Of course I would pick no ads, but if the choices are relevant ads or random ads, I guess I would choose relevant

I'm against it, but just as a matter of personal preference. I don't think it's an invasion of privacy-I don't find it intrusive, but unnecessarily obtrusive.

In 20 years,I bet projectors will be installed over urinals, displaying ads on my meat while I take a leak

@Darkwing_Duck: The way to protest this, of course, would be to refuse to look while you pee, thereby peeing all over the floor. Who's with me

/delusion

Someone explain how this is an invasion of privacy for me.

How would it be any different if they just had some guy standing there.. "Hey, I see you just picked up that shampoo for dry hair.. Have you seen this conditioner that would be a perfect compliment?" As a matter of fact PetCo has that guy. "I see you just picked up the Purina dog food specially formulated for fat dogs.. Have you seen our house brand?"

The system has no idea who you are.. It only knows that you just picked up dandruff shampoo (or bought a half-caff venti, soy, double mocha). I really don't get the concern.

@Farquar: It isn't an invasion of privacy, it just is more officious than regular advertising

Sounds a little too "Minority Report" for my tastes. No sir, I don't like it.

@Farquar: My only concern with RFID tags directly attached to products is they can't be turned off when you leave the store. That means, my shampoo is broadcasting I have it all the way home and when it's in my bathroom.

What's to stop J&J from trolling my neighborhood with a reader and getting my street address because they know I have their products in my house from the RFID tag?

While RFID tags aren't supposed to broadcast long distances (I think they say 30 ft), that can be extended and readings have been taken from further.

Hmmm. What constitutes, say, a cruller face vs a fritter face?

You aren't going to get any idea what I would actually be interested in from my age and gender. For fuck's sake, no one has yet been able to do it with my BROWSING HABITS.

The problem isn't the concept, I don't think, it's the fact that the only people who are advertising stuff are advertising crap that no one needs and hardly anyone (relative to the number of people who will see it) wants.

Buffalo, NY? Really?

I'm always interested in how sci-fi tends to be a prelude to real technological advances. Remember how this happened in Minority Report when Tom Cruise walks into a Gap store and gets a personalized ad? In that case they knew what he had bought previously. And even though they're not going to store data, it still seems kind of creepy to have the computer know what you bought like that.

"Stressed out, John Anderton? Need a vacation? Come to Aruba!"

Whomever the futurist for that movie was deserves a huge pat on the back.

/minority report'd

I don't see it as being a privacy issue, as every store would have to have access to your personal private info and to do that you'd have had to authorize it's release at some point. And I would imagine much like mailing and call lists you didn't realize you'd be getting on when you filled out your catalog order, you could get your info wiped on request.

Plus, I wouldn't mind at all if the presented material was relevant and informative - save me time browsing on my cell phone! Unfortunately, any info is certain to be biased by whoever's paying for the product (unlike a friendly employee, who has no immediate vested interest in having you purchase one particular product over another). I just couldn't trust any actual info the shelf ads presented.

And anyway, I don't think a shelf tag would have the capacity to help inform consumers and aid them in making better purchases - I see them much more as being like a whiny kid saying 'buy me THIS, mommy! buy me THIS!'

Ugh.

I bet this system is scrapped, but not because of the privacy issue but because people will complain when the system thinks you're older than you are. The news stories won't be about people worried about privacy. They'll be about 40 year old women complaining they were targeted for AARP ads.

Hmmn, if the technology incorrectly guesses someone's gender or age, would that be grounds for a discrimination suit against DD?

Attorney: Dunkin Donuts advertised a Sausage Bagel & Mocha Latte to my client, an advertisment targeted to 20 year old males. My client, a 55 year old woman has been grievously injured by the clear case of mistaken gender and age-inappropriate advertisments. We demand $3,000,000 in punitive damages. And oh yeah, your coffee tastes like crap.

Lawsuit waiting to happen.

@Farquar: Unless the customer signed a model release, this is an invasion of privacy. Just because the company claims the image will not be stored, that doesn't give them permission to record and transmit it in the first place without a contract from the individual being filmed.

Is there a notice posted above the establishment letting customers know that they are being filmed and subjected to facial recognition? Somebody was wearing their Bad Idea Jeans when they came up with this crap.

I wonder if it can tell if you're wearing a "terrorist head scarf" around your neck and advertise appropriately...

I thought they already had these robots and just called them coffee jerks?

I wonder if they're actually going to insert your face in these ads... It's gonna be weird seeing some model wearing my face drinking DD coffee.

@Farquar: It's cause the computers are taking over.

Well, they've had motion detection coupon dispensers on the shelves in grocery stores for years now. I'd love it if these targeted ads could point me in the direction of a product that would not make my skin crack break out due to the mystery chemicals in many cosmetics/lotions. I'd give up a fingernail clipping's worth of DNA if they could do that.

The funny thing about this Dunkin Donuts is that it's not in Germany or Buffalo, NY. This Dunkin Donut is on Wabash Ave. across the street from the new Trump Plaza in Chicago, IL. I see this place everyday. They get A LOT of business.

I interviewed someone recently and she told me that Dunkin Donuts experimented with putting video in all their stores solely for catching employees stealing from the till. There would be people sitting in a distant location, looking at the video and the register screen to determine if they were selling expensive items for cheap.

It didn't take off, mostly because the franchisees weren't willing to pay for it.

@Imaginary_Friend: The courts have already ruled that when in public, there is no expectation of privacy, therefore a model release or such is not required when someone is photographed or recorded on the street.

We are under pretty constant surveliance. Many cities have anti crime cameras, most stores have security cameras that record you, bank ATMS have cameras built in. I'm sure these Dunkin Donuts already had security cameras filming the customers and the register.

