Casinos Hit the Data Jackpot 201
foldedspace writes: "CNN.com has a story about the information that casinos collect about their customers. They're even bragging about it. 6TB on 9 million customers at the Mirage!"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Casinos Hit the Data Jackpot
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
One man's constant is another man's variable. -- A.J. Perlis
Say it isn't so. (Score:1)
Wrong (Score:2)
A note about trolls (Score:3)
Why doesn't Slashdot institute a rule (very simple) that no anonymous cowards or accounts with < 0 karma can post to an article for the first 5 minutes of its existence? This perpetual "First Post!" thing just seems so tired and easy to eliminate.
I don't think the Geekizoid folk would be as keen to get "middle post!".
Re:gotta give ms credit man (Score:2)
I'm not sure what they are using now, but as of a few years ago, Harrah's customer database was in Informix running on NCR *nix. The also had a few AS/400s. I _think_ every property had one of the small AS/400s onsite. Which sometimes can be a problem if the property is a riverboat and it moves under a bridge, blocking the satellite uplink.
Re:What else is new? (Score:2)
Maybe an opt out policy is in order? Or an opt in?
You don't have to have one of the players or gold cards to eat or gamble at the casinos. People get them because the more they use them, the more freebies the casinos give them.
Re:What else is new? (Score:2)
Most casinos already have hundreds of video camera watching everyone. Just imagine what they could do if they used the same facial recognition software that the Tampa police have and tie it back into their gambler databases.
Re:Something I wonder... (Score:2)
Casinos (and in fact and organised gambling of any form) relies on odds. Betting in a casino will, in the long run lose you more than you gain. That's because the odds are stacked in favour of the casino. However, there's one exception -- Black Jack. There, the odds are very slightly in favour of the gambler. Card counters are basically people that have learned techniques to help take advantage of this fact, and so, in the long run, can expect to win more than they lose. There's nothing bad about it, unless you're a casino, at which point, you're obviously going to be less than impressed. If casinos tolerated card counting, it would seriously affect their bottom line, and they're not prepared to do that.
As Microsoft said (Score:2)
__
Re:Patent on consolidating data? (Score:2)
Re:hmm (Score:2)
A SQL Server database can be partitioned obviously across multiple machines (which is how it dominates the TPC), but also across several disk volumes.
In any case I thought the theoretical maximum file size is 16 exabytes (18,446,744,073,709,551,616 bytes).
Re:Shooting in the dark. (Score:2)
SQL Server was made to run on reasonably well equipped hardware (the listed requirements for Windows 2000 are a 133Mhz Pentium processor, and 128MB of RAM, with 256MB recommended. For SQL Server 2000 they up the CPU recommendation to a 166Mhz or better), and on anything less it is starved for memory or I/O and it will not scale with CPU time because there are much more perilous external circumstances. There is ZERO reason to run Windows 2000 or SQL Server on under-powered hardware (256MB PC133MB CAS2 DIMMs are like $35 US), but on proper hardware it will take on any competitor when comparing apples to apples.
Re:What else is new? (Score:2)
Re:What else is new? (Score:2)
For the rest of the people, do you really think they're going to have 1 employee for each guest going through the casino? Not very cost effective, especially if you only spend $50. Don't think the Casino really notice you unless you start betting $10,000+ pr. hand.
Besides, drinks are free.
Re:Scalability of SQL Server (Score:2)
Re:hmm (Score:2)
Are you sure they didn't just keep their prices the same, and then add "penalty fees" for people who refuse to use their card? (Is there even a difference?) Anyway, I'm swapping cards with my friends, just to mess with Safeway's head...
Re:What else is new? (Score:2)
From a cross-indexing of everything from your tells, amount of patience, religious beliefs and political opinions to your salary and betting habits, psychology info can then be computed and instantly sent to that one-armed bandit you just sat down in front of. The machine then comes up with results designed to keep you in front of it and maximize the total amount you put down.
--
Re:Truly Outrageous! But Get Used To It (Score:2)
Very nearly, but not quite. As I understand it, the EU has passed a motion (directive?) that allows its member states to pass legislation like that that you describe. I don't think that the states have to pass it.
Unfortunately for me, the UK, in which I live, was one of the states pressing for this to be passed... Ah well, I have nothing to hide (from the current government, at least...)
I do agree that the largest privacy threats come from business, rather than government, but I take some exception to your assertion that we should Get ready to drop any spare change you still have left.
Highly targeted advertising or not, I'd like to think I still have enough free will and self control to decide for myself what I want to buy.
Cheers,
Tim
Casino Comps (Score:2)
I just got back from a 3 day weekend in Vegas, all completely comped: meals, rooms, drinks. We ate and drank well, and charged everything to our room. When we were checking out we were told that our host had checked my account and comped everything except the tips (the casino never comps tips). So our three day weekend cost us about $30 + plane fare.
To make the whole thing better, I won enough money to cover all out of pocket expenses (taxis, limos, etc). I fairly consistently come back from Vegas with just as much money as when I left.
The counterintuitive thing that people don't get about comps is that casino will comp you more when you are winning. You can bet heavily and lose and not get a comp, yet bet mildly and win and you will get a comp. People think that Casino's comp you for losing. Casinos know that people who consistently lose will not really want to come back.
But by creating that instant "High Roller" experience as quoted in the article, people who are winning will want to come back even more. People who are losing mildly, but getting comped and treated like royalty are more likely to write off the loss and not care.
Chris
Re:Something I wonder... (Score:2)
Over 37 spins, you'll spend (say) ¥370. Since each number has a 1/37 probability of being hit, each number can be expected to be hit once in that span. Your expected earnings:
12 wins on your 1-12 bet (¥5 at 2:1 odds) = 12*¥15 = ¥180
12 wins on your 13-24 bet (¥4 at 2:1 odds) = 12*¥12 = ¥144
3 wins on your row bet (¥1 at 11:1 odds) = 3*¥12 = ¥36
Total gross in 37 spins: ¥180 + ¥144 + ¥36 = ¥360
I don't think the casinos would have any problem with that.
If you put all your ¥10 per spin on 2 for 37 spins, you can expect 1 win. At 35:1 odds, you'll win ¥360. (By this, I mean that you can expect in the long run to make back ¥360 of your ¥370. You could very easily double your money at some point -- there's a ~40% chance of hitting 2 in 18 spins.)
If you put ¥3 on the 17-18-20-21 intersection, ¥2 on red, ¥2 on the first column, and ¥1 each on the digits in your grandfather's birthdate (12, 15, and 19, in my case) for 37 spins, you'll still win ¥360. The actual math (or, as you might say, "maths") is/are left as an exercise for the reader. (It helps if your grandfather was born between 1900 and 1936.)
As far as maximizing possible earnings, see Duff's comment above. Lots of low-odds bets won't get you far above break-even, and you'll go broke. However, IIRC, single-zero roulette has the best payout of all games against the house unless you're counting cards.
