My local grocery store has a similar system. They're unionized and seem to have a very stable workforce (I've seen the same people there for six years now). If I can be any judge from the outside, the staff seems to have a healthy work environment, which here means that they're warily polite to customers and considerate and jokey with each other. But there's that handprint pad at the door, right next to the employee union message board.
I'm worried about the future of protecting privacy as a political goal. So much ground has already been ceded, and every data-collection program can muster such reasonable justifications, that I really do think most people under 25 can't imagine not being surveilled.
I've never seen biometric measures used for clock-punching and such, but this really doesn't seem like that big a deal to me (I am, of course, under 25). Are these contraptions physically obtrusive, or is the objection just on privacy grounds?
Not "just" on privacy grounds, I wouldn't think--although there is that--but also on the implication that the identification is to prevent theft or fraud. It sucks to feel that one is assumed to be dishonest, and ime it usually leads one to try to get away with whatever one can, out of a feeling of grievance....
I suppose if it's cheap and works, why not. It doesn't strike me as much more intrusive than a manager recognizing your face when you arrive at work.
Pretty crazy to see handprint identification being used in a grocery store. Only a few years ago the movies would portray such technology as the exclusive province of government programs and James Bond villains. I suppose the grocery store needn't worry about someone cutting off an employee's hand and using it to sign in...
Arguably, timecards just save one the hassle of calculating hours by mechanising the process. They're pretty easy to defraud--have a friend punch in for you, don't punch out for your lunch hour, whatever. There's still an assumption of integrity there that the employee is punching the card before he starts work and just before he leaves, rather than (say) punching in and then going out to get breakfast or something. Whereas the whole biological verification thing makes it all more personal, somehow.
Maybe I'm being kind of irrational. But it bugs me. I wouldn't like it. I don't mind being asked to account for my time, but I would mind being expected to provide "proof" that I were being honest about it.
I predict that the next step (id not in use already) will be combining the biometrics with RFID chips to track your movement so you can be automatically put on/off break when you enter/exit the bathroom or leave the building, to prevent B's breakfast example.
I see your general point Becks, and I agree with it.
But, w/r/t this particular case, is a handprint really the kind of biometric data likely to be bought/sold or subject to abuse? I would object if the company wanted a DNA sample, as I could imagine all kinds of shady characters and companies wanting a peek at my DNA. But what are they going to do with a digitized breakdown of my handprint? Do a large-n palm-reading study?
But what are they going to do with a digitized breakdown of my handprint?
Identity theft. Maybe not now, but you'll see it if banks or other financial institutions start using similar biometrics for authentication. HR and payroll databases for small and mid-sized companies are usually a lot less secure than databases for financial institutions so they would be a much easier target.
Also I bet many employers would willingly turn over fingerprint data, etc. of their employees if asked by police. Look at how easily the phone companies turned over their call records. Once your fingerprints or whatever get entered into a database, who knows in what system it will ultimately end up.
Question: is cod the perfect fish?
Answer: while the notion of "the perfect fish" is highly problematic, it is nevertheless the case that cod is very good.
There is a technique to take the name of the perfect, and make it moreso; such that the referent of the more perfect name is itself more perfect with respect to the perfect simpliciter. Observe.
Perfect: cod; catches; Canton
More perfect: scrod; scratches; Scranton
I don't remember how cod tastes, but it's abundance in the shallows off Massachusetts was responsible for the Plymouth colony thriving, and therefore for AMERICA.
Isn't cod a fish of the sort that my family refers to as "dead white fish"? The sort of fish that gave fish a bad name for so long? Do you prefer chicken breasts to drumsticks, Ben?
Identity theft. Maybe not now, but you'll see it if banks or other financial institutions start using similar biometrics for authentication.
Apparently many ATMs in Colombia now feature fingerprint access. But I'm not sure how possessing a copy of my handprint would enable anyone to commit identity theft. I would think that using biometric data would make identity theft more difficult. If thieves wanted to steal my identity, they would need more than just numbers; they'd need to construct an identical replica of my hand or cornea...
If thieves wanted to steal my identity, they would need more than just numbers; they'd need to construct an identical replica of my hand or cornea...
No they wouldn't. In 24, etc. you see Jack Bauer cut off the bad guy's thumb so he can put it in the scanner and impersonate his identity. Really, that's not necessary. Biometric devices convert a picture of your thumb, hand, retina, etc. into some kind of digital representation that is compared against a similar digital representation stored in the database. If you can steal the digital representation and bypass the input device, you can just compare bits to bits, impersonating the person you want without anything physical.
If you can steal the digital representation and bypass the input device, you can just compare bits to bits, impersonating the person you want without anything physical.
