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
Seriously, The Path Intelligence guys use, or at least got started using, the GNU Radio platform(which, incidentally, is really really cool and you ought to check out). http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/06/70933?currentPage=2 http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/6124/1637/1600/path_intelligence.jpg http://handcircus.blogspot.com/2006/06/my-brother-in-wired.html
Now all we need is retinal/facial recognition and we'll have the perfectly offensive onslaught of advertisements available to us.
How did you like the last ad greeting you by name, John Anderton?
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
No problem. I'll just walk in random directions all the time, thus screwing with their data.
On the other hand, since they have all those security cameras already installed, wouldn't it be easier to just come up with some people-tracking software that scans the video output?
Aren't there laws on the books with serious penalties for unauthorized reception of private radio signals? Why shouldn't the mall owners be busted for this snooping just like they would if they were hacking DirecTV signals?
If the mall is going to use my equipment for their benefit, I should be warned before entering the premises. I see no mention on TFA about the mall warning its customers about the tracking system , besides looking for the antennas on the walls but those can easily be concealed. Maybe someone can come up with a device that changes IMEIs on the fly creating one man stampedes/mobs
The best test environment is production. - Me
chrome://browser/content/browser.xul
I'm glad I don't have a mobile telephone. This is just one more reasons (in the list of many reasons) not to have one anyway.
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
Which customers? Which shopping centers? ALL OF THEM? Am I being tracked?
Put on your tin-foil hats everyone!
Sigs are for Terrorists.
Whenever I read big-brother type stuff like this, I'm reminded of one of the best lectures I received regarding the direction of IT (and this was years ago)
In speaking about GIS he outlined some items that seemed very spooky and seemingly improbable things that would happen - then he discussed the results of those things occurring as if they were a given. I was skeptical that they'd even happen, but they are beginning to... stuff like this article mentions, how it will be very close to impossible to travel without a cell phone, and how that would essentially mark you (not in the crazy 666 sense) for all kinds of crap people want to sell to you.
At the end, his point was that these types of things will be reviled in name only, but once people receive the benefits of the technology, they'll love it. We're headed down this path whether we like it or not; privacy will become a very relative thing in the next couple decades. We will need to rely exclusively on the good faith of the companies that guard our information.
If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
These folks expect us to believe that they would admit that these devices can indeed access peoples personal contacts? Who are they kidding? It's like expecting Bush to admit that he was wrong to invade Iraq.
This is pretty cool. The website claims accuracy of 1-2 meters. If they indeed use triangulation, their equipment has to be able to measure time down to ~1/300 millionth of a second. BTW, chances are that tracking is anonymous. I don't believe phones transmit phone numbers or other private information unencrypted.
Since this article is about cell phone tracking, I thought I would mention a free GPS tracking service that we recently launched. It's called InstaMapper. There is a DIY that explains how to track a car in real-time using a $40 prepaid cell phone:
http://www.instamapper.com/diytracking.html
Under Section 5(1)(b) of the WT Act 1949 it is an offence if a person "otherwise than under the authority of a designated person, either:(i) uses any wireless telegraphy apparatus with intent to obtain information as to the contents, sender or addressee of any message whether sent by means of wireless telegraphy or not, of which neither the person using the apparatus nor a person on whose behalf he is acting is an intended recipient;
This means that it is illegal to listen to anything other than general reception transmissions unless you are either a licensed user of the frequencies in question or have been specifically authorized to do so by a designated person. A designated person means:
the Secretary of State;
the Commissioners of Customs and Excise; or
any other person designated for the purpose by regulations made by the Secretary of State.
Or:
(ii) except in the course of legal proceedings or for the purpose of any report thereof, discloses any information as to the contents, sender or addressee of any such message, being information which would not have come to his knowledge but for the use of wireless telegraphy apparatus by him or by another person."
This means that it is also illegal to tell a third party what you have heard.
With certain exceptions, it is an offence under Section 1 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 for a person - "intentionally and without lawful authority to intercept, at any place in the United Kingdom, any communication in the course of its transmission by means of:
a public postal service; or
a public telecommunication system."
It is similarly an offence to intercept any communication in the course of its transmission by means of a private telecommunication system.
