O'Sentinel - NextGen - 1/17/10

[mgf]

You make too much sense...JT will never listen to your logic.

Pick your battles. JT is a loss cause.

Please read the fourth sentence of my post.Everyone has a right to an opinion. I posted mine.

But at the same time, prudence dictates an investigation and exploration of the issues NOW, not after the horses have left the putative barn. So I'm wary, that's all.

I totally understand. I am a student of (and work in ) public policy, so none of these concerns are lost on me. We have this type of lateral thinking drilled into us constantly. I appreciate your perspective on this issue. Every conversation needs two rational sides.

I also agree with the comment about the ROI.

------

Again, these were general comments. I will be interested to watch this play out in the coming years. For now, I will give Disney the benefit of the doubt. They have significant financial incentive to not mess up implementation. I can only imagine the cost of paying damages and removing the technology if they are negligent in developing sound policy.

 

[krankenstein]

I sense the opportunity for a new product!!!!

*Available in MouseGear next week*






:lookaroun

 

[jt04]

There's no arguing that Disney *could* have been tracking and mining data all this time. FastPass makes that possible too. But two questions:

1. HAVE they really been doing it? Because if they haven't before, they are about to.
2. Won't this new technology make it EASIER? They are throwing big-time money at this, and no publicly-traded company throws big-time money around without an expectation of ROI.

I'm reasonably certain that most of the stuff NextGen will make possible will actually be stuff I like, enjoy, and am glad Disney customized for me. But, and I think this point has been made elsewhere in this thread, if Disney works as a trailblazer for this (and it really is revolutionary stuff), then expect the rest of society to work the same way.

Your credit cards, your car's GPS. Supermarkets will know what you purchase (which they probably do already, via reward cards). I'm not saying these things are being abused now. I'm saying RFID makes it easier to abuse them in the future. I could imagine a heavily RFID'd world having health insurance companies smack themselves upside the head and realize they are losing money by not customizing premiums based on your driving habits, your supermarket purchases. If my homeowner insurance company finds out I'm at Disney World every weekend, and staying in a different house, might that be cause to hike up my rates?

I'm as aware as the next guy that this sounds paranoid. The irony is not lost on me that I might have to actually resort to using aluminum to prevent surveillance - this is prime wacko stuff here I've landed in.

But at the same time, prudence dictates an investigation and exploration of the issues NOW, not after the horses have left the putative barn. So I'm wary, that's all.

You are exactly right. And where and to what ends are we headed. This is a case of some people not being willing to see two or three steps down the road. Some people believe they will be on the receving end of it's benefits rather than thinking of the dangers. And some people believe technology can usher in a sort of utopia. I'm sure other people have other motivations. I'm looking at where this may lead 10 or 20 or 50 years down the road. That's all.

 

[unkadug]

You are exactly right. And where and to what ends are we headed. This is a case of some people not being willing to see two or three steps down the road. Some people believe they will be on the receving end of it's benefits rather than thinking of the dangers. And some people believe technology can usher in a sort of utopia. I'm sure other people have other motivations. I'm looking at where this may lead 10 or 20 or 50 years down the road. That's all.

Any technology can be used for good and bad. Should we squash new technology because of the potential for application misuse?

 

[jt04]

Any technology can be used for good and bad. Should we squash new technology because of the potential for application misuse?

Sometimes. For instance science and technology gave us some terrible weapons during the cold war. It was agreed the human race was better off without them and agreements were made to destroy them.

Like I said, having RFID at WDW is not the concern. It's what happens with it if Disney develops it and exports it that concerns me. Simple as that.

 

[unkadug]

Sometimes. For instance science and technology gave us some terrible weapons during the cold war. It was agreed the human race was better off without them and agreements were made to destroy them.

Like I said, having RFID at WDW is not the concern. It's what happens with it if Disney develops it and exports it that concerns me. Simple as that.

But out of the research for these weapons also came new ways of creating power and new methods of curing disease.

You can't control what others may or may not do with information, but to stop progress because of the fear of what the future may hold is stifling.

 

[jt04]

But out of the research for these weapons also came new ways of creating power and new methods of curing disease.

You can't control what others may or may not do with information, but to stop progress because of the fear of what the future may hold is stifling.

I prefer technology that empowers people not potentially enslaves them. We have many laws that control how information is used. They didn't create those laws for nothing.

I'm all about not stifiling progress. I'm not saying we are going to be facing "1984" in a few years. But we are definitely on that path. I wonder if all the Disney executives would be willing to carry a GPS, broadcast there credit cards purchases, and their cell phone calls live on the internet in real time?