Good biometric systems also look for indications of "liveness" like pulse, pupil response, etc.
The funny thing is that re-reading my comment, I briefly forgot that I had written it, and wondered if the comment itself were a joke, meaning that someone was faking being me.
My local grocery store has a similar system. They're unionized and seem to have a very stable workforce (I've seen the same people there for six years now). If I can be any judge from the outside, the staff seems to have a healthy work environment, which here means that they're warily polite to customers and considerate and jokey with each other. But there's that handprint pad at the door, right next to the employee union message board.
I'm worried about the future of protecting privacy as a political goal. So much ground has already been ceded, and every data-collection program can muster such reasonable justifications, that I really do think most people under 25 can't imagine not being surveilled.
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 7:41 PM
I've never seen biometric measures used for clock-punching and such, but this really doesn't seem like that big a deal to me (I am, of course, under 25). Are these contraptions physically obtrusive, or is the objection just on privacy grounds?
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 7:47 PM
Aren't they lucky they aren't Bob Arctor and they don't have to be they're fellow employee.
Posted by Paul | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 8:06 PM
Not "just" on privacy grounds, I wouldn't think--although there is that--but also on the implication that the identification is to prevent theft or fraud. It sucks to feel that one is assumed to be dishonest, and ime it usually leads one to try to get away with whatever one can, out of a feeling of grievance....
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 8:11 PM
But don't timecards also assume dishonesty? I don't see how this is different.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 8:15 PM
I suppose if it's cheap and works, why not. It doesn't strike me as much more intrusive than a manager recognizing your face when you arrive at work.
Pretty crazy to see handprint identification being used in a grocery store. Only a few years ago the movies would portray such technology as the exclusive province of government programs and James Bond villains. I suppose the grocery store needn't worry about someone cutting off an employee's hand and using it to sign in...
Posted by Andrew | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 8:16 PM
Arguably, timecards just save one the hassle of calculating hours by mechanising the process. They're pretty easy to defraud--have a friend punch in for you, don't punch out for your lunch hour, whatever. There's still an assumption of integrity there that the employee is punching the card before he starts work and just before he leaves, rather than (say) punching in and then going out to get breakfast or something. Whereas the whole biological verification thing makes it all more personal, somehow.
Maybe I'm being kind of irrational. But it bugs me. I wouldn't like it. I don't mind being asked to account for my time, but I would mind being expected to provide "proof" that I were being honest about it.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 8:21 PM
I have privacy objections (I don't trust an employer to safeguard my biometric data) and also think 4 gets it exactly right.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 8:23 PM
I predict that the next step (id not in use already) will be combining the biometrics with RFID chips to track your movement so you can be automatically put on/off break when you enter/exit the bathroom or leave the building, to prevent B's breakfast example.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 8:26 PM
id s/b if
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 8:26 PM
Aren't they lucky they aren't Bob Arctor and they don't have to be they're fellow employee.
Their. Incidentally, the movie looks absolutely terrible.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 8:37 PM
I see your general point Becks, and I agree with it.
But, w/r/t this particular case, is a handprint really the kind of biometric data likely to be bought/sold or subject to abuse? I would object if the company wanted a DNA sample, as I could imagine all kinds of shady characters and companies wanting a peek at my DNA. But what are they going to do with a digitized breakdown of my handprint? Do a large-n palm-reading study?
Posted by Andrew | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 8:39 PM
Biometric systems have always had the failing that while the measurements may be individualized, they can't really be private.
Posted by Nathan Williams | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 8:40 PM
re RFIDs and privacy, scroll down a little on this page:
http://www.privsecblog.com/
Posted by Andrew | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 8:45 PM
But what are they going to do with a digitized breakdown of my handprint?
Identity theft. Maybe not now, but you'll see it if banks or other financial institutions start using similar biometrics for authentication. HR and payroll databases for small and mid-sized companies are usually a lot less secure than databases for financial institutions so they would be a much easier target.
Also I bet many employers would willingly turn over fingerprint data, etc. of their employees if asked by police. Look at how easily the phone companies turned over their call records. Once your fingerprints or whatever get entered into a database, who knows in what system it will ultimately end up.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 9:02 PM
Becks, if you haven't done anything wrong, you don't have anything to worry about.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 9:06 PM
Tim, I'm just going to assume 16 is an ill-fated attempt to disprove this.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 9:12 PM
You'll sing a different tune in the gulag, Timmeh.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 9:14 PM
Oh. Hi Becks.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 9:14 PM
Hello there!
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 9:24 PM
STANDpipe. BRIDGEplate. Clap. Clap. ClapClapClap.
That's how I've been reading your name lately, by the way. It's very "high school football game".
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 9:26 PM
Question: is cod the perfect fish?
