Bank of America ATMs have cameras

Kuketz forum

Re: Euronet ATMs - with cameras and advertising

Postby vatolin »

Bit wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:02 am
vatolin wrote: privacyLaw should ensure that the handling and trading of data is fair.
... and otherwise has to refrain from doing it.
However, this is not the intention of the General Data Protection Regulation: The free movement of personal data [...] must not be restricted or prohibited for reasons of protecting natural persons when processing personal data; Art. 1 Para. 3 GDPR.

One reads again and again that the General Data Protection Regulation is a prohibition law with reservation of permission. But legally this is wrong. The principle "prohibition with reservation of permission" means: A certain behavior is fundamentally inadmissible, but may or may be permitted in individual cases. The General Data Protection Regulation, on the other hand, regulates the processing of personal data in principle lawful is when certain conditions are met. in the Individual case a right of objection can arise from the particular situation of a person; Art. 21 para. 1 sentence 1 GDPR.

Of course, it is questionable whether the bank has to recognize the customer's face in order to hand over banknotes.
It's more about recognizing skimmers and predators.
And is it necessary to record every bank customer by video every time they withdraw money? For legal reasons, I have doubts and I can think of a less drastic solution.
The potential for profiling is considerably more worrying if you pay by card everywhere.
Individual profiling is now actually subject to a prohibition with reservation of permission; Art. 22 Paragraph 1 GDPR.

Much more questionable, but hardly covered by the General Data Protection Regulation, is what Shoshanna Zuboff describes: behavior control by utilizing excess behavior. The individual person does not matter at all. This concerns the processing of data for which identification of the data subject is not necessary; see Art. 11 GDPR. In this standard, data protection law implicitly recognizes that such processing takes place and that in this case the rights of the data subject do not play a role.
But customers must still have the option of making a living with cash.
Why? What is the customer's right to cash?
Not to mention the use of natural resources for the production, distribution and safekeeping of coins and bills.
There are considerably more important construction sites.
"What about ...?" (Nikita Khrushchev)
[...] unseen and without leaving any traces [...] If you describe this as anti-social, then this is an anti-social forum [...]
Nerds - in German: weirdos - always somehow have an anti-social attitude. But in the end, it makes a difference whether the competencies undoubtedly available in this forum are used to block and impair the data processing machinery, or whether they are used to make the machinery better - especially in the sense of (legally) more secure, more understandable , more efficient, ... - to do. The latter is my Approach.

To come back to the topic: The butcher has an interest in knowing the tastes and habits of his customers and will therefore evaluate their purchasing behavior. And he's lucky enough to be able to communicate with customers at the counter. Why shouldn't a payment service provider like Euronet his - structurally different - skills are allowed to use his Customers and their To know behavior? Butchers and payment service providers participate legally and necessarily in economic life. Why should double standards be used?