posted
Every once in a while some department store will be discovered to have security cameras in the dressing rooms and get busted for it. This made me wonder about something, and I'm curious to know Hatrack's opinion:
Would you find it objectionable if cameras that used some kind of thermal imaging that showed body shapes but no personally identifiable details were used in store dressing rooms, rest rooms, etc? Security personnel watching one would be able to tell if someone were shop-lifting, but your privacy would no more be violated than if you were fully clothed. (Alternatively, regular cameras outside of dressing rooms could be coordinated with thermal cameras inside to be able to have evidence of a crime.)
For some reason, this thought still squicks me out, but I can't think of a coherent argument why. Maybe it's because I don't trust things to be set up like they are supposed to be.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't have a problem with it since it's a private company monitoring in private space, particularly if they post notices outside the dressing room that people are being monitored.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thermal/IR imaging is how ya can see through the clothing of fully dressed people. There was a small stink about it a couple of years ago when the public at large learned that some of the higher-end consumer video cam's could produce IR captures.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
aspectre, I'm not talking about stuff so sophisticated that you can see naked features, like they've been talking about on the news for airports recently. I'm talking about stuff intentionally chosen to allow behavior to be monitored while not showing any private details.
And I think this connects to while it still bothers me. Someone would still be watching, at a time when I would be at my most vulnerable, and ordinarily consider myself protected by my isolation.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why would thermal imaging nab shoplifters? Sure, the people are warmer than the rest of the room, but the stuff they're lifting wouldn't be.
So if I undressed, tried on their clothes, took some off, but put my own clothes over the shoplifted stuff, would that stuff be evident on thermo-cam?
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If I were watching your actions, I would see you putting on two sets of clothing (based on your actions), neh?
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
But I think I see what you're saying . . . what if you just pretended taking off the store's clothing. I think that would work. Which means that stores would have to be keeping it a secret for it to work. Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think a more practical solution is the one that a certain clothing store in Florida uses--just have someone outside the dressing room inventory all the store items a person has before they go into the dressing room and then make sure they bring those items back out.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think a more practical solution is the one that a certain clothing store in Florida uses--just have someone outside the dressing room inventory all the store items a person has before they go into the dressing room and then make sure they bring those items back out.
You low-tech genius, you! That might just work!
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The problem with cameras is the abuse associated with them. It is WAY too easy for the security people to do what ever they want with the images. I have had access to security images and my conscience was my only watchdog.
Also, most network cameras are Axis cameras, which run Linux, and most of them out there can be compromised without even trying because they haven't been updated with the latest security patches or because they still have the default passwords. Most of them are thus wide open to anyone to watch. And using google you can actually FIND these cameras all over the world.
So even if they are suppose to only be watched by security guards, they might be open to the public. This actually happened at a high that installed them in a girls locker room (it was only suppose to point at the door, but no, it was pointed at the lockers...). Huge uproar. Ironically I can't find a link to the article on google now...
And don't forget the camera phones. My gym had a ban on them in the dressing room...
And some criminals are using cameras to nab credit card numbers at check out registers, where people pull them out, and where clerks wave them around for the whole world to see. And don't forget ATM's and gas stations.
quote:Originally posted by Storm Saxon: I think a more practical solution is the one that a certain clothing store in Florida uses--just have someone outside the dressing room inventory all the store items a person has before they go into the dressing room and then make sure they bring those items back out.
That's how they do it in large French stores too. You get a ticket with the number of items you take to the dressing room and then they check to see that you brought all of them out. It's easy, doesn't slow the process, and there are no privacy issues. I like it. Posts: 4519 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
They do that in the cheap chains here in Australia - K-Mart, Target, Woolworths etc. You actually get a coat-hanger with enough hooks for the number of items you take in.
Posts: 2245 | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
posted
Neither was I, Icarus. I was referring to regular ol' (though admittedly higher-end) videocams purchased by regular ol' consumers.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Most of the stores that I've been to count on the way in, but not on the way out. So it kind of defeats the purpose.
Posts: 1547 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