--
... (Score:3)
SO WHAT
jesus christ people. you sign up for one of those loyalty card things, and you don't expect this? plus, what's the big fucking deal? why should i give a fuck if they know i like onions on my burger (i don't). is the onion mafia going to come out and get me, and make me eat my onions?
god damn, there are a lot of other things going on in the world more important than this, but i guess if some casino knows i like gin and tonic, that's pretty damn newsworthy.
(OT) Information collection. (Score:2)
I only have a problem with them selling it or giving it out to others.
Ever wonder why bank clerks get chatty? They get bonuses for referring people to the loans department (or any other bank service) when they hear the person is doing something. Oh, your daughter is just about to get married? That's great sir! (write not to loan department to give him a call).
Thank you. (Score:2)
I fail to see why people have a problem with people who they already do business with using whatever means they want to 'remember' that information.
It's when they share it/sell it that I take issue.
Well... (Score:2)
Also, I don't know about you, but I don't really worry about people taking my credit card number. I mean, I don't flaunt it around, but there are a zillion ways for someone to get it if they want, I don't concern myself with it.
I'm not responsible for a dime if some yahoo uses my number, I'm only responsible for up to the $50 limit if someone *steals my card*.
If it WAS somebody new using your number (a valid concern) and they did decide to use your credit card number to order something... they'd still need to get a signature when they delivered... and you'd have no problems refuting it.
The tracking system is OPT IN. (Score:3)
'Hey we want to give the small-time big-spender the big-roller experience, the only way to do that is to know our customers intimately and know their habits. '
Gathering as much info as possible is the only way to do this. Getting customers to give up the info is the problem so they reward them if they do. The system is opt in, which most consumer privacy groups applaud, so what is the big deal?
-Shieldwolf
A couple of tidbits... (Score:2)
1. As someone who has done very little gambling, but read a fair bit about the social and mathematical aspects of gambling & casinos, I have to agree with everyone who has pointed out that you really can't make money with "systems". The casinos are there to make money, not to provide a fair game. Even "fair" purely mathematical systems like card counting will get you thrown out and your picture sent to every other casino in town, thus ending your gambling holiday. It might have been possible to have been a professional gambler 20-30 years ago, but things have changed. (I'd also like to take a moment to spark one in memory of Ken Uston, who got me interested in lots of cool applied mathematics at such a young age).
2. As much as I'm generally passionate about privacy issues and pay cash whenever possible, I can't say I'm bothered by what the casinos are doing here. If you are that bothered by the evil voracious nature of capitalism, WTF are you doing going to a casino??
3. Kim Rice, who wrote the CNN article, "shouldn't not" be publically shamed and humiliated, and his/her editors and proofreaders "shouldn't not" be tarred and feathered, for allowing such ugly mangled sentences like "These aren't things that supermarkets, banks or retailers don't do" to be seen by public eyes.
Re:Something I wonder... (Score:2)
Re:Something I wonder... (Score:3)
They are people who have learned a system to get themselves an edge on card games - normally but not necessarily blackjack. They are bad from a casino's point of view in that they can convert an 8-10% edge in the casino's favour to a 2-6% edge in their favour depending on the conditions - how many decks, the size of your bankroll and the rules of the game in question.
From what I understand (and I am not a gambler - and I don't really like cards, outside of the mechanics of the games, etc - so I may be wrong) - is that a "card counter" is exactly that - someone who can keep track of, in their heads, of what cards may be "where" (ie, in what players) - and what the dealer may have left - through knowing what they have, as well as how many hands they have lost or won - etc.
Almost. Very few people on this planet can keep track of several shuffled decks in their heads, especially when those decks are reshuffled every few minutes. Card "counters" just tally up the values of the cards dealt according to one of several systems. Once you're through a deck far enough then if you have a high running total - you bet high, low running total - bet low. There are plenty of links - try searching Google for "Blackjack Basic Strategy".
What I can't understand is why this is illegal - ie, why is it illegal to have the skill to remember cards and positions, etc - in order to make the odds more favorable - making such an ability illegal punishes those who have the brain "capacity" or "ability", and rewards (or at least protects) those with "lesser" (or nonexistant) skills in the area.
It's not illegal - casinos just don't like like you to win. If they suspect you have a system, then they'll use the catch-all Right of Admission Reserved and kick you out. Trust me - I know :)
Re:Scalability of SQL Server -- Static Data (Score:2)
They do a little OLTP, but it sounds like the main use is reporting. Their database doesn't require any real power. Just oodles of storage.
Re:hmm (Score:2)
Anyone silly enough to buy groceries or booze with a credit or debit card can probably assume that their insurance company already knows about all of their bad habits.
Re:We need govt. regulation for this kind of stuff (Score:2)
Move to Canada. Your privacy is actually protected there.
Something I wonder... (Score:3)
One thing I have always wondered about, is the notion (reality?) of "card counters" - I mean, what exactly are they, and why are they bad?
From what I understand (and I am not a gambler - and I don't really like cards, outside of the mechanics of the games, etc - so I may be wrong) - is that a "card counter" is exactly that - someone who can keep track of, in their heads, of what cards may be "where" (ie, in what players) - and what the dealer may have left - through knowing what they have, as well as how many hands they have lost or won - etc. The idea of "shuffling" is to introduce some form of randomness to help alleviate (or eliminate) the ability to count cards...
If this is true (ie, if my "definition" of a card counter is correct), then I can see how it would skew the odds in their favor, and away from other players and the house. What I can't understand is why this is illegal - ie, why is it illegal to have the skill to remember cards and positions, etc - in order to make the odds more favorable - making such an ability illegal punishes those who have the brain "capacity" or "ability", and rewards (or at least protects) those with "lesser" (or nonexistant) skills in the area.
I can understand the bans against using computers to do the counting for you - what I wonder about is what happens when the time comes (if it comes), that humans are able to get "brain augmentation" devices - would these "trans-humans" be unable to gamble in casinos at that point? In other words, would they be banned? Probably...
Finally, if the cards can be actually counted, and the probability of the hands can be skewed or somewhat accurately determined by a machine or by a human card counter - are the games then not truely random? If that is so - then are the casinos really just protecting the possible fact that they may be found out as a fraudulant "business"?
Comments?
Worldcom [worldcom.com] - Generation Duh!
Info abuse from the other side... (Score:4)
Re:but what will safeway do with it (Score:2)
Of course they do. They quality and quantity of coupons in their mailings are directly related to how much you spent at the store last month. The size of the "free" Thanksgiving turkey or Christmas ham is related to how much you spent at their stores during the months of November and December respectively.
________________________
Re:hmm (Score:2)
If you don't want Safeway to collect information on your purchases, then don't have or use a club card.
