Fuck no you can’t take my picture to share with 2000 other establishments to see if I’ve been a bad boy. That’s an easy way to ensure I just don’t hang out in your bar.
ID Scanners Can Change How Your Local Bar Treats You—and Whether It Lets You In.
Submitted 3 months ago by ModerateImprovement@sh.itjust.works to technology@lemmy.world
Comments
MeaanBeaan@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 months ago
fully agree, I barely go to bars in the first place, I’m the quiet guy that orders and just hangs out and have a good time, but like I would never enter an establishment where a copy of my ID is required to enter, and that’s ignoring the fact that it’s doing photography at the same time. Would be an instant next bar please.
tenextrathrills@lemmynsfw.com 3 months ago
Good, I’d rather not have you in my bar if you’re worried about not being able to get in my bar.
Bruhh@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Except now the bars can easily sell my data to corps without my goddamn permission. It isn’t about having things to hide. It’s about resonable privacy. According to the article, the company can track VIPs and “big spenders” and treat them differently. They can also deny you entry on “potential” risks. I wonder what systems they use to determine a denial of entry.
todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 3 months ago
Can’t wait to get banned from the queer bar in my neighborhood after the bartender I buy whiskey from on my business trip to Kentucky flags my faggot ass as a major disruption because they think I’m a child-grooming Satanist.
Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 months ago
You may not have read that right. I don’t think they are saying that it’s their behavior that is the reason that they won’t enter, it’s the fact that you are using a partner that makes digital copies and photographs patrons. It’s a huge invasion of property. It’s one thing for security cameras, it’s a whole different level to also be copying ID’s AND then also sharing that information to parties outside the establishment.
Bell@lemmy.world 3 months ago
This is why we need data protection laws here. We need to be able to control what these companies keep about us.
sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 months ago
Yeah like I don’t have a problem with a shared database for bars to keep out bad actors. That sounds like a collaborative IRC banlist. But why does it have to involve keeping pictures of me and which bar I go to which night and all this other stuff
heavy@sh.itjust.works 3 months ago
This is just like that China social credit system
todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 3 months ago
No, no, no, that’s the evil government credit system. (Communism)
This is a private, patriotic, free-market surveillance apparatus. (Liberty & Freedom 🇺🇲)
We love [corporate] big brother.
dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 3 months ago
Dude don’t be alarmist.
It will be months until it turns into that. Maybe even a year or two.
jordanlund@lemmy.world 3 months ago
“Its website lists six behaviors customers can be flagged for: violence, assault, destruction of property, sexual assault, fraud, and theft.”
Seems like they’re missing an “overconsume” flag. If you ever had to cut someone off, that should be noted. 6 drink maximum or whatever.
Grimy@lemmy.world 3 months ago
It would be nice if they put an AA flag as well and let people with addiction problems blacklist themselves on a voluntary basis.
someguy3@lemmy.ca 3 months ago
This is clearly only the ones that negatively affect them.
ChexMax@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Yeah, I’m half surprised there isn’t “under consume” on the list and they stop letting people in who don’t spend enough money
Takumidesh@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Why would a system meant to maximize the profit of the bar local out their best customers?
They only want to block fighters and predators because it hurts business, not for any moral reasons.
jordanlund@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Serving someone who has overconsumed can get you in trouble with the liquor authorities.
ilmagico@lemmy.world 3 months ago
From the article:
Patronscan previously had a system flag for “substance abuse,” but this flag was removed in 2019, according to Mlikotin. Its privacy policy notes a California law that limits its flags to “fraud, abuse, and material representation.”
jordanlund@lemmy.world 3 months ago
See, fo me, “substance abuse” = “caught doing coke in the bathroom”.
ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 3 months ago
As someone in New Orleans who has bartended and done many other service industry jobs, eat pant. That will definitely be used in shittier cities to arrest/sue bartenders who “overserve” someone who then leaves and gets in trouble.