Would this make the bottle of shampoo costs $20 because I also have to pay for RFID tags?

Ads? I don't want ads. I want Coupons! A Medium 'nilla Latté hot, no sugar, and a choco chip muffin. Zoooooooooooom!

On a off-topic but reasonable related note:

Has anyone had the new flatbread breakfast sandwiches as DD? They are under $3.00 and under 300 calories. I think the BEST fast food that can be obtained through a drive-through window. I frankly want to turn up my nose at anything DD would offer as fat and sugar laden crap, but these are good and actually semi-healthy (made with egg whites only)

[NOT corporate shill, had one this morning].

@Opie: For that you have to look at the butts.

Hey Everybody! Joe Smith just bought some condoms! This guy is getting laid! Hey!
By the way, Mr. Smith, can we suggest some KY Jelly, on sale this week? Or perhaps some Kleenex?

I recommended lube to people buying condoms in a store once... they got pissed off.

I wonder how this will work out for Dunkin' Donuts.

/kidding
//or am I?

I would rather see LESS ads, relevant or otherwise.

More ads make me sad. I would be prone to stay away from stores or establishments that tried this. To me this is like the constant upselling in some stores. I don't want to be asked by the cashier if I need a bottled water or a subscription or etc. If I want these items I know how to make those purchases I'm tired of playing 20 questions.

Now if you want to pay humans that are well trained and no what the heck they are talking about when it comes to the merchandise or can fetch me the right size or find something for me that matches I'm all for that.

Invasion of privacy: no.
Creepy: yes.

One can assume that if I'm looking for a particular shampoo, then I'll be likely to buy the conditioner from the same manufacturer. I'm not sure I need help. The last thing I need when shopping is to be nagged with hints as to what I should buy. I don't pay much attention to advertising as it is, but this makes me want to do it even less.

This is why I buy as much as possible online, so I don't have to deal with pushy, unknowledgable sales-staff, and soon obnoxious, unhelpful ads.

I never look at ads now; I just buy what I want/need. If I can't find it or am not sure, I ask a person. If I can't find a person, I leave.

I don't know why they think people wouldn't just tune these out.

To be honest, I'd prefer targeted ads to random ads (though none is perferable), but this is just too much. I don't need to see an ad everywhere I turn, especially if the ad is generated by what products I pick up off the shelf, or by *tremble* facial recognition software. Really, though, don't the self-promoting ads already on the packaging accomplish this a lot less intrusively? To use the shampoo to conditioner example from the post, if I pick up a bottle of, say, Suave, it's already got a blurb on the bottle about how I should buy the Suave conditioner too. This new stuff seems like overkill.

@harvey_birdman_attorney_at_law: I really can't understand this one. Web pages are the worst. I even get targeted ads based on the location of my internet connection on sites that sell nothing. Going back to an online shop gives you "Hey, you bought this piece of crap last time and we think you will like this piece of crap today.
I find no invasion of privacy. Ad agencies are finding new and inventive ways to sell you and boost thier paychecks. I have an ignore button on my forehead.

@SkokieGuy: Yeah, I know about that, but being a passerby on the street is quite different than this situation.

1. The customer is on private property once s/he enters the store and, it can be argued, has some expectation of privacy (security cameras notwithstanding).

2. Yes, someone can photograph you on the street without permission, but the moment your image is used for a commercial purpose (which DD is definitely doing), a model release is required. This is why Google and other search engines blur faces to make people unrecognizable.

3. RFID and legal/privacy issues are still pretty unsettled as far as I know. I think DD are taking a big risk proceeding this way, both legally and from a customer service standpoint. There area lot of people who aren't tinfoil hat-wears who'd have a problem with this. They'd just as soon get their coffee and carb-bloat from some other store.

@TechnoDestructo: I'm a 26 year old male. Kudos to anyone who can tell me what I want based on that information alone.

@Tzepish: I'm a 26 year old male. Kudos to anyone who can tell me what I want based on that information alone.

1. Sex
2. Beer
3. Steak

In my ideal world, when I pick that item up off the rack, some useful information about it would be displayed on the screen.

Instead we will get some mindless and unhelpful advertisement.

Related issue which has been pissing me off:
The screens at McDonalds which were supposed to be displaying my order so that I can make sure it's correct.
Instead they are displaying stupid ads, and then when I get to the window I find out they've botched my order again.

Somthing which is all the more frustrating than it used to be, because THERE IS A TOOL TO PREVENT MY ORDER FROM BEING BOTCHED RIGHT THERE BUT YOU'RE USING IT TO SHOW ME ADS.

As long as they don't record the data, it's not a privacy issue... but can you trust that they WON'T record data?

Also I am extremely offended by the "targeted" advertisements that I get already. I don't think I look forward to more "Oh you're a 30-something female so we're going to bombard you with ads of Pampers and Midol."

@Imaginary_Friend:

I was filmed running a red light in Manhattan without my permission. What recourse do I have.

As you might be able to tell from my avatar they already know what I want when I go into my favorite Dunkin Donuts.

@digitalgimpus: "I recommended lube to people buying condoms in a store once... they got pissed off.

I wonder how this will work out for Dunkin' Donuts."

Dunkin' Donuts makes for a tasty but inferior lube.

*Beep*Beep*Boop*

"Hello Shopper,

I see you are quite overweight and smell of B.O. Can I interest you in some fruits and vegetables and some Right Guard?"

So what does the computer advertise to a person wearing a Guy Fawkes mask?

So would they show Rachael Ray the way I want to see her?

How about if they just put a note on the bottle, "Buy this product too and get $XX off"? Then lay of the R&D department. The next step will be, Free medical if you have our implant that gives you ads whenever you get near our products. Note: Any advertizing agency that uses this idea, has to pay me royalites.