It's that simple. You are trading information about yourself for discounts. Seems like a reasonable exchange rather than some sinister invasion of privacy to me.
I might have a problem if they were piggybacking on your Credit cards or scanning your checks in to compile statistics about you without your knowledge, but anyone who thinks they might not use those club cards to gain information about you is naive.
Re:gotta give ms credit man (Score:2)
As far as the riverboats, each had it's own AS/400 on board. When the boats docked they were plugged into a land-based network which allowed the data to be synced to another AS/400 on land. This system, of course, was connect by WAN to the other properties.
numb
Not such a recent development (Score:3)
The amount of data the system collects is astounding. Each table has a card reader which the dealers can run your card through to keep track of how long you've been at which table. Each slot machine is also connected. I believe about 75% percent of floor space, the maximum allowed by law in Atlantic City at the time, was allocated to slot machines. The slot machines generate more money per square foot than any other part of the casino so it is beneficial to fit as many of them as possible into the available space on the casino floor.
Not a drop of data is wasted. The system would register the exact time that each coin is put in, the exact time the handle was pulled (or the time the bet/spin buttons were pressed), which machine it was, the type of game, the denomination of the coin(s) inserted, whether a coin was rejected, every conceivable transaction. We could actually calculate the average time it took between the last coin being inserted and the patron pulling the handle. All the data is archived with the same care that financial instutions archive their transactions. If you use a 'loyalty card' as they call it in the article then the data is attached to the patron.
The big reason to use one of these cards is all the free perks you get should you spend enough money gambling. The prefered parking areas at the casino required your card to get in and the reader on the parking gate was also attached to the system. If a high end player arrived the system would page a Casino Executive (actually just a fancy title for someone who makes sure a high end player's needs are well tended) and the exec could go wait near the corridor to greet the arriving guest.
From the casino's perspective, knowing the patron's likes/dislikes, which events to send invitations for, which players warrant personal attention, and things like these are important in generating customer loyalty--you want to make your casino the customers' preferred destination when they come to town and you want to keep it that way. Regular visitors to the city might visit several casinos while in town, but they usually have a favorite where they spend most of their time and money.
Another imporant part of the system is to allow the patron to collect points by gambling. The more points you accumulate per visit the more free perks you get such as tickets to shows, fights, parties, free rooms/suites, meals at gourmet restuarants, limos, helicopters, charter flights, etc.
I was going to make an analogy to frequent flyer miles but it's not quite the same thing. With frequent flyer miles it's the number of points you accumulate the decides when you get your free airfare/upgrades. At a casino it's the number of points that you are likely to earn on your next or current visit that are important. This is based on 'past performance' of the patron. However, as with frequent flyer miles, it pays off to patronize the same place in order to get the most freebies. It's usually preferable to be offered a free suite at one casino than to be offered a free room upgrade at 3 or 4 different casinos which are not your favorite.
Even in the early 90's they were already doing this. In the meantime I'm sure much thought and effort has been expended to refine the process.
numb
Re:700KB PER CUSTOMER?!? (Score:5)
numb
Re:so we were all wrong (Score:2)
Odd Twist (Score:2)
On the plus side, footage of the Rodney King beating forward then will be available live on the Internet the instant it's happening. Will the be laws allowing you to tap into the Cops' armour HUD sense data and replace the last several hours to see if they set out to "beat up some niggers" earlier that night? That would be pretty damning evidence at the trial. That goes back to Brin's Transparent Society, I guess.
More troubling... (Score:2)
One critical patent covers Harrah's method for consolidating gambling and hospitality data from its 21 properties. If someone visits Harrah's Las Vegas, then the nearby Rio, then Showboat Atlantic City -- all owned by Harrah's -- information about those activities is culled from local databases and consolidated into a central patron database. This gives Harrah's a fuller view of individual customers, Boushy said.... Any competitor that wants to consolidate data from their own multiple properties "has to come talk to us or run the risk of a lawsuit," Boushy said. "We created a strategy that others thought was nuts at the time, and [we] want to garner benefits from it."
What I find more troubling is that Harrah's was able to patent the consolidation of data among properties. Good grief, what's so unique about that? It would seem to be the logical use of data, else why would you gather it?
Patent on consolidating data? (Score:2)
How can yo patent consolidating data? Sense when does the particular type of data used make it unique? Does this mean that anyone who starts a new type of survey could patent they're survey, and anyone who wants to to collect similar information would have to pay them royalties?
Re:Farleyfile? (Score:2)
Er
Re:Politicians *do* keep databases! (Score:2)
No--if anything, this moves power away from the political elite. This is the ultimate grass-roots campaign: no consultants, no pollsters, no "positioning", no "image advisors." Just a guy whose on the school board who thinks the current state rep is a jerk, calling to ask for your vote. And calling back to mention that he'd talked to some other veterans, and now he understands why getting funding for the VA hospital expansion is such a worthwhile thing, and so forth.
I can't point to statistical evidence that N phone calls increases voter turnout by Y--but I have plenty of anecdotal evidence. After the second or third phone call, those Super Voters really feel special. They start to view themselves as part of the campaign. And since they're so interested in politics (which is why they vote in every election) they tend to be opinion leaders--they influence other people. Get a few of these people, get them to really understand who you are and why you're running, and you have a powerful political force.
We're getting off-topic, but there's a larger conversation to be had here. Everybody thinks that "special-interest money" is a bad thing, especially the influence that special-interest money had in the last presidential race. If primary delegates and presidential electors were selected by congressional district (as opposed to "winner takes all") this kind of I'm-calling-to-ask-for-your-vote approach would be incredibly effective. You'd have to spend unbelievable amounts of money to overwhelm the grass-roots communication methods of thousands of local leaders who are routinely talking to their constituents. I'm biased--but I think that would be a positive thing for the nation as a whole.
Re:Politicians *do* keep databases! (Score:2)
With respect, I disagree. There are activists in any election, but only rarely are they Super Voters. Activists, particularly the Christian Right activists, only tend to show up at the polls when they are animated by a particular issue. They tend to not be Super Voters--SVs vote in every single election, rain or shine.
Case in point: Mario Andretti. He lives in our township, and he is a gold-plated Super Voter. He votes in every election, every year, no matter what. He has voted by absentee ballot from Indy in a completely uncontested municipal primary. He (and his entire family) vote absolutely every time. Mario's not an "activist" by most definitions. Yes--he'll lend his name to a Republican party fundraiser every now and again--but typically for a candidate that he's known for years, rather than out of ideological or political loyalty.
The Super Voters, in my experience, are good, old-fashioned patriots. Real believers in the electoral process, people who view voting as their civic duty, and who will cheerfully mouth the words "civic duty" without a hint of sarcasm or embarassment. A lot of them are naturalized citizens, or first- or second-generation Americans. A *lot* of them are vets. You see a lot of them at the Memorial Day parade, you see a lot of them at the fire company July 4th picnic.
