![United States United States](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/usa_64.png)
![Privacy Privacy](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/privacy_64.png)
USPS Service Kiosks Taking Pictures of Customers 650
NW writes "According to FOIA documents obtained by EPIC new Postal Service self-service postage machines take portrait-style photographs of customers and retain them for 30 days." IBM is the contractor behind the kiosks. Note that the kiosk is supposed to not complete the transaction if it determines the photograph has been compromised, so simply covering the camera is unlikely to work. As the cost of cameras and digital storage approaches zero, is it inevitable that every machine you interact with will take your photograph and store it?
Fun ideas... (Score:5, Funny)
Return of the ex-presidents.
Great.... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Fun ideas... (Score:5, Funny)
What could possibly go wrong?
Re:Fun ideas... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:No such word (Score:5, Funny)
Re:No such word (Score:3, Funny)
It's a perfectly cromulent word.
Re:Fun ideas... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Fun ideas... (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh no (Score:5, Insightful)
No, no. (Score:2)
Re:Oh no (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Oh no (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Oh no (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oh no (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Oh no (Score:3, Insightful)
I personally don't have a problem with any sort of automated machine taking my photo so long as:
1) It is clearly indicated that the machine will do so, and what the storage and use policies are for the photo.
2) It will only take my photo if I am performing a transaction with the machine (or in the background
Re:Also (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course if you're into mail fraud or anthrax then this just might affect you, sorry.
I am supposed to tolerate something just because it's already been done? Thanks but no thanks. Just because we have been taught that we have no privacy in public doesn't mean we should have cameras trained on us at every turn.
Soon the cameras will be inside your house but it will be ok because they are everywhere else.
Re:Also (Score:3, Interesting)
This is specifically because of him.
You used to be able to drop off a sufficently stamped parcel in any mail drop. After the UniBomber scares you were required to take packages over a certain size and/or weight into the office in person. This is simply a way to allow the conveinance of a mail drop with the security of personal delivery. A camera is already in my house (4 in fact) I controll them, no-one else.
-nB
Re:Also (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Also (Score:5, Insightful)
It is a philosophical quote: a political mindset. Marx had many quotes that are wrong in the frame of capitalism and Adam Smith generated many quotes that are contrary to a planned economy. Were they right or wrong? That depends on your own sociopolitical/economic concepts and goals.
For a truly free state the Ben Franklin was right on, but many (most?) people these days don't _want_ a truly free state: consider the millions of people who consider a prohibition of random searches and seizures to be a quaint idea that is little more than an idealistic suggestion. No less a figure than Abraham Lincoln considered the Constitution to be a rough guideline that could be suspended at will by a single individual (refer to his elimination of habeas corpus). Was that justified and necessary? Those who were thrown in jail without reason would probably say no, but everybody else had to decide for themselves.
So are those willing to sacrifice liberty for security undeserving of either? Personally I say that Ben was right smack spot on. But then again I don't believe in entitlements.
Re:Also (Score:5, Informative)
Some people in positions of power want more power (Score:5, Insightful)
Not, but I'm sure it is a very Patriotic Act to gain remote controll of your web cam.
And to monitor your power usage (hey, you might be trying to grow some of that evil hydroponic devil weed).
And when there's a camera on every street light looking at liscense plates (gotta catch those red light burning bandits), it's gonna be a breeze to track your car... right to the mall, where every store front tracks your unique compilation of RFID tags and cameras from every angle watch your every move.
Each of these things, by themselves, aren't a big deal, right? So there's no reason (aside from tin-foilliness) to object to any of these small, incremental erosions of privacy, right?
Baby steps... baby steps.
Re:Also (Score:3, Insightful)
The current administration has already proven that they have both the desire and the ability to drastically change our laws while keeping the public thinking that it is in their best interests for the government to do so.
Just wait for the terrorists to begin
Re:Also (Score:3, Insightful)
First, I disagree with the principle of your statement, I don't believe that distinction is all that clear. Second, it is entirely possible to revisit the distinction and redefine it.
In the most famous example of this, the Quebec Supreme Court ruled that cameras in public spaces were a type of privacy invasion because the knowledge that you were being recorded diminished a citizen's ability to enjoy the public space.