Answer: while the notion of "the perfect fish" is highly problematic, it is nevertheless the case that cod is very good.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 9:32 PM
Dude, tuna is the perfect fish. It makes great sushi, it's great grilled as a steak, and it's even good out of a can with mayo.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 9:42 PM
Clap. Clap. ClapClapClap.
You just rebooted the server.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 9:49 PM
black cod is the perfect fish. If you're lucky enough to reside in the PacNW, you can enjoy the world's most delicious dish.
Posted by sw | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 9:50 PM
There is a technique to take the name of the perfect, and make it moreso; such that the referent of the more perfect name is itself more perfect with respect to the perfect simpliciter. Observe.
Perfect: cod; catches; Canton
More perfect: scrod; scratches; Scranton
Consider this my gift to science.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 05-18-06 10:03 PM
Their.
Of course. I think I was sleep-commenting.
Posted by Paul | Link to this comment | 05-19-06 6:19 AM
You'll sing a different tune in the gulag, Timmeh.
Yeah, "Ask".
Posted by slolernr | Link to this comment | 05-19-06 6:47 AM
Will no one stand up for the yellow-tailed jack and the arctic char?
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 05-19-06 8:32 AM
I don't remember how cod tastes, but it's abundance in the shallows off Massachusetts was responsible for the Plymouth colony thriving, and therefore for AMERICA.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 05-19-06 8:47 AM
Isn't cod a fish of the sort that my family refers to as "dead white fish"? The sort of fish that gave fish a bad name for so long? Do you prefer chicken breasts to drumsticks, Ben?
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 05-19-06 8:50 AM
31 posted before seeing 30. Why do I hate America?
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 05-19-06 8:50 AM
No, cod is white but delicious. You could make it boring, of course, but it's rich and tasty.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 05-19-06 9:33 AM
I have never had good cod, except for the fried kind that comes with chips. (And walleye is better for that, anyway.)
Note that the black cod is not a cod, just as the Chilean Sea Bass is not a bass.
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 05-19-06 12:04 PM
I don't think I've ever had cod at all.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 05-19-06 12:06 PM
11: I haven't read it. In fact, I've read a total of one PKD book. That said, I like the trailer.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 05-19-06 12:08 PM
Identity theft. Maybe not now, but you'll see it if banks or other financial institutions start using similar biometrics for authentication.
Apparently many ATMs in Colombia now feature fingerprint access. But I'm not sure how possessing a copy of my handprint would enable anyone to commit identity theft. I would think that using biometric data would make identity theft more difficult. If thieves wanted to steal my identity, they would need more than just numbers; they'd need to construct an identical replica of my hand or cornea...
Posted by Andrew | Link to this comment | 05-19-06 1:31 PM
Boiled cod with a good aiolli (and some boiled potatoes and other nice vegetables, boiled eggs, fresh parsley, etc.) is the perfect cod dish.
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 05-19-06 8:05 PM
bacalà!
plus watermelon. eaten with beer at a table in the street while entertainingly bad street magicians do their thing every night. about 10pm.
Posted by mmf! | Link to this comment | 05-20-06 7:50 AM
You forgot to mention the Elvis impersonator with the Provencal accent.
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 05-20-06 8:38 AM
If thieves wanted to steal my identity, they would need more than just numbers; they'd need to construct an identical replica of my hand or cornea...
No they wouldn't. In 24, etc. you see Jack Bauer cut off the bad guy's thumb so he can put it in the scanner and impersonate his identity. Really, that's not necessary. Biometric devices convert a picture of your thumb, hand, retina, etc. into some kind of digital representation that is compared against a similar digital representation stored in the database. If you can steal the digital representation and bypass the input device, you can just compare bits to bits, impersonating the person you want without anything physical.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 05-20-06 10:24 AM
If you can steal the digital representation and bypass the input device, you can just compare bits to bits, impersonating the person you want without anything physical.
Good biometric systems also look for indications of "liveness" like pulse, pupil response, etc.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 05-20-06 10:57 AM
Yeah, but aren't those also read digitally, and therefore fakeable digitally?
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 05-20-06 11:09 AM
We all ought to act as though we subscribed to a deontic moral theory, because this will result in the greatest good.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 05-20-06 12:13 PM
Does that answer your question, B?
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 05-20-06 12:14 PM
(Oops.)
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 05-20-06 12:16 PM
Totally not, no.
The funny thing is that re-reading my comment, I briefly forgot that I had written it, and wondered if the comment itself were a joke, meaning that someone was faking being me.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 05-20-06 1:41 PM
I just noticed I put "it's" instead of "its" in 30. I hate that typo most of all typos.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 05-20-06 3:17 PM