How about you?:shrug:

 

[Monty]

RFID usage is already ubiquitous throughout society. Disney is not developing anything that isn't already out there. They may be refining it to their own specific uses within their sphere of influence, but that's all. Governments, corporations and in very nearly every facet of daily life someone is tracking what you do and how you do it... Google ads, Amazon.com, on-line shopping, Credit and Debit cards, likely a good number of other cards, smart-keys for cars... It's already permeated society.

Denying being paranoid is all very well... Somewhat along the lines of saying "I invariably lie about everything" :shrug:

Everything jt spouts as potential risks are risks regardless and indeed are already in place in many instances.

 

[KevinYee]

To bring this back to the parks specifically, I can imagine a homogenization effect.

Consider:

1. You love the little bridge in Oasis precisely because no one uses it.
2. Disney RFID lets an accountanteer know that the bridge area is horribly under-utilized
3. Execs decide to monetize the area (it's underused, right?) with a small food or merch location.

Win-win? For some, that would be a win-win. For others, though, the thing which had made the area attractive is now gone.

The cumulative effect of dozens (hundreds?) of decisions like these would be one of making everyone's experience the same. Maximizing margins is all about aiming at the "big" part of the audience, not the small part.

So does this mean we all get the same experience? And the next question (which I honestly don't know the answer to): would that be a bad thing?

 

[KevinYee]

RFID usage is already ubiquitous throughout society. Disney is not developing anything that isn't already out there.

I'd be interested to know if Wal-Mart plunked down 1.5 billion to convert to RFID. I had read (only half paying attention) that the items on the shelves all had a chip, so the shelf would "know" to order more, but were they tracking where in the store those RFIDs went? Did they connect them to the people buying them? Because Disney *is* planning to personalize. When I pull cheetos off the shelf at Wal-Mart, the shelf doesn't thank me by name

 

[jt04]

RFID usage is already ubiquitous throughout society. Disney is not developing anything that isn't already out there. They may be refining it to their own specific uses within their sphere of influence, but that's all. Governments, corporations and in very nearly every facet of daily life someone is tracking what you do and how you do it... Google ads, Amazon.com, on-line shopping, Credit and Debit cards, likely a good number of other cards, smart-keys for cars... It's already permeated society.

Denying being paranoid is all very well... Somewhat along the lines of saying "I invariably lie about everything" :shrug:

Everything jt spouts as potential risks are risks regardless and indeed are already in place in many instances.

With all due respect, this just isn't true. I occasionally find RFID's in a DVD purchase. But my license does not have it. None of my credit cards do. In the states, phone records are not publicly avaiable. Now you may be right when it comes to Canada, but we are a long way from that in the states.

And we are just now gearing up the legal system to protect privacy in this matter.

Now don't get me wrong, I see the potential positives with this technology. It should be available to individuals to use as they desire. It should also be available to companies and the legal system. But it needs to be controlled and folks need to be informed of it's usage.

So, once more, I don't have a problem with Disney putting it in their parks. But to whom and why they sell the technology needs to be regulated. Full disclosure should be the law of the land.

 

[Bolna]

I'd be interested to know if Wal-Mart plunked down 1.5 billion to convert to RFID. I had read (only half paying attention) that the items on the shelves all had a chip, so the shelf would "know" to order more, but were they tracking where in the store those RFIDs went? Did they connect them to the people buying them? Because Disney *is* planning to personalize. When I pull cheetos off the shelf at Wal-Mart, the shelf doesn't thank me by name

I have read numerous times that one of the applications of RFID would be that check out at a supermarket would be so much easier, because instead of scanning each product individually just rolling the shopping cart past a scanner would immediately give you the total sum. Of course there would be an application that if you have a customer card (or perhaps a credit card with RFID) you won't even have to pay but would be charged automatically.

While it would be possible for the scanner than to tell you: "Thank you Mr Yee for shopping with us today.", this might be reserved to the special Disney touch of RFID. :animwink: Or - if Walmart would offer this - might that be "disneying" of Walmart? :lookaroun

 

[Monty]

I'd be interested to know if Wal-Mart plunked down 1.5 billion to convert to RFID. I had read (only half paying attention) that the items on the shelves all had a chip, so the shelf would "know" to order more, but were they tracking where in the store those RFIDs went? Did they connect them to the people buying them? Because Disney *is* planning to personalize. When I pull cheetos off the shelf at Wal-Mart, the shelf doesn't thank me by name

Indeed the "personalized interaction" may be unique to Disney for now. But next time you get a passport for foreign travel it'll have an RFID chip. Chances are next time you get a Driver's license it will as well. Almost every credit card or debit card that doesn't currently have one will when it's next replaced. The fact is the technology is already being used to track you and your spending. Almost every access card, ID card, pass, ticket or whatever else you may carry around with you likely has or will soon have RFID technology contained therein.

