this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2026
61 points (98.4% liked)

Privacy

45889 readers
1222 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Australia's Privacy Commissioner Carly Kind determined in 2024 that Bunnings breached privacy laws by scanning hundreds of thousands of customers' faces without their proper consent.

A review of that decision by the Administrative Review Tribunal of Australia has now found the opposite

The retailer did not break the law by scanning customers' identities, but should improve its privacy policy and notify customers of the use of AI-based facial recognition technology, the ruling said

Petty typical stuff by this point. The privacy-invading company wins, pissweak government makes a few privacy "recommendations" but stops short of enforcing anything

top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MalReynolds@slrpnk.net 21 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

Fuck. Cunts. Shit's going to be everywhere tomorrow. (I rarely profane as much, but this)

[–] freedickpics@lemmy.ml 14 points 3 hours ago

Exactly. Kmart did a similar trial a while back. This ruling will just open the floodgates for every company to roll out AI-powered facial recognition cameras everywhere

[–] Tenderizer78@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

The way Bunnings used facial recognition was as private as it could be ... mostly. It is possible to run all of the facial recognition locally, but instead they run it on a central Bunnings-controlled server in Sydney. They only scan for faces of known offenders based on previous entanglements.

My concern isn't surveillance, but mass surveillance. Because this is exclusive to Bunnings it doesn't quite reach mass surveillance, but because the processing is centralized and Bunnings is so big it edges dangerously close.

Still this isn't Flock, nor Palantir, nor Google.

[–] ageedizzle@piefed.ca 3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

They only scan for faces of known offenders based on previous entanglements.

How does the system know who’s an offender and who isn’t without scanning their face first?

[–] Tenderizer78@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

They look at CCTV, take an violentcustomer.jpeg, and add it to the database.

EDIT: Oh I see what you're asking. You misread my quote, what I said is "they only scan for" and not "they only scan".

[–] dumbass@piefed.social 11 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

Well, looks like its medical face mask, big sunnies and blank clothing covering my arms and legs, just to go get some nails.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Wear clothing with realistic faces printed on it to confuse the FR. A baseball cap with infrared LEDs in the brim too

[–] freedickpics@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Make sure you don't drive either. They scan number plates too

[–] dumbass@piefed.social 5 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Ok, so put fake plates on before I go as well.

[–] Goodlucksil@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Wearing fake plates is absolutely illegal for very good reasons.

[–] dumbass@piefed.social 3 points 2 hours ago

only if you get pulled over.