Twenty years ago I viewed them as old codgers with a simplistic view of the world and not enough to do. Today I think they're a lot more important--and their views are more important--than I used to give them credit for. Even if I agree with the Christian Right agenda (at least most of the time) these are the people whom I most respect.
Politicians *do* keep databases! (Score:5)
Hi!
Okay--I'll confess. Although I've been working with computers and networks since 1983, I'm not a real geek. I've never read anything by Robert Heinlein. So I'm not familiar with the book "Farleyfile".
But I am very familiar with a very successful political strategy that combines two database methods to produce a very, very effective (and inexpensive) campaign. And it sounds very similar to what you describe. Here's how it works:
Every state requires some government entity (the county in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Illinois, don't know about other states) to maintain voter registration records. For purposes of purging records of inactive voters (and for double-checking when there are allegations of vote fraud) the county maintains records of which elections you have voted in during the past N years. So in Pennsylvania, for instance, the county keeps track of the past 8 elections (primary and general in each of the past 4 years). That data is a matter of public record: along with the voter's date of birth, residence, and political party. (Pennsylvania is a "closed primary" state: you have to register as a member of a political party, and you can only vote in that party's primary election. You can't "choose your ballot" as you can in some other states.)
When you review this data, it does not take you long to recognize some patterns (which, ex post facto, seem obvious): a lot of people only vote in the presidential general election. A lot of people only vote in the congressional general elections (1998, 2002, etc.). Relatively few vote in "off-year" general elections (1999, 2001, 2003), and practically nobody votes in off-year primaries. That much is reasonably obvious.
But oh--when you look at who votes in off-year primaries, the lightbulb comes on. These people--to a person--are the diehards. They vote in every single election, and they have voted in every single election since they were eligible to vote. (And they know what year it was that the voting age dropped from 21 to 18.) The ultimate test of political junkihood is this: "can you name the last three losing vice-presidential candidates?" Most of these voters can.
Key point:These voters are extremely influential. They like politics, they talk politics, and if they get excited about somebody they will shape voter opinions. With the slightest motivation/provocation they can bring half a dozen relatives and/or friends to the polls with them. When politicians prate about "grass-roots" support, these are the people they're talking about.
So step #1 is to identify the Super Voter. Step #2 is to send a dozen volunteers through the phone books (you can hire firms to do this as well) to associate a phone number with every single Super Voter (that is, Super Voters in your party) on the list. Step #3 is simple: sit the candidate down at the phone in front of a computer with a contact manager (like Act! or any similar tool). Have the candidate--personally--call every single voter. And have the candidate keep notes, in the contact manager, of every single conversation. Between the time you file petitions at the county registrar's office in February and the primary in May, the candidate should have spoken to every single Super Voter twice. Between the primary and the general election, the candidate should speak to every single Super Voter another 3 times. Each time, the candidate should make notes of the conversation. Whenever possible, the candidate should quickly respond to any need or problem the voter is having.
The results? The first time I saw this used, the candidate was a neophyte: he'd been on the school board, and was running for state representative. He did practically no advertising--but he called every Super Voter in the district two or three times before the primary: there were whole voting districts where he won 100% of the vote. In the general election he faced an 8-term incumbent--and spent essentially zero on advertising. His opponent strolled through the campaign, and was actually on TV (ostensibly to accept congratulations) when he discovered that he'd been beaten.
As a gimmick, this is terrific. But it's more than that: After the election my candidate kept right on calling. He called the super voter list to thank them for their support; he calls newly-registered voters to encourage them to come out to vote; and he calls his lists several times per year. It was so effective that he was unopposed in the next 3 or 4 elections.
Is using a database in this way a bad thing? I don't think so. The end result is that the voters got to recognize their state rep's voice on the phone--and the state rep talked to people across his district, one-on-one, several times a year.
A politician actually calling up his constituents and listening to them. Now that's a scary idea....
Re:Politicians *do* keep databases! (Score:2)
Heinlein got the word and the concept from real life. Here's a quote from Jerry Pournelle about this:
I got the quote here [jerrypournelle.com].
steveha
Farleyfile? (Score:5)
If you always walk in to your favorite restaurant, and the hostess knows you and greets you by name, you probably don't have a paranoid feeling of "She knows who I am. This is bad. I need to start randomly changing restaurants so no one ever recognizes me." In fact, if she remembers that you like to sit by the window, and she puts you by the window, you are likely to be happy.
So the casinos are doing this sort of thing, only on a vast scale. I find this interesting, but not too troubling. I'm sure there are possible abuses here, but I'm not sure that the casinos are any worse than Safeway and their stupid "keep track of everything I buy" card.
steveha
Minor step, huge threat. (Score:2)
This would be fine, so long as everyone was an ISP and could keep their own records! The whole structure of the internet is supposed to be peer to peer. Legislation that forces subservience to this otherwise equitable technology is a free speech, privacy and national security threat.
As the internet becomes the publishing medium of choice, it is important to preserve the ability of anyone to publish. Control of this medium would be much like the control that governments once imposed on printing presses, opressive, counterproductive and doomed to failure. Any attack on the ability to publish and publish anonymously should be seen as an attack on free speech.
Tracking internet usage by tracking user log ons and browsing is useless and oppresive. It has no use but invasion of privacy. Real criminals will always find away around measures like this. The computer time needed for this tracking would be better put to other purposes.
Finally, the equitable nature of internet protocalls is needed for national security reasons. The web was designed for redundency and continued operation in the event of nuclear war. It's a natural extention of Ham radio field day. Every computer should be able to serve as a true node in the net, if not redundancy is lost and the system becomes weak.
Computer "crime" is best fought by redundency and well educated adminsters who can track down attacks well.
Let other nations oppress their people and track their habbits like bugs. We should live free and thrive.
Re:What else is new? (Score:4)
OK, so maybe I'm a completely naive, but I fail to see how this is an invasion of privacy...
You visit their casino, spend money on their games, eat in their restaurants and stay in their hotel rooms.
Why shouldn't they track that information? You chose to go and do the things you did on their property.
Now, if they were sharing that information with others with whom you had not chosen to do business, then that would be a problem, but the article clearly states that they aren't doing that.
Stand Fast,
Re:What else is new? (Score:2)
Now, that I severely doubt. I really don't think the average customer stops to think for even a second to consider what kind of information on their habits will be collected when they hear the magic word "free".
Lnik to riginal article from Computerwold (Score:2)
"ComputerWorld" - Casinos Hit Jackpot With Customer Data [computerworld.com]. CRM leaders keep detailed dossiers on loyal gamblers
While the rest of corporate America is waking up to the value of truly detailed customer information, the neon-lit enclave of casino gambling is already taking it to unmatched levels.