According to Ofcom, scanners and monitoring radios can be legally sold, bought and used in the United Kingdom, without the need to obtain a license, provided they only receive radio services meant for general reception by the public. In the UK such services include Citizens' Band, Amateur, licensed broadcast radio, weather and navigation broadcasts.
It is only illegal to use scanners to listen to licensed private services such as the police and taxi radio transmissions and other prohibited or private broadcasts not intended for the public. Listening in on such broadcasts is an offence under Section 5(1) (b) of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1949.
In order to help the public understand what it can and cannot listen to, Ofcom publishes a Radio Authority information sheet titled RA-169.
Anyone who intends to listen to radio transmissions should be aware of the following, it warns: A license is not required for a radio receiver as long as it is not capable of transmission according to The Wireless Telegraphy Apparatus (Receivers) (Exemption) Regulations 1989 (SI 1989 No 123). An exception to this is that it is an offense to listen to unlicensed broadcasters (pirate broadcasts) without a license and licenses are not issued for that purpose.
Although it is not illegal to sell, buy or own a scanning or other receiver in the UK, it must only be used to listen to transmissions meant for general reception - Amateur and Citizens' Band transmissions, licensed broadcast radio and weather and navigation broadcasts. It is an offence to use your scanner to listen to any other radio services unless you are authorized by a designated person to do so.
So possession of the equipment is allowed so long as it is not used to listen to prohibited communications in the UK.
http://www.monitoringtimes.com/html/mtlaws_may04.html
What about the shopping centers with a poor signal there some places where you get a weak signal some times parts of a store get no signal at all.
Lots of fun things you can imagine doing with this :)
... the dressing room at Victoria's Secret / Stall 3 in the bathroom at Baskin Robbins / the service elevator in any place you can find with a service elevator.
... no, wait, they didn't. Errr ... 50 people just appeared spaced in a grid around the parking lot! No, they've disappeared.
Gather as many cellphones as possible (from cooperating friends etc). Put them all in a small basket.
Have them visit for a while in
Or just have people do a lot of trading, so person A keeps visiting place 3, over and over and over. (Also works with grocery loyalty oath cards.)
Have a massive "appearance" / "disappearance" fest. Hey! 50 people just appeared inside Best Buy! No
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
Other things these systems could do include correlating phone IDs with missing big-ticket merchandise to identify possible shoplifters, or look for suspicious activity like repeated visits to rest rooms or other semi-private places by the same set of IDs. Combine it with video records and credit card records and you can get a fair amount of visitor identification without going to the phone company for tracing. Not enough to act, but enough to be useful to security personnel.
It's another step towards Brin's transparent society.
I don't have objections to it being done correctly. By correctly I would want the following issues to be addressed. 1. No attempts to find out who the cell phone belongs to. (No personally identifiable information). 2. The id number that the cell phone transmits is never stored in any way. The use of an internal identifying number would be acceptable as long as no link was made between the actual cell phone identification number and the internal id number is stored. 3. Every time you visit the mall you get a new internal id number. This would prevent getting information about repeat visits to the mall. My concerns about storing personally identifiable information stems from the government. The government would subpoena for the mall owners cell phone information and all sorts of fun would begin. Even if only a cell phone id number is stored it would be enough for the government to use as a starting point.
They will track you the best, because when the signal quality gets worse, your phone increases its own signal strength in order to keep the connection as long as possible.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Those actually make the system's life easier. In modern phones, the phone adjusts the power of its transmissions in order to conserve energy. If contact with the tower is good, it will use less energy, if conditions are bad, it will use more in an attempt to compensate.
Since this tracking system listens to your phone's transmissions, it should actually have an easier time in areas where tower transmissions are weak and phone transmissions are strong.
Besides the obvious question "who watches the watchers", I always ask myself on these privacy topics:
Where does the money come from to pay people to sit around the whole day and watch other people? There must be an enormous amount of data accumulating...
NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
Okay, fine, so now I want to use SMS to send my shopping list to the mall, and get in return directions to the aisle and row of the widget I want, with the price displayed on the map on my phone of the mall, with directions if I ask, so I can decide which of two competing stores to go to. Better still, I would not mind if the the higher priced store might offer me a deal when they see me entering their competitor's shop. And no colluding on price, please, I will go to another mall...
Since this tracking system listens to your phone's transmissions, it should actually have an easier time in areas where tower transmissions are weak and phone transmissions are strong. ..which is an easy thing to simulate with a sufficient amount of radio reflective material in the walls of the store.