It’s basically impossible to keep track of every customer at crowded bars when you’re working your ass off, people buy rounds for each other, you’re worried about stocking the bar, cleaning glasses, etc. Imagine working at a music venue and being slammed for 3 or 4 hours for tips and then some ass gets you sued, fined, or arrested because you didn’t manage to remember every single person at the show.
pjwestin@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Honestly, I spent a lot of years tending bar, and most of the time, if someone was too drunk, it was my fault. Sure, there were times when someone was pre-gaming too hard or snuck in alcohol, but 9 times out of 10, if someone overconsumed, it was because I overserved.
ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 3 months ago
I commented elsewhere about this but it’s entirely dependent on the type of bar and event. That data will be used for holding bartenders who “overserve” liable for someone else’s behavior and there’s so many scenarios where you have no idea who has drank the correct amount.
Imagine working an event — a concert or wedding or anything like that — and some jackass manages to get too drunk. That should be on them but America is the most litigious society on Earth. There’s no way the bar and bartender won’t ever be sued and this data subpoenaed.
pjwestin@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Possibly controversial opinion, but this sounds reasonable. The flags they can put on customers are, “violence, assault, destruction of property, sexual assault, fraud, and theft.” Those aren’t petty gripes like, “rude,” or, “poor tipper.” I was bar staff for a while, and I’d have wanted to know if the guy I was serving got violent the last time he went out.
That being said, I could see how this system could be abused. If one power-tripping bouncer claims you sexually assaulted someone, and no one will serve you anymore, that’s bullshit. Some regulations around how businesses use these databases would be good.
GroundedGator@lemmy.world 3 months ago
For anyone like this to be a good thing there needs to be a system of checks and balances. There should be an appeal process that is low effort and low or zero cost. There should also be a verification process by a third party before anything can be added.
pjwestin@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Yeah, and a lot of this will depend on how it’s used. If I were still in the service industry and I saw that a guy had been to 20 bars in the last year, and I saw he got flagged at one for violence, I would think, “Well, this doesn’t seem to be a pattern of behavior, maybe he wasn’t thr instigator, I’ll keep an eye on him but I’m not too worried.” But I could see a lot of larger places, like clubs, who aren’t hurting for business just rejecting people who are flagged out of hand. The information seems objectively good to have, but the application could be really problematic.
freeman@sh.itjust.works 3 months ago
Yes totally reasonable some corpos and business get to claim you are a criminal and impose de facto penalties on you.
pjwestin@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Your email app will give your messages to other companies, your navigation app will share your exact location with marketers, and your dating app will sell your sexual preferences to the highest bidder, but sure, bars having a way to warn each other which costumers tried to assault a waitress is a bridge to far.
harrys_balzac@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 months ago
Wow. It was worse than I thought. They’ll take your picture but won’t be using it for facial recognition?
I can see how they could easily “upgrade” their system for businesses to gather more data and be even less privacy friendly.
8000gnat@reddthat.com 3 months ago
brat ass lookin thumbnail
GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 3 months ago
It’s brat green summer, apparently.
boatsnhos931@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Nice try feds
nobleshift@lemmy.world 3 months ago
No.
GBU_28@lemm.ee 3 months ago
Airlines do this too
astronaut_sloth@mander.xyz 3 months ago
I can see the allure for places wanting to keep certain trouble-makers out as a precaution, but this gets so close to a privatized social credit score that it’s beyond uncomfortable.
conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 3 months ago
I feel like you should not be allowed to record any data until there’s a documented case with a police report at minimum. At that point, potentially restricting action becomes a legitimate security need.
dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 3 months ago
Idk about that level of escalation being necessary, maybe just repeat offenses. Where I went to college it’s got to be super serious for police to come into a bar.
Repeat fights, or pukes on the floor, or belligerence to staff are all things I would think would be decent grounds to be turned away by ID. I mean, that happens now at gas stations and restaurants with security cam photos saying “don’t serve this person” posted at the register except it’s more public.
I suppose it depends what data is recorded though, they don’t need your home address.
umbrella@lemmy.ml 3 months ago
yeah, promising security is how they reel us in