Socioeconomic databases, loyalty cards, the cross-matching of credit card data with other files--they're all at work in the gambling business. These aren't things that supermarkets, banks or retailers don't do. But casinos have become masters of customer relationship management (CRM), having mined more complex customer data on a larger scale for a longer time than just about any other industry.
In its latest annual report, Harrah's Entertainment Inc. bragged, "We know what our customers like," then provided examples of the kind of detail the company tracks. "Tom likes NASCAR, Clint Holmes, thick steaks. Joyce and Ted like oceanfront views, barbershop quartets, Elvis slots. . . ."
Re:Politicians *do* keep databases! (Score:2)
Only question is... Does this create a political elite in the voting pool? In other words, do these "Super Voters" represent a special interest that has a lock on the power to get politicians into office, or is it just the apathy of everyone else that makes catering to them so effective? If the former, then the situation is questionable, but in the latter it's pretty much everyone else's fault (including mine) that they have as much sway as they do.
--Fesh
Re:More troubling... (Score:2)
Think Xerox. The guy that invented electrostatic printing went to Kodak with a nifty new way to make pictures. When he got laughed out of the office, he started his own company and proceeded to change the world.
If you do something fairly obvious that everyone thinks is nuts and it works, don't you deserve to be rewarded for taking the risk? This is different from the "One-click" scenario in that Amazon patented a process which was being developed concurrently by just about everyone at the same time in order to stifle competition.
--Fesh
Re:Something I wonder... (Score:2)
--Fesh
Oh. My. God. (Score:2)
Thanks for bringing that to my attention.
--Fesh
And now, integration with face recognition (Score:2)
"Domestically, Viisage products annually produce more than 20 million identification documents at more than 1,500 locations in 13 states."
"MGM Grand Las Vegas has adopted Visionics Corp's FaceIt-enabled Griffin G.O.L.D. [hospitalityupgrade.com] face-recognition casino security system, following The Venetian and Bellagio's adoption of the product earlier this year. Griffin Investigations, a provider of gaming security information, has an on-line database with over 30 years of intelligence data, which casinos to match suspected individuals at gaming tables, in real-time, to a database containing photographs of all types of known casino cheaters, card counters and their associates."
Any questions?
Data mining for fraud (Score:2)
Re:Wrong (Score:2)
Re:Politicians *do* keep databases! (Score:2)
The reason that the Democratic Party is focusing on Social Security and the Republican Party is focusing "Faith-Based" initiatives is a solemn nod to these "Super Voters". Retired people and the devoutly religious are perfect examples for each party. There are other kinds of bases for each party, but a politican who plays to the base voters in his party in his district can easily beat an opponent in a primary. And phone calls to voters from the politician are a lot more effective than media buys.
Is apathy the cause? I don't really think so - some people are just not attuned to the difference between a Christian Conservative Republican and a Goldwater Conservative Republican. In 95% of the votes this person will cast in office, the difference (Christian vs. Goldwater wings of the GOP) won't be apparent. It's those base voters who care about that 5% that determine who wins and loses. And the politician will often crow loudest about that 5% to placate those base voters.
BTW, a caveat to the above - the original message didn't say that the "Super voters" they called actually AGREED with them on issues. But many Super Voters (and to a lesser extent regular voters) are impressed by a candidate call that they'll vote for the candidate anyway, even if they don't like the candidate's issues. All politics is local, and even that bum the don't like is still their bum.
Milhouse: "Why don't we put it on the internet?"
Re:What else is new? (Score:2)
Every time you use your card the casino is collating data on your gambling character; how often you gamble; where you live; what kind of credit card you have and approximate credit limit; whether you're trailer trash or affluent; whether you're single or married; gay or straight; how many kids you have; whether you're ahead or behind; what your spending limit is; what table games you play; whether you're reckless or cautious; what machines you like; how long you play them for; if you are loyal to a machine; where you play in the casino; the times when you gamble; the times when you don't gamble; what features of a machine make you spend more; what food you like eating; whether you respond to "comps"; what room you like and so on.
All of that information makes it considerably easier to part someone with their money. You can target certain kinds of people and hit them at their most vulnerable spot. If the table take is down, the casino sends a mailshot out to some high, reckless spenders. If it's low season, mailshot all the trailer trash with cheap bus fares and accomodation.
The same is true for supermarkets of course, but then the scale is so much different. A supermarket mailshot might get someone to spend ten dollars more on their groceries with a coupon, whereas a free meal comp from a casino could end up with someone losing hundreds of dollars.
Sigh ... patents again ... (Score:5)
"Hey Ernie, these guys say that if you walk into the Showboat, they can tell right away that you like Margaritas, even though that's in a computer miles away!"
"Gee Bert, that's incredible! If anyone ever deserved a patent, it's them."
"We all say so, so it must be true!"
Re:IT ethics have a long way to go (Score:2)
For example, what would happen if someone were to steal MGM Mirage's database and post it on the net? Immediately millions of people's names and addresses would be available next to their estimated personal income, and potentially "interesting" information such as when they're likely to go on holiday.
Assuming a best case scenario on a dedicated T1:
ftp.m1ragehax0r.net userdb.sql 6.5970698E12 bytes completed in 397 days 16:22:18.368 @192.000KB/s
Re:hmm (Score:3)
Re:Something I wonder... (Score:3)
I also would still let people do this however it obivously tips the odds against the casinos to much.
Re:hmm (Score:2)
Well if it can comfort you, it's probably not hosted on windows because 13TB is the limit of NTFS if I remember correctly
Re:Sigh ... patents again ... (Score:3)
Yeah I caught that bit of nonsense. Not too surprised, but the mention of licensing or 'other forms of compensation' (kneecapping?) was almost offered as a challenge. Are they gonna sue doubleclick? Amazon? Yahoo? Google?
"Woid on da street is dat da clowns over at Yahoo are makin coin on our intellectual properties"
"Ya wants I should have dem, uh, 'repartitioned' boss?"
See ya at the bottom of the lake, kids...
Re:Patent on consolidating data? (Score:3)
Customer Recognition [164.195.100.11]
Customer Worth [164.195.100.11]
more customer recognition [164.195.100.11]
It looks like their system is setup to determine how well a customer should be treated based on past spending at all Harrah's locations. I doubt that collecting data from different locations is all the patents cover.
Re:Truly Outrageous! But Get Used To It (Score:2)
[The UK has one of the lowest number of officers per head of population for the whole of europe.]
Re:What else is new? (Score:4)
What is important to ask is, can one opt out of this data collection? This is becoming a bigger and bigger issue, and privacy is important. I've been running the IE6 previews at work (familiarity with upcoming technology, or so I tell my boss), and I've let it notify me about third-party cookies. I had *no* idea it was this bad. Sites that don't even have banner ads have third-party cookies trying to plant themselves on my system. I don't mind first-party cookies, but the tracking issues on third-party....