Iam sure the cellphone companies will love to put a stop to a third party using their $billion privately licensed network infrastructure for commercial gain that they are not a part of.
Of course if ALL the cellphone companies have giving their blessings to recieve their frequencies then the legal threat is reduced, somehow from reading about their tech they dont have permssion.
i presume they have lawyers?, even a ham radio operator could tell you the laws on reception of signals, bottom line no permission, no reception or usage in any way at ALL
Unless they inform me (signs posted prominently on the doors or walls, for example), then I consider this to be gross invasion of privacy.
And of course, if they were to post such signs, then I would go to another shopping center!
Which is NOT an excuse for them to keep using it without telling people. What I am getting at is, I object to the practice and I believe most others do too.
A simple search on Google will bring any number of articles on the decline of the American mall {even though TFA discusses UK malls}. The article(s) specifically state the financially affluent are abandoning the malls. Despite what the articles may summarize, the reason I don't shop in malls is simple -- mall stores carry nothing I need. I park outside the single store I need to visit, get the items I require, and leave.
I am quite confident any tracking will show an inverse relationship between time spent in the mall and actual shopper's spending.
Every mans' island needs an ocean; choose your ocean carefully.
The UK and USA governments have both used cellphones to listen in on private conversations WHILE A CALL WAS NOT BEING MADE. Even CNN verifies this. Basically -- taking the battery out IS necessary if you want true privacy with NO chance of interference. And that's just one of many reasons why I would never get the piece of crap called the iPhone.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
That's an issue of getting a signal to/from a tower outside the immediate area. These devices are in the immediate area at close range with the mobile phone, hence no weak signals.
> look for suspicious activity like repeated visits to rest rooms
Either you're a terrorist or you've got the runs, and we're not taking chances!
I could see mall security using this.
I'm sure we've all been there before, where a store ask you to leave. I remember an incident at Radio Shack (when they still existed). I bought a Sony Discman that didn't work. Anyways I was being persistent to get something done. They called mall security and I was kicked out and told not to come back to said mall. Although I was back the next day, my secondary school was connected to said mall.
With this system, I could see them locking on to one's mobiles signal, and then placing it in a database so they would be alerted if one were to return to a mall they were not welcome to. Although if one was smart and figured out they were using mobile signal to track you then all you have to do is turn the mobile off.
This is ridiculous, they are using it for more advertisements to spam the shit out of us even more. "we noticed you looked at underwear for 2.3 minutes, would you be interested in one of the following X-brands."
What's changed is that now the technology is available for corporations to access your cell phone's broadcasts and use that to determine your movements. It's pretty certain that they can read the ID from your phone - and if they're not linking it to your personal profile already it's just a matter of time until they do. When your cell phone broadcasts ID from the checkout counter as they're running your credit card - gotcha!
Would these corporate watchers reveal what they're doing? Not likely at all; they'd be much more likely to keep it a deep dark secret for as long as they can. It's the perfect pretext for gathering personal data - they've got a business relationship with you and they're just updating their internal records, you know.
The only thing about this whole mess that surprises me is how many people are concerned about how RFID may be used to track them - but they're completely overlooking that cell phone that they carry with them everywhere they go.
Tip for those who don't want to be tracked: Leave the cell phone at home.
But no.. I actually don't know that I have bad karma. I don't care enough to check. So the real reason would truly be from not giving a fuck. But thank you for your interest. :)
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
I'm going to mentally meta-moderate your mental moderation of my post as flamebait as "unfair". At worst, it was redundant, because I noticed after posting it that several other people also pointed out the very valid, relevant, non-flamebait point that cellphones can be listened in on even when not making a call.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
2) ???
3) Profit!
Actually, number 2 should perhaps be "Invest in iRobot Corporation." After all, monkeys don't clean up after themselves.
Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals... except the weasel."
I was talking about frequent visits by the same groups of people.
Now that's still possibly a parent and a child with the runs rather than a drug deal, but you're right, there's a huge potential for false positives from any system like this, but do you really think that will stop them?
That's kind of the point.
It wouldn't surprise me a bit if the phones, as phones (but not as people) could be tracked by the radio signals they send out constantly. It could lead to interesting movement information for the stores and the mall management.