(I can't find the citation
Re:Also (Score:3, Insightful)
So you alright with cameras in public restrooms then? Most places are public to use but private in the sense of information disclosure. When I am on the street, only people who already know me recognize me and link whatever I am doing to my identity. I keep my privacy in regard to strangers and people watching security cameras for criminal activity. Unless they post MPEGs of juicy bits on the web, which happens to be illegal.
On the other hand,
Re:Also (Score:3, Interesting)
Not just for sex anymore... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Not just for sex anymore... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Not just for sex anymore... (Score:4, Funny)
:)
Re:Not just for sex anymore... (Score:5, Funny)
Celine Dion: What do you mean? Why are you calling him Ugly Bob?
Phillip: Because that's his name you stupid bitch.
Celine Dion: You told me your name was Handsome Bob.
Terrance: Look at him Celine Dion.
Phillip: Behold, his horrible face.
Celine Dion: Oh my God, he's heinously ugly, and I am pregnant with his child.
Terrance: What? Noooooo.
Celine Dion: I'm going to have a freak-baby.
Phillip: Oh, the humanity.
Finally... (Score:5, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
hotornot (Score:5, Funny)
No privacy for you (Score:2, Funny)
This would be ok if... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:This would be ok if... (Score:2, Interesting)
Of course, then the PO would have to pay more attention to make sure stamps weren't just stickers someone had printed off at home.
Re:This would be ok if... (Score:2, Informative)
http://photo.stamps.com/ [stamps.com]
Re:This would be ok if... (Score:3, Informative)
The Royal Mail does this, I'm suprised the USPO doesn't.
The answer to the quick-identification problem is tha the personalised stamps have a common part (with the queens head, plus one of a number of designs) with the photo next to that.
Of course, in some ways this means it's no different from having stickers made of your photo and sticking them next to normal stamps...
Re:This would be ok if... (Score:3, Informative)
http://photo.stamps.com/
Of course, it's not cheap. Looking that te site for a price....ooops, it seems the've halted the program until the USPS evaluates whether or not to continue with it again. Hopefully they will reinstate it.
It seemed to me that when I looked at it before, it was like $1 per stamp. Not something you'd want to use everyday, but would be neat for special events (ex: wedding invitations).
Re:This would be ok if... (Score:2)
Yea a real nasty one for when you invite your ex to your wedding.
what is the point (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:what is the point (Score:2)
To show the picture of the Terrorist Boogieman on the TV after the attack off course.
It's not a stamp machine, it's a post office (Score:5, Informative)
In other words, it *is* a lot like an ATM.
Re:It's not a stamp machine, it's a post office (Score:5, Funny)
The cameras were originally included to solve one of the hardest technological problems with faithfully implementing a mechanical post office. It's necessary for the machine to recognize when the line of waiting customers has filled the entire lobby and is just starting to snake out the front door. That's the precise time that the machines need to pop up the cardboard "Closed" sign on all but one of their stations.
Re:what is the point (Score:3, Informative)
I welcome.. (Score:2, Funny)
If it can prevent crimes/terrorism, or at give the authorities a clue on who did sent what, i dont have a problem about getting my picture take.. Its already on dozens of other surveillance videos, and I havent seen people complaining about that..
Re:I welcome.. (Score:2)
Considering the pics are being stored on XP. . . (Score:5, Funny)
Talk about unnecessary invasion of privacy... (Score:5, Insightful)
Say your branch IS used for terrorist activities. Say a mail bomb, or anthrax threat. You can bet that if you're an arab you're going to be getting a visit from the FBI.
Re:Talk about unnecessary invasion of privacy... (Score:5, Insightful)
As a bearded unix programmer who happens to be muslim, complete with a muslim name ( first name == first name of an at large chechen terrorist; last name == name of a 911 hijacker ) this kind of stuff makes my hackles stand up.
I happen to be white (not arab), and american born; but nonetheless I was raised with a love for this country and its freedoms by a father who also is bearded and muslim ( and happens to have the *most* common muslim name, Mohamad ).