In the same vein, I don't mind a hotel greeting me by name, but having them ask, "Will you be spending your normal $352.65 on the casino floor tonight?" would be downright spooky, not to mention who might be buying tapes of this data. Imagine a casino chain knowing you in Las Vegas, Atlantic City, and on the gambling cruises!
Truly Outrageous! But Get Used To It (Score:5)
If you have any of the above, a great deal of information about you is already being trafficed through the corporate world, and the amount will only grow with every passing year. To take one seemingly harmless example, if you have a savings club card, you've already handed them on a silver platter to megabytes of data about yourself for your grocery store to sell. Then there's the magazines you subscribe to, the professional organizations you belong to, the ISP you use (don't think they don't mine logs for useful information). And don't forget your medical records. The databanks of the highest bidders certainly never will.
In the future, as storage gets cheaper, and transactions are increasingly done through electronic means, you can expect records to be kept of everything you buy, everywhere you go, everyone you correspond with.
While the government does present a danger to privacy*, the corporate world is clearly the largest threat. Corporations already manipulate us with slick marketing. Once highly targetted advertising arrives, we'll be so many fish in the corporate target barrel. We won't stand a chance. Get ready to drop any spare change you still have left.
Besides targetted advertising, blackmail is the other serious threat posed by corporate stockpiling of personal information. I could see a future where corporations solidify their control over our leaders by holding their past misdeeds over their heads. Campaign contributions and corporate political activism are bad enough. Just imagine when the corporations put themselves in a J-Edgar-like postion above the president.
*For example, I expect that within 5 years we'll see legislation forcing ISPs to verify the identities of users and log and store all traffic for a some minimum time frame; this minor step has already been taken over in the EU. I think it makes sense though, as a method to combat computer crime. The internet can't stay the wild-west forever.
Re:SQL & win2k (Score:2)
You know, you should feature your wonderbox on Slashdot. It would make a great article and we all would love to see how you did it.
Re:IT ethics have a long way to go (Score:2)
In some ways, casinos are more mindful of privacy than other companies
right after putting on a discourse about saving 6TB of onion data about their customers. I`m sorry but I don`t want Casino`s to take care of my privacy. I want to have control of that myself, I don`t care how mindfull thoughtfull or nice these 160Million dollar companies may be. I remember altavista giving me a lifetime pop3 box, for which I was paying only3 years later.
Yielding control over your data over to an IT firm is usually a risk, but if their is malpractice from one of their employees abusing your data, chances are you can get them sued. On the other hand companies as big as these are much tougher to attack because they you know their laws and rights inside out and you probably somehow agreed to be in their system and surrender your private data. They are big brother, and they didn`t tell you. After all, you came to them. It`s your choice. Proving they misuse your data is so much more difficult. Besides they don`t really store 'you', they store profiles. 'You' is not important to them. It`s what makes you appealing to them that is important.
Actually I don`t mind them correlating the data with other data. It`s their right. I would mind them selling and getting rich on data of my life. It`s like they do not own a 'copyright' on my actions I undertake, and thus have no right to make money off of it. Obviously, they get '3rd party' data from elsewhere, so this is really going on. I didn`t think they were this far ahead, but apparently everything is possible.
I`m wondering what the Casino industry, which is collecting so much data about thier customers, is going to do with all that 'knowledge', as it also means power, a power the government might in the long run have to negotiate with. Hmm.. Maybe I read too much 'SnowCrash' by Stephenson.
ignace.
Re:What else is new? (Score:2)
"If you care more about your privacy, then your path is fairly clear - don't apply for one of these cards!"
This is not at all clear. The article said one casino had information on a lot of people -- and it said only a fraction of them carried those customer cards. Therefore the casino collects information in other ways. So it is not clear how to protect your privacy.
Re:Something I wonder... (Score:3)
I hope I can correct and enhance some of the comments here about card counting. First, under most current Blackjack rules, the casino has a slight advantage over a player who plays optimally but knows nothing of what is left in the deck, aside from the distribution of cards in a full deck. "Optimal play" is play that makes all the choices (hit, stand, split, et cetera) that maximize the player's expected return. There are a few casinos with rules that provide a slight advantage to the player. However, it is difficult to make money this way, as the advantage is small and making an occasional mistake is enough to wipe out the advantage.
"Counting cards" refers to just about any kind of count. It does not have to be a count of each rank of card played. One common system is to count how many high and how many low cards have been played, and to count or estimate how many cards remain in the shoe. Thus, the player only needs to remember one number and estimate the remaining cards. You would think that is not so difficult, but it does take some skill to do it. The casino is noisy and filled with distractions. You have to watch all the cards on the table carefully, while the dealer is trying to go as fast as possible to make as much money for the casino as possible. Other players aren't going to wait for you; their busted hands may be surrendered and discarded before you have much chance to see them. Your neighboring players may try to talk to you while you are trying to concentrate. And, while maintaining the count, you still have to make decisions about play.
Knowing the count does two things for you. First, because you now have some indication of what is left in the deck, your optimal strategy may change. Whereas you used to stand on a 13 in a certain situation, you might now hit, because your chance of busting is lower. (Naturally, you don't calculate this chance as you go; this is all approximated in tables that you memorize.)
Second, knowing the count changes the value of the game -- it might make your average return greater or smaller (including negative). In response, you change your betting. When the average return is relatively high, you bet higher before each hand. When the return is negative, you bet lower, so you are just marking time until the situation changes.
As you can imagine with all this, the casinos can often spot card counters. They are winning (or, if not, the casino doesn't care), they are concentrating, and they may be slow to indicate their choices. It is hard to get good at counting.
I have heard that in some jurisdictions, like Atlantic City, the casinos are not allowed by law to prohibit a person from using skill in a game. Thus, they cannot ban a person from play because the person is card counting.
Re:What else is new? (Score:3)
"Why shouldn't they track that information? You chose to go and do the things you did on their property."
It is a common fallacy that because a company may do something, there should be no objection to it. From a legal or ethical perspective, the company is within its rights to collect information. But that does not mean it is beneficial. It does not we cannot dislike it, that we cannot take action of our own to oppose it.
By the same reasoning you give, that it is their casinos and their restaurants and their rooms, so also it is my money and my information and my communications with friends and other consumers. They can do what they want with their stuff, and I can respond by doing what I want with my stuff. I can withhold my money, I can ask my friends to complain, I can support organizations that promote things good for me, we can negotiate with companies for better policies, et cetera.
Now, why should we oppose this collection of information? Lots of reasons. Personally, I am fed up with being treated as a potential sucker all the time. It has gotten worse, and it is getting hard for me to avoid sales pitches even in my own home. Companies are finding more and more ways to invade my peace and quiet, my sanctuary. I throw away junk mail, but companies I once thought I had a satisfactory business relationship with now send ads in bills. Software I used to like has been hijacked to display ads. An ad here or there is not much harm, but, when it is continual, it is just too much.