But can the tracking infrastructure on its own (ie, without cooperation from the cell phone companies) determine who is the owner of a given phone as it moves through the mall? Its one thing to say "phone ABC123 was in the gap for 20 minutes, and then went to cinnabon", but a very different thing to say "jane doe was in the gap for 20 minutes and then went to cinnabon".
It would be useful to know just how much privacy is actually at stake, here.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Article, though datelined "San Francisco", seems to refer to tracking being done in a GSM-only environment. They talk about looking at the IMEI of the handsets, which is a GSM term, and the locations mentioned seem to be in the UK.
In the US, they'd have to be decoding three to six different protocols on at least three frequency bands. Those nodes would cost a fortune. You'd have want that location information pretty badly to fund something like that. Not to mention multipath issues.
I know it would work in theory, but something tells me this company isn't tracking *all* handsets in a large mall. Of course, you'd only find that out once you pay for their reports...
The type of thing they claim, not even network operators can do, and they assign all the frequencies in use, so, they know who is who. Cell phones (GSM, at least) don't broadcast unless there's something to do, like make a call, change base station, etc. How they will monitor something that is not broadcasting?
This can only be achieved using monitoring software IN the cell phone, using network monitoring (a big subject).
I don't know what they are monitoring, but for sure, it is not GSM phones.
Math is beautiful... e^(pi*i)+1=0
Anyone who walks around with an RF transmitter in there pocket and complains about the privacy implications is an idiot.
Another reason I don't have a cell phone. Don't want it, don't need it, don't miss it.
Why use phone triangulation? Everyone will be bugged w/ RFID's soon, if they aren't already. Credit/Debit card, merchandise, passport, driver's license.
All of this technology has only 2 practical uses: law enforcement, specifically amber alerts, and spam.
on the surface it's sounds right...
but what if you drop coils under high-power transmission lines to garner free electricity?
what if you tune in on HBO or skinamax without a subscription?
what if you slurp a optical link between two banks using an IR bridge?
how about reading vibrations off a window with a laser to listen in on a conversation? or with a shotgun microphone
what if I'm standing across 86th ave in NYC in my apartment, looking into your bedroom making love to the wife, or the family dog?
these are all forms of 'radiation' that I can percieve, without entering your person or property....
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
You also need to read the news.com news article linked to from other comments here. The FBI was pretty clear in its statements.
Thank you for providing the counter-example of a swapped out cellphone -- that'd a good point. But I think they don't even need to do THAT.
And an iphone is not turned off when it's turned off -- Go read the slashdot article about the guy who got a $5000 bill when it was "turned off" while on a cruise. It still checks your email, it still transfers data. I could be wrong -- I don't have an iphone. Or a cellphone. I'm not an expert. But I do rememeber what I've read that makes me NOT want to get one.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
When you moderate a post, you moderate the content of entire post, not a sentence that was an aside. Do you actually have a point, or do you simply bait flame from flamebaiters?
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
I don't know why anyone would be concerned with privacy here. It's not like shopping centers don't have security cameras watching every inch of the stores anyway. If they're learning how to make their stores better by watching crowd movements, I think thats great. I never considered the fact I walked into the mall to be private information.
Since I don't have a cell phone, I don't have anything to worry about. It helps that there is not a mall within 100 miles, either.
At first I thought this sounded like a pretty good idea and I was impressed with the ever amazing technology we keep developing, but then again, it's kind of annoying. Does anyone else think this is a breech of our privacy? It's like the Patriot Act but on a much smaller scale. On a scale of one to ten, how important is this really to our society? Like are we really in dire need to see how many people view a specific area of an airport or a store? Seriously, it's ridiculous that we are spending time and money developing something so stupid. Wouldn't it be more beneficial, cheaper, and accurate to just hire people to observe different areas of a store, airport, etc? In all honesty, how many people just walk around a store or area in the airport, simply because they are bored or trying to waste time before a flight? Yes, it's great that they are at least keeping it anonymous, but who knows how long it will stay like that. Or hell, they may just be advertising that. I don't know, to me personally, this idea just sounds ridiculous and another way for us to be monitored.
Everyone thinks of this story in terms of privacy but no one thinks of it in financial terms: My shop usage data have great financial value (otherwise the shops wouldn't pay to install surveillance systems) and the shop's surveillance is involuntary - I am not given a choice whether to allow them track me or not, except if I avoid transmitting wireless signals while near their shop. As the data collection is not voluntary and my shop usage data have financial value, I demand payment from shops using this system. I want a share of my shop usage data's financial value.
