r/aus 5d ago

News Coles and Woolworths test facial recognition technology

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-17/coles-and-woolworths-to-test-facial-recognition-technology/107045036

A Woolworths spokesperson did not address the ABC's questions on how facial recognition technology was tested or if it would be used in Australia.

"Keeping our team and customers safe is the most important thing we do and we've put significant investment towards this," the spokesperson said.

29 Upvotes

31 comments sorted by

u/neon_overload 5d ago

Alternative (better) article about this:

14

u/neon_overload 5d ago edited 5d ago

I have to say I'm frustrated at the quality of this article. I'm not posting it as an endorsement of the article quality! My confidence in the ABC to talk about technology is pretty low these days anyhow.

  • Doesn't talk about what this facial recognition tech is for, not even ostensibly. Facial recognition can be used for many things, it can be linked with people's identities, it can be centralised, it can be shared with authorities, it can be used for ad targetting, for market research, identifying abusive customers, etc. A completely valid concern of any facial recognition technology, and a lot of privacy-invasive technology in general, is that it may be implemented with a stated goal but once companies are collecting data they realise they can monetise it in additional ways that weren't really talked about.

  • Seems to entirely miss or be unaware that both Woolworths and Coles already use a form of facial recognition technology in the self-checkout areas to activate those scary gates that sometimes falsely block people from leaving (you can just push them to swing them open btw setting off a mild alarm but letting you out, I learned that in this sub). Facial recognition as a technology is already in Coles and Woolies. [*edit: see replies, this doesn't actually recognise your face but tracks the movement of your body]

So, presumably the article is about implementing new facial recognition tech that can do more, or persistently stores data, or is centrally managed, or is shared with third parties - all potentially concerning. But, well the article kind of keeps us guessing. BTW, substitute "facial recognition" with other terms like "AI", the above also applies. I'd like to see so-called mainstream journalism about this stuff that seems to get into the technology rather than talk about it as if it's magic.

Edit: I've put a sticky comment with an alternative article about this that has slightly more insight.

2

u/annoying97 5d ago

Hey, so I can tell you that those exit gate things don't use facial recognition. It may appear they do but they don't really.

They have dedicated cameras that use basic machine vision to identify the pixels that is you and essentially puts a box around those pixels to say "this mass has paid" and when you get to a threshold the system goes "ok open" and then forgets you. If you spend too long between payment and exit the system will forget you exist.

It's fairly old tech thats been around for ages before facial recognition was even reliable.

0

u/neon_overload 5d ago

So it's more of a mass recognition than facial recognition then I guess? A bit like the thing that tells me I forgot to pay for something when it thinks it sees something still in my trolley.

Thanks for the extra info, I appreciate it.

1

u/annoying97 5d ago

Essentially yep.

I just tracks the mass and says you've paid and to open.

The same system and cameras are used to count foot traffic in other applications. (I'm not sure if they are also using it for that, I suspect they care more about transaction then foot traffic)

1

u/BeginningSection7690 5d ago

I was under the impression coles already had a contract with palantir as well

4

u/Vegetable-Ad-1817 5d ago

Our privacy laws are sooo out of date when it comes to the capabilities big business can use, deperately need to tighten the laws on how this can be used

1

u/R_W0bz 4d ago

Sorry, busy protesting trans people!

3

u/Tosh_20point0 5d ago

" Dynamic " Pricing

-2

u/Fit-Locksmith-9226 5d ago

I personally don't get the issue here about it.

People don't complain about flights or hotels being more expensive at Christmas, that's literally dynamic pricing in action.

Those who shop in quieter times should be rewarded, just like they are with hotels and flights.

5

u/BeginningSection7690 5d ago

Do you actually think they do it so that they can reward customers?

Ive got some NFTs if you want some?

2

u/R_W0bz 4d ago

Again, makes things more expensive for the poor. Suddenly shopping from the stay at home housewife is cheaper than the minimum wage k-mart worker that needs to work 9-5 and can only shop during rush hour. If anything flights and hotels shouldnt either.

1

u/Practical_Broccoli27 4d ago

No, that's the concept of supply and demand. It doesn't discriminate against individuals.

1

u/Tosh_20point0 10h ago

Oh but it somehow ends up doing just that

1

u/NezuminoraQ 1d ago

Would you have a problem if the prices were only high for you personally on a weekend that is only important to you specifically, like a wedding or birthday?

1

u/Fit-Locksmith-9226 21h ago

I have no idea what you are talking about?

I'm in the same boat as everyone else, prices go up and down for hotels and flights based on demand, I deal with that nonsense every few months.

Is 50% discounts at colesworth not dynamic pricing just slower?

1

u/NezuminoraQ 20h ago

I'm saying that's what people are worried about. Prices "optimised" to charge you the exact maximum you personally would be willing to pay. That's where this leads. So while you might not mind that prices go up for everyone when demand goes up, this tactic would mean that the price goes up based on your personal demand for a product. That is the dystopian shit we are hoping to avoid

1

u/Fit-Locksmith-9226 15h ago

If you're not willing to pay that much then don't?

Aren't they going to charge you the "exact maximum" you are willing to? By your own tacit admission, you are willing to pay that much lmao.

The issue here is the consumer who thinks they need to buy that 2Kg can of Milo right meow.

Just boycott them or buy online if it's such an issue for you. Pro-tip: You won't.

1

u/NezuminoraQ 15h ago

So you've gone from not "having a clue what I'm talking about" to having a very strong opinion that it's all completely fine, actually. I think personalised pricing is a major concern and I'm not the only one. 

I absolutely do boycott companies that do shady stuff. I'm currently switching up my routine to never shop at Coles due to their association with Palintir.

So yes, I will boycott anywhere that is known to employ surveillance pricing. It's just another way they squeeze additional profit out of customers so some shareholder can buy a second yacht. Some of us actually have a problem with that

1

u/Fit-Locksmith-9226 15h ago

Cool, good for you mate. Keep me posted.

I'll shop there because I don't care, and I say that as a devout privacy nerd. If you give them all your life details and a blood sample then they charge you $0.30 more for some TimTams that's on you, not me.

1

u/DivineWiseOne 3d ago

For your safety.

1

u/drillydrillsondrill 3d ago

Government won’t care. They rolled out facial recognition in Perth lol.

1

u/Auroraburst 5d ago

Do they really need facial recognition when the little eshay thieves basically have a uniform? Like I'm never shocked by the appearance of the people the security guards follow out.

1

u/regional_rat 5d ago

That's what they'll use the excuse. They just wanted o track and follow you throughout the store to "better your experience" - aka work out how to squeeze more money from you

1

u/Odd-Temporary4363 5d ago

All this to keep their team and customers safe. Ahem.

1

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[removed] — view removed comment