I know many arabs who love this country and live here. We ( and by we I mean people with "funny" names, beards, etc ) are always put in the random search line in airports, given extra scrutiny at border crossings, etc. Etc. Etc. Etc.
Frankly, I don't really care about the camera in the USPS box. I live in DC, I can't walk a block without being seen by probably half a dozen cameras.
But this is yet another straw. People like me feel it earlier, but we're all losing our freedom here.
Perhaps it's time to take off; but where else is any better? I get the impression these days that the only place you can actually be *free* is in a 3rd world country that doesn't have its shit together well enough to properly monitor its citizens. But do you really want to live in such a place?
I guess the answer is "Anywhere in Europe". Sure you won't be any more free, but at least you'll have healthcare and good mass transit. In america we're getting the shaft six ways to sunday, and we don't even have a good society as an excuse.
Forgive my rambling, but this stuff grates on me.
Re:Talk about unnecessary invasion of privacy... (Score:3, Informative)
Maybe his father was the former Prime Minister of Malaysia [wikipedia.org]. Or maybe you just havn't met enough Muslims [google.com].
Homeland Stupidity (Score:3, Insightful)
Realistically, most people in the U.S. are more likely to experience problems due to misguided and overly zealous government attempts to "protect" them, than to be directly affected by a terrorist attack. It's not a question of which gets your heckles (sic) up more, it's a question of which is most likely to have a direct effect on you. The answer to the latter question
Re:Talk about unnecessary invasion of privacy... (Score:2)
Has the postal service considered the cost... (Score:2, Funny)
Its to act as a deterrent (Score:4, Insightful)
Mod Up (Score:2)
has to be KNOWN to be a deterrent (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh NO! (Score:2)
Someone who looks like you purchased stamps!.
I'm a huge privacy advocate and all, but it's not like this can be put to some nefarious use. The only two potential issues I can see:
What!!!!!!! (Score:2)
What about ATM machines? (Score:3, Insightful)
Problem = Opportunity with markup (Score:2)
Herbert Hoover (cross-dressing spy)
Stalin (All-around nice guy)
Benjamin Franklin (First Postmaster General of the US)
i fail to see an issue here (Score:2)
Wow, scary. (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm reminded of Aldous Huxley's 1984. This is the first step toward telescreens!
As tech savvy people, we need to get the word out about this and put these sorts of invasions of privacy to a stop. Making the citizen the object of state knowledge is the first step toward subjugation and elimination of freedom.
As an open source programmer, gun owner, and opponent of the current politica
I'm on the fence (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, I value the freedom of public places, and the freedom to take pictures of whatever you wish.
It boils down to an argument I had with a friend of mine a while back. We were in a public place, and a third party took a picture of him. He became furious, and demanded that the person take no more picture, nor distribute the one he had already taken. (The third party was not known to either of us; he wasn't just some stranger)
Now, I calmly explained to my friend that, since he was in a public place, he had no reasonable expectation of privacy, and that the other person could indeed take his picture whether he liked it or not. I cited prior cases and current laws regarding such things. (I'd recently done research for a class on just that topic.)
He became even more angry. "I don't care about his rights. He has a right to be an asshole, but that doesn't mean he should be! I don't want my picture taken!"
The guy took his picture again for good measure (nice shot of an angry face), and we all walked away chuckling.
To further muddy the waters, consider that digital photography, like p2p applications and globalization, is fast-growing and un-stoppable. There's no magical way to prevent someone from taking your picture. In the end, your picture can be taken whether you like it or not, and there's nothing you can do about it.
I don't believe that people have a right to privacy, but I do believe that people have a right to protect their privacy as best they can within the confines of reasonable law.
My friend, for example, could avoid public places and close his curtains, but he could not assault photographers.
Public places are just that: public. Whether you like it or not, people can see and record your actions.
Then again, this isn't just a person: it's a government entity. Should corporations/governments have the same rights as individual people? What if this were a private company, instead of the USPS? Would that make the issue any different?
What if it was just some guy standing near USPS boxes taking pictures of people?
It's a complicated issue with no simple answers.
Re:I'm on the fence (Score:2)
Fence sitters will be executed! (Score:3, Funny)
Stand at attention, maggot!