Another reason why I don't own a cell phone! Beside not wanting to be on a leash to a higher power, like a wife.
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
I wonder when they start refusing entry to people who don't have cell phones because they are obviously some kind of dangerous individual who can't be tracked and manipulated?
Until then I am safe.
I am anarch of all I survey.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trilateration
Engineering is the art of compromise.
If they are passively reading the signal the cellphone emits, then they need no permission whatsoever and the cell phone company have no recourse (other than change how cellphone transmit signals). The only exception I can muster are governmental signals (police, 911, military) which are afforded a protection by law.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Apparently in the US permission is required. Somebody posted ane xtract of some legalese below.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
This is not that different from CCTV; your cell phone transmissions, like the light you project from your body, both exist in the same public space. There is a legal precedent which allows people to monitor their businesses with CCTV, provided that the customers know they are being recorded -- that sort of system could be used for the same sort of tracking and research done here.
Actually, I used CNN because they seem to have a lot of legitimacy with a lot of people, not because I am a particular fan. Don't have the channel, and no longer bored enough at work to read the site (because I have no job! zing!). Hell, I heard about it on PrisonPlanet / Alex Jones 2 years before that ... which is yet another "sensational news site that makes money by selling its advertisments", albeit a bit more tin-foil-hat-y. But it took a lot longer to hit mainstream, and CNN Is a good reference for that. Suffice to say that I barely touch mainstream news these days... I'm about to cancel my cable for good because I've used it for about 10 minutes out of the last $200 spent @ $20 a month.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
tm
Support TBI Research: http://www.raisinhope.org
Mod parent up. Information about the sender is exactly what the IMEI number is.
Shop as usual. And avoid panic buying.
I read an article where the FBI remote enabled a drug dealer's phone and recorded lots of very incriminating discussions. The mod seems to leave the screen and leds turned off even though the phone is still listening/and or transmitting. Are you ever surprised your cell phone needs a recharge already? Even though you just charged it last night? Do you have any drugs for sale? Just kidding, we shouldn't discuss that on email, ha ha ha.
Once you attach some storage to the storage pool, it's there forever, Oh oops, that's ZFS. Maybe there are some things you shouldn;t put in the storage pool Hans.
Ever since I bought that LG CU320 I have noticed this phenominon. It is a pain in the ass. I have to take my cell out of my pocket when I sit down near te computer of the speakers make a bunch of noise. Thanks a log Cingular...
I read that you have to use a cell phone to unlock the toilet on the streets of France. They had so much vandalism they had to go to a system where a unique number was involved, no charge just a record.
As a Nation, England ceased to exist around 1707.
As stated, this system /by itself/ is relatively benign, however, pretty well all large complexes have CCTV so it would be trivial to link this system with DVR recorders since you'd know what area Joe Public just walked through and at what time,..
Based on that alone you'd be able to assign a face to a tracked IMEI code,... and since you've done that, why not 'sell' this information to your good buddies in the next part of town. Heck, why not sell it to the police (for a small fee I'll give you 24/7 access to my database)
And this is all very good for commercial premises but what happens when it's scaled up to start covering larger sections of a district? I can envisage several unpleasant scenarios.
At the same time I can see an interesting application for police for crowd management around say a football stadium,...
Like all technologies, it's open for abuse for purposes it wasn't really designed for
Nice try, but your schemes will be foiled yet. Your false flag claims while convincing are damming in their proof that you are a mere dupe for the evil robotic empire soon to enslave mankind. Your bait and switch game will fail, your pathetic mind control nanobot minions may fool a few, but you can NEVER deceive us all! In case you were unaware, the vile truth is that we need to eliminate all the oil and silicon to save the planet from the propheciesed devastation at the hands of your despicable overlord Skynet.
if the phone is ON but UNUSED, it can be tracked. If the phone is OFF, it cannot be tracked. There is no evidence I'm aware of that any consumer phone transmits *anything* when the phone is turned off.
... I fail to see how this could ever possibly work.