The Amazon example shows that such technology can easily be adapted to targeted marketing and most people are already buying more than they previously did from companies that are utilizing the readily available data. The thing to remember is they're generally not buying stuff they don't want, they're see more stuff they want as a result of improved marketing. Advterising on radio and TV is mass-marketing aimed at broad market sectors, it's inefficient. Companies are constantly looking for ways to advertise to highly focused demographic groupings of consumers. That way they ultimately spend less to get the ads to more people who are likely to be influenced to buy.

The "Minority Report" style of customized/personalized advertising may never come about simply because too many consumers would consider it too "creepy", but the technology to do it is already available. Advertisers are smart enough not to turn off potential consumers by creeping them out.

 

[KevinYee]

The "Minority Report" style of customized/personalized advertising may never come about simply because too many consumers would consider it too "creepy", but the technology to do it is already available. Advertisers are smart enough not to turn off potential consumers by creeping them out.

Agreed and agreed.

But... isn't this exactly what Disney's "NextGen" is going to do? Personalize so that it's almost unnerving?

 

[Monty]

Agreed and agreed.

But... isn't this exactly what Disney's "NextGen" is going to do? Personalize so that it's almost unnerving?

Amongst a plethora of other much more mundane, function-oriented uses [room key, park pass, wait time monitoring, etc...], yes it'll add a personal touch here and there. I suspect Disney will advertise it as more "Disney Magic" and if I were a betting man, I'd say it won't be widespread enough to become creepy or unnerving in a bad way. Maybe once every day or two something happens in an attraction using your name, likely aimed more at kids than adults but not exclusively ["Daddy! How did Peter Pan know your name?" - "Well, sweetie, we go way back, I was one of the "Lost Boys" you know."]... If it were more than that, it would get tired really quickly.

I don't see Disney overdoing this for the same reason ad companies are unlikely to start having talking billboards calling my name, it would be counter-productive. But worked properly, a little "princess" being spoken to by name by Winnie the Pooh on his ride would be a magical touch. It has to be enough to be dazzling, not become expected or commonplace.

 

[raven]

To bring this back to the parks specifically, I can imagine a homogenization effect.

Consider:

1. You love the little bridge in Oasis precisely because no one uses it.
2. Disney RFID lets an accountanteer know that the bridge area is horribly under-utilized
3. Execs decide to monetize the area (it's underused, right?) with a small food or merch location.

Win-win? For some, that would be a win-win. For others, though, the thing which had made the area attractive is now gone.

The cumulative effect of dozens (hundreds?) of decisions like these would be one of making everyone's experience the same. Maximizing margins is all about aiming at the "big" part of the audience, not the small part.

So does this mean we all get the same experience? And the next question (which I honestly don't know the answer to): would that be a bad thing?

You make a good point. But the RFID technology they will be using requires the guest to actually hold their chip up to the receiver. Think of it like the fast key system that Mobile uses at their gas stations. You have to be within inches of the receiver for it to register. While the receivers will be nearly everywhere on property they will be clearly marked. And guests will have the choice to use that receiver or not.

 

[KevinYee]

Yeah, that's an excellent point. RFID is passive, and its "range" is pretty limited, so the Big Brother uses may be themselves limited as a result.

 

[ChrisFL]

You make a good point. But the RFID technology they will be using requires the guest to actually hold their chip up to the receiver. Think of it like the fast key system that Mobile uses at their gas stations. You have to be within inches of the receiver for it to register. While the receivers will be nearly everywhere on property they will be clearly marked. And guests will have the choice to use that receiver or not.

I think that last part about choice will kill off any questions about any "big brother" issues.

 

[Next Big Thing]

I think that last part about choice will kill off any questions about any "big brother" issues.

Exactly. If there is the choice, then there should be no issues. If you have a problem with the system and it's possible big brother issues, then just don't use it.

 

[raven]

Exactly. If there is the choice, then there should be no issues. If you have a problem with the system and it's possible big brother issues, then just don't use it.

I really think that's what it all boils down to. That kills a lot of the argument.