Also, this information isn't always secured properly or used ethically. It gets out and is used for fraud or, occasionally, malice. If a company exposes me to damage like that, it isn't just their information anymore; it is mine, and I have a valid interest in seeing that it is controlled properly.
Another concern is that companies are becoming shrewder at manipulating people. Increasing data and increasing computer power are helping them. I am a very rational person, but I am not a perfect thinking machine. Every human being can be manipulated psychologically. At some point, the use of marketing techniques will become (or has become) unfair, because it subverts the reasoning process. A fair transaction is one involving consenting, informed adults -- people who have had an opportunity (although many may not use it) to think things through. If a company blasts away at thinking, the transaction is no longer fair. Continual repetitious ads, ingeniously engineered phrasing that leads a person to incorrect beliefs without actually being false phrasing, sales pitches calculated to go to a particular person's weakest point, and other such things create unfair circumstances.
Re:Something I wonder... (Score:2)
If you want to win at roulette, bring $300 that you are prepared to lose.
Bet 1-5 chips on numbers; 15 chips per spin. If you lose three times in a row, get up and grab a drink. If you are lucky, you'll win alot of cash. I actually paid for a year of college by doing this (winning about $3k) and then having an incredible streak in craps ($12k)
It's all about luck and having fun. "Systems" are for losers.
Re:What else is new? (Score:2)
The casino tracks all of your bets and determines how much you gamble per hour. You get comps based on this.
Re:Farleyfile? (Score:2)
No, they know it because they've made a point of remembering stuff about you in order to enhance their business in the future.
Maybe, but it's much more personal, and you have the opportunity to judge whether the waiter/host likes you or is just remembering YAC (Yet Another Customer) based on body language and other non-verbal cues. Chances are you won't go back to a restaurant where the staff seemed disinterested, even if they had managed to remember that it was your cat's birthday that day.
Plus, I think (and this is pure speculation) that people think that others will act in a more moral and ethical manner in a face-to-face situation than if one was just data on screen. Irrational, but it does matter, IMO.
Re:same thing (Score:2)
Did the Coca-Karma story ever make it to the front page of Slashdot? (Using "Search" turned up nothing.)
Should it?
I personally found it a very, very disturbing read, particularly in light of the court cases that affect the Internet that are turning up in the Federal courts.
READ THE ARTICLE (Score:2)
Cool example: When you check in, they check your preferences. If you're a big gambler, they come over, greet you by name, make sure whatever drink you normally get is ready for you, etc, etc, etc. It's a damn impressive article.
IT ethics have a long way to go (Score:5)
I'd rather that none of the above had that information. If it only gets used for what they say they're using it for, it's probably okay. The problem is that information doesn't go away - much of what's been collected about people within the last few years is likely to be around for a lifetime.
Lots can happen within a lifetime. (Compare today's world with something pre-WW2, for example.) Assuming various privacy laws and data correlation restrictions (or what's left of them) don't lighten up in the future, and that's very unlikely, there's still the danger of information leaks.
For example, what would happen if someone were to steal MGM Mirage's database and post it on the net? Immediately millions of people's names and addresses would be available next to their estimated personal income, and potentially "interesting" information such as when they're likely to go on holiday.
The thing that most consumers don't realise is that when you're letting a company collect information about you, you're not just trusting the company. You're also trusting every one of their employees, and probably employees of related companies that you have no control or knowledge about.
In this case you're trusting their data security setup - not to mention the software engineers who wrote the software they're using. You're trusting every one of thousands or more casino workers who have direct access to some very personal information, and you're trusting the person who hired them not to make one mistake with that many chances.
I'm not sure if there's an obvious way to stop this, because people will always be collecting data about other people and in the computer age it's going to get easier and easier to store, mine and correlate to make new information. I'd at least like to see the following:
Important computer organisations (eg. ACM [acm.org]) really pressing their codes of ethics' seriously. There must be lots of people in ACM at the moment, for example, who have pirated software and don't have a second thought about it. I know lots of society doesn't take it seriously, but if the ACM isn't going to take it seriously then I don't think section 1.5 should be in the code of ethics [acm.org].
General ethical standards in computer employees really suck at the moment. Information management ethics needs to be a more serious part of the education system. There are lots of IT workers who have essentially sold out to their management. There are some lines that I simply won't cross without resigning to find a better job, and when we're approaching them I let my boss know what I will and won't do. Doctors have professional codes of ethics - they don't go selling inforamtion about their patients - and IT professionals should, too.
Standard and well recognised privacy policies in place for organisations to use. They would include things such as properly destroying collected personal data after a certain timeframe (very important) or when the company ceases to exist, not correlating it or using it for unspecified purposes, and so on.
If marketed properly so that ordinary consumers understand it, organisations could stamp an approval label on their service, and people could decide based on that whether they want to trust the organisation or not.
===
hmm (Score:4)
Reading things like this scare the shit out of me.. mostly because I know that if one company is admitting to something, another company has probably done ten times worse.
Re:Liars! (Score:2)
Yeah, but you WANT this. (Score:2)
When you arrive, and there are tickets to a show you want, or maybe a free meal at a restaurant they know you enjoy going to, you feel like you're being taken care of for a few days.
so we were all wrong (Score:2)
how nice...
Re:This is NOT like other companies' datamining. (Score:2)
BTW Annie I'm really sorry you haven't been posting more lately. We miss you, troll or no.
~
Casinos, guilty of security, and being a business (Score:4)
The reason they collect all the data is most likely for security, and for profit. It would be poor judgement for them to sell most of this data, but by having all of this data, the casino can give a gambler a more 'personalized experience'.
Everything in a casino is about making money. They make the ceiling and floor 'loud' so that you look forward, not up or down. When you look forwards you see slot machines and tables and other games. Bells, whistles and sirens are set to attract people to areas so that they will spend their money. The food is priced cheap, so that you'll spend more money gambling since you are saving so much eating.
Everything in a casino is highly advanced. You are under constant watch from floor bosses, security cameras, and the like. All the 'automatic' games are computer controlled. A casino is required to give back a certain % of their profits, so for example, if it's a busy night, you are more likely to make money off the slot machines. If the casino is fairly empty, maybe not. I have also heard stories from some guards who used to work at casinos that some of the games are timed so that if you are not playing them during an hour, you will not win. A casino is pretty advanced technology-wise.
So I am not surprised that they have so much market data on their customsers. Many casinos now even have cards that you can use with 'credits' that work the slot machines and other gambling sites. These cards allow the casino to track gambling habits of their patrons.
But in the end, security is probably the top reason for all the data on the customers. The casino wants to make money, and by keeping track of what you are doing, they can make sure your not cheating, and that the house remains in the black.
Just don't be surprised if they have a nice government- style database, complete with pictures of everyone who has ever entered the casino.
[Something witty and intelligent should have appeared here.]