The electret mike in a phone (or anything else) uses a tiny bit of charged material and a tiny bit of foil to generate a tiny tiny signal (in the order of nanovolts) that is then picked up and amplified by a very sensitive amplifier built into the mike capsule. The whole thing is in an earthed metal can, because it if it wasn't it would pick up huge amounts of mains hum from the environment. The amplifier is almost sensitive enough to pick up the electric fields generated by your larger muscles.
I really can't see a way to separate out a few nanovolts of signal from the massive amounts of electric fields that would be floating around. Even the nerve pulses that drive your heart muscles would swamp it, never mind the radiated noise from mains wiring, network cables, bits of electrical equipment, and all the other day-to-day electromagnetic mayhem round about.
Of course if you can post schematics so we can all build one to test it for ourselves, and it works, then I'll believe it.
I hope it's gonna be forbidden soon http://www.buythismobile.com/APPLE-IPHONE/Shopping-Centers-Track-Customers-Via-Cell-Phone-Signals
They say they are using the 'location update' broadcast from the cellphone to the base station. From what I can discover this happens only every 10-15 minutes (depends on Network Operator) so they certainly can't track in real time. I did read some stuff on the Vodafone website which suggests that if an app polls the HLR (Home Location Register) which hold details of which mobiles are within a base station area (I think!) and the HLR hasn't been updated for a while then a 'dummy SMS' is sent requesting an update but Path Intelligence do not do it this way.
...if anyone sells a signal-blocking cell-phone case. Sure, you would be screwed for incoming calls, but if you are the type of person who only makes outgoing calls (or doesn't want to be tracked in a mall), it's very useful.
Maybe I need to get myself some copper wife and faux leather and make my own. :3
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
...Assuming you have a cell phone that can really be turned OFF.
This will allow you to use your cell phone while in the mall without giving them any really useful tracking information.
Use the cell phone in only one place, near the mall entrance. Turn it off as you leave the mall entrance area. They can tell that a cell phone ID 31784908 came into the mall at X time, was in the entrance at Y and Z times, and left at W time. If you're paranoid (I don't blame you) they could link the cell phone ID to your name through the service provider and tell that YOU were in the mall at these times, which is still a lot better than giving away a detailed map of your shopping activities.
Get used to using your cell phone's radio judiciously in the future. Software plugins to allow the radio to be disabled on command, and give some sort of warning signal when it's on, might be a popular modification.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Good luck finding a local d.a. willing to indict a cop for "doing his job". Might I recommend RSS-subscribing to BadCopNews.net for a few months? It'll wake you up to the way things work.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
With top of head recognition for quite some time, as I understand it. When you enter the store, a photo of the top of your head is taken and somehow it's marked. Then photos are constantly taken at certain points in the store to track patterns. At the end of your visit to a store, your purchases are tracked via what the system sees the cashier selling you. No names, no personal identities, just the top of your head that particular day.
It has to be the headset! Couldn't be the phone itself!
My phone (and all my other electronic widgets) have an 'Off' switch.
I'm not afraid to use it.
If I'm paranoid enough to believe the switch is not really an 'Off' for everything, it is a simple matter to remove the battery. No power, no signal. Period.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Bruce Lane, KC7GR,
Blue Feather Technologies
Not just no, but h*ll no. I don't show my receipt at Best Buy after paying at the checkout, I don't give my address, zip code or phone number at the checkout for their marketing and I certainly am not going to frequent or visit a mall that is physically tracking me. They are already watching me in CCTV. I typically hate new laws as we have far too many, but I'm thinking we need a law requiring any such usage in the US has a clear posting at every mall and store entrance that your privacy is going to be further violated. That way I know to point to the sign, flip off the security camera and take my dollars to another business.
I have no false sense of anonymity, however, a line must be drawn at some point and tracking my individual movements, no matter how anonymously, in a store or mall is past the line of my tolerance. I'm not going to turn off my phone or otherwise mask their ability to track me, I'm just not going to give them any business, period.
... while I actually see this as far too invasive. I'd be interested to see the kind of conclusions that could be drawn from such data.
I care about not caring about my karma. Thus, depending on your semantic interpretation of the word "care", and all the implications therein, one could argue either way -- that I don't care, or that I care by virtue of wanting to not care.
It's also my way of saying "my postings are not motivated by karma"...
It also applies to me in real life a bit.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
Thanks for that tidbit - that was a detail I had forgotten!
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com