On one hand, I value my privacy, and I dislike such intrusions.
Oh, we know what's in your hand, boo-boo, when you're in private. No need to clarify, Sparky. Now get on those knees and give me twenty!
It's a complicated issue with no simple answers.
Hah! Typical! We can't ba having this sort of mamby-pamby, nancy-boy, wibbly-wobbly, clap-trap, hoo-hah here, toots! Youse either for it or agains'it. This is Slashdot! Global repository of supergeniuses like "gamerdood69" and "
Re:I'm on the fence (Score:3, Informative)
I'd like to know how that fits in.
Re:I'm on the fence (Score:3, Funny)
Ha! I found away around it. I just watched this freeky video a friend of mine brought over, something about a girl and horses, some lady brushing her hair.... Really weird, then some creepy kid ca
Simple Logic (Score:5, Insightful)
Moderate this comment
Negative: Offtopic [mithuro.com] Flamebait [mithuro.com] Troll [mithuro.com] Redundant [mithuro.com]
Positive: Insightful [mithuro.com] Interesting [mithuro.com] Informative [mithuro.com] Funny [mithuro.com]
Re:Simple Logic (Score:4, Insightful)
1. A crisis exists
2. Let's exploit this crisis for the benefit of the ruling class
Nothing new here. Government has been exploiting crises for its own benefit since the beginning of time.
The Cost of Convenience (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, it is inevitable. Dammit.
Thank God the cost of anal probes and specimen storage is not approaching zero.
- kgj
Tracking stamps? (Score:3, Interesting)
Anyone taken a very close look at a stamp recently?
Big deal (Score:2)
The robotic USPS employees with cameras embedded in their eye sockets have been taking your picture for years.
Tracking people is more pervasive... (Score:2, Informative)
If you have one of those shopping cards, they can track your purchases. If you travel, you're photographed at every point, especially in Europe. If you buy stamps, your photographed. Welcome to the US police state. Orwell may have written fiction, but damn if it isn't coming to fruition.
I voted for Bush, but I have since had many second thoughts on why I did. I have voted Republican since I was 18, thinking that voting for lowering my taxes, having a small government, etc. would be benef
Missing the point... (Score:2, Interesting)
Has there been a run of stamp-machines getting broken into? All of the stamp-machines locally are in post offices, which have video cameras in every corner anyway.
For that matter, is this a real privacy issue? Considering that you can buy stamps online, in your local hallmark store, or even through the mail to a P.O. box, I'm not too concerned about the post office taking my picture.
Now if they start putting cameras on the soda machines, then I'll get upset. And I won't even bring up the condom dispense
ATMs Too... (Score:3, Insightful)
The retention times for those pictures vary with the institution, but it could conceivably be years...
I worked for Diebold back in the 80s and on an almost weekly basis I was tasked with operating the video gear for bank security and FBI investigators...
Those insensitive clods! (Score:2)
Stamp Security (Score:2)
That said, this does not seem to tbe point of such photo taking, as 30 days is probably an unreasonably short time to hold the
Yay! (Score:5, Interesting)
We had some great fun with the coin machine. We had bags of coins plus the coin/bill acceptor for testing. When work had been going on too long, I used to like emptying the acceptor of everything but pennies, then buying a 1c stamp with a $20 bill. The thing went off like a machine gun firing out pennies, it was friggin' cool.
It also did a bit of a Las Vegas style jackpot dispense with all of them full - in change it could give (IIRC, it was 1998 when I worked on the software for the pilot) quarters, nickels, pennies and Susan B dollars. (It didn't dispense dimes. I was told because dime dispensing is unreliable, and the machine tended to choke on them). Again, 1c stamp with a $20 bill, and Ker-ching - it simultaneously fired coins from all four coin stores.
At least I worked out what to do with surfeit pennies - instead of keeping them in a jar or bagging them up and paying one of those machines to count them, you can spend 1c coins in the postal vending machines (or could when I was working on them). Great way of getting rid of your shrapnel.
BTW: Whenever you take a package to a post office, if it's got IBM kit, you're using my code. I wrote the scale driver (amongst other things).