Re:Another cause... (Score:3)
So what ? Casinos have long reserved the right, AFAIK, to kick anyone they want out, if they have even the slightest suspicion that someone may be cheating. Note this is suspicion, NOT proof. You can get kicked out for using a cell phone in a casino. You can get kicked out for taking a photo. And yes, you can get kicked out if they think you are counting cards, or otherwise cheating. If people aren't comfortable with being tracked, then they should not get the cards.
One of the casinos had larger than expected losses on their table games last year. They got some consultants (with loose lips) to run some statistical analysis
Given the sheer amount of money casinos pull in from table games, these 'few' and 'lucky' individuals would have to pull in a HUGE amount to noticeably skew a table game's results (which, BTW, were almost CERTAINLY gains and not losses). If these were indeed high rollers, the casinos would be folly to ban them unless they were quite certain they were cheating - because casino operators are smart enough to know that if they are not cheating, the high rollers will make the casino money almost every time. Trust them to make the decisions that will help their bottom line.
And by the way, cheating at one casino is only likely to get someone barred at one group's casinos - as the article points out, casinos have a strong disincentive to share information.
Re:What else is new? (Score:5)
Well, seeing as this story is about physical casinos, here's how it actually works:
If you are a regular casino customer, you can apply for, and receive, a loyalty card (you don't even have to be a regular, all you have to do is apply. It doesn't even cost anything.)
Every time you use this card, the casino gathers data on what you are doing, and for how long (how much you are spending - or winning). They do this because this information is valuable to them, and you do it because they are willing to pay (comps) for that information.
Everybody using a card like this knows that the casino is tracking them, collecting information about their habits. That's why they use the card. If they didn't think that the casino was watching, then why would they use it in the first place?
If you care more about your privacy, then your path is fairly clear - don't apply for one of these cards! If you've already got one, then just stop using it. The casino is perfectly happy to let you walk in off of the street and lose as much money as you want - in cash if you prefer it that way!
This is about as opt-in a system as you could ever ask for. Not only that, but it's a fair trade - you actually get something valuable in return for your information. And, as the article says, they generally don't even sell your information, as most companies would.
This seems like the most responsible use of private information that I've ever seen.
Of course, if you're worried about privacy in casinos in the first place, then maybe you should just avoid them altogether. There're more cameras per square foot in those places than just about any public place on the planet...
Re:What else is new? (Score:2)
Safeway club card benefits with no privacy loss (Score:2)
Another cause... (Score:5)
One of the casinos had larger than expected losses on their table games last year. They got some consultants (with loose lips) to run some statistical analysis on their database to find people who won an improbable amount. They had information on some of their big money customers down to a bet-by-bet record.
The consultants identified more than a few "lucky" individuals. I'm not sure what happened to them, but I'd bet that they're not welcome in that establishment anymore.
The truly troubling result of this is that those people, who were not conclusively found breaking any rules, are probably now indexed around the world as undesirable gamblers. Can you imagine having a string of good luck at the Taj and then walking into some casino in Paris and being asked to leave the premises?
the more you spend, the more they care (Score:3)
Grocery stores don't bother with this. They are starting to get into the game with things like Air Miles, which associate personal info with exact product items, locations and times. But the payback isn't nearly so large; people just don't spend thousands of dollars a day at grocery stores.
Probably the only other industry that really has the resources and desire for this information is the tobacco industry. You can bet they do their best to track trends. They have a big disadvantage, though, namely that they don't have direct access to consumers. You can be sure that the healthcare industry keeps the data, but they don't have as much concern since medical treatments are much less discretionary than grocery selection or casinos. I wouldn't be surprised to see them team up with tobacco companies though, since they have pretty much all the requisite information.
Re:Safeway club card benefits with no privacy loss (Score:2)
___
Nothing to hide. (Score:3)
The expediency with wich former Chilean dictator A. Pinochet incarcerated his political opponents was astonishing. In a matter of days all the members (big and small) of the Socialist Party and other organizations that supported the democratically elected Socialist presdient, Salvador Allende, were imprisoned.
How did Pinochet's newly born regime achieved this? Easy, he got the record of the memebership of the Socialist Party, so it was a futile excercise of pick and choose.
You never know how information about you is going to be used and by who, thus you should give away as little information about you as possible.
Confess or gamble (Score:2)
Just proves that old adage that people will tell their bookmaker what they won't tell their priest.
What it comes down to is this: as you are after the casinos money (and they, of course, are after yours), you are far more likely to respond truthfully to a invasive questionnaire from them than you are one from Amazon.com or anyone else.
The fact that they are more likely to check up on the information provided to them (to protect themselves financially and legally) means that they are less likely to get people lying through their teeth on their books.
Yes! (Score:2)
They can be stupid, too, though. (Score:2)
Now, I want good data out there... in aggregate. I want places to know what people want to buy; it means more of the stuff you want with less waste and better prices. I'd even like to have the option of asking them to remember my preferences. I don't ever want them assuming they know who I am, or figuring out my identity, without me explicitly telling them.
I mean, it's like you're not safe to buy 50 bags of fertilizer from different stores and 20 tanks of diesel from different gas stations over a single weekend with cash any more...
--
why, and by what right? (Score:3)
Then it dawned on me... (as I work third shift at a Texaco and cleaned out the out-of-code candy) ... companies can save and make lots of money, much more that the cost of implementing these computer systems, by having the most likely brand / item / game for customers that frequent the store most often. By minimizing loss in supermarkets by out of code items, and by offering perks that a large percentage of people would want in a casino, they are achieving cost effectiveness. In fact, a lot of supermarkets offer discounts to people who help them keep their prices low by this method. Doesn't seem so evil to me.
But also, by what right do companies do this information gathering and using? Well, by right of free trade. The honest companies that ask for this up front, and don't sneak it out of your computer by 'registration' of software, are attaching a certain condition to a specific sale. Since the companies hold the item /service, and the user holds the exchange medium, BOTH must choose the conditions of the sale, and agree to it. In fact, a company may choose to only make a sale in which they collect personal data. I know we collect personal data for credit reasons at the other job I work for, but only because we can't afford to have a customer bounce a check or default on payment on a $100,000 machine. As long as the companies are explicit in stating that they are taking the information at the time of the sale, it's perfectly legal and moral.
Do not equate this, however, with the sale of this information from one company to the next. Not all companies do this. And if they do, and don't list it in the terms of the sale agreement, (whether its for a slim jim or an e-beam system), they should be sued. My only suggestion to those afraid otherwise is, be an informed consumer.
SQL & win2k (Score:2)
I'm not making anything up. Have you ever tried running win2k and MSSQL on a 486SX running at 33mhz? It just doesn't work. I have used mySQL on Linux and it works fine. Maybe you should get some real life experience with SQL instead of talking to me about Terra server running on a giant cluster of win2k boxes. D/\ Gooberguy