Re:Yay! (Score:3, Interesting)
It was something the testers brought up time and time and time again. Every time we got a new tester, they'd write a defect about the scale under-weighing in a normal mails transaction, but showing exactly the right weight during calibration (the underweigh feature is a hardware feature - and for calibration it's turned off). I think I returned that defect as "As designed" in CMVC at least
Simple response (Score:3, Informative)
Step 2: paste onto stiff posterboard, add handle.
Step 3: Cut eyehole(s) as appropriate.
Step 4: Label back "Back - toward friendly"
Step 5: Hold in front of face while using kiosk.
Don't Accept Cash ... Where is The Outrage? (Score:4, Insightful)
The camera part is pretty obvious and easily spotted - it's a silver colored square that's difficult to miss. Contrast this with pinhole cameras that are often well hidden and difficult to spot - pinhole cameras are sometimes used in conjunction with a traditional camera(s) in ATMs, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if there is more than one camera aimed at/inside some of those kiosks.
Ron Bennett
OK folks... you know what to do... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:OK folks... you know what to do... (Score:3, Informative)
No, according to two recent cases, you do not have a right to public anonymity. Cf. Hiibel v.Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada [papersplease.org] and Church of the American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan v. Kelly [cnn.com] (the second of which specifically points to the case of wearing masks in public).
so what's new? (Score:3, Insightful)
Disclosed at introduction and touted as a feature (Score:4, Interesting)
When those kiosks went in to the local Post Office, they had a greeter who explained their function and features. It was explicity part of the "script" that the transaction was accompanied by a photograph for security purposes.
Seems to me someone needs some PayPal donations to subsidize their fight for your freedom so they announced this as an FOIA issue. Oh, what do you know, donations are the first item on their main page!
Fooling the Camera? (Score:3, Interesting)
Sure way to get your picture noticed: (Score:4, Funny)
Back in college, I had a gas mask I had picked up at an army surplus store. You have no idea how much fun you can have walking around in public wearing a gas mask. I think the best was when I walked up to the Information desk at a book store and asked if they had any books on paranoia.
Re:Answer (Score:2)
Why can't I just send a fucking package without having my picture taken especially without the kiosk having a 5'x5' sign in blinking neon that it is doing so?
Personally I want to be able to send a vibrating, two headed dildo, in the USPS mail to a random recipient without having the Post Office opening the packaging thi
Re:Answer (Score:3, Funny)
So isn't this then technically right wing drivel?
Re:Answer (Score:4, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Answer (Score:3, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Remember to say "Cheese" (Score:5, Insightful)
Say, you're an honest person, right? You wouldn't mind if the government kept logs of all your telephone conversations, would you? Or how about if they PUBLISHED the logs? I mean, you're honest and all, what do you have to hide? Say, since you're an honest person, would you mind if we put a bug on you and kept ALL your conversations?
This is not an example of a strawman fallacy, I'm simply showing how far this "you shouldn't mind it if you're not doing anything wrong" backward thinking can be taken.
I say that BECAUSE I'm an honest person, I don't want the government taking pictures of me when I send a package.
Re:Remember to say "Cheese" (Score:2, Interesting)
A better arguement (Score:5, Insightful)
Ask them how they would feel if they were sitting in a restaurant and someone at the next table was staring directly at them the entire time. Most people find this very disconcerting and sometimes react with great hostility. That is how I feel when someone, the government or otherwise, is constantly recording my activities no matter where I go. I don't have to be hiding something to not like being stared at.
When presented with this scenario, most people begin to understand and are less likely to present the "I'm an honest person" retort.
Re:Analogy wrong (Score:3, Insightful)
Additionally, I personally, don't have any problem with the USPS system. These machines use credit and debit cards to perform their functions and having a photograph of the person performing the transaction is simply a means of preventing fraud, just as it is with the ATM.
I do, however, dislike the increasing amount of surveill
Re:Analogy wrong (Score:3, Insightful)
Except the Kiosk stores the picture for 30 days and the person glancing at you does just that, glances at you.
Now, if he glanced at you and then drew your portrait...
Re:Given that... (Score:2)
Re:Two thoughts (Score:2)