Spirited News and Observations and Opinions ...

[alphac2005]

Please consider the following:

“The real danger is the gradual erosion of individual liberties through automation, integration, and interconnection of many small, separate record-keeping systems, each of which alone may seem innocuous, even benevolent, and wholly justifiable.” - U. S. Privacy Study Commission, 1977

Fundamentally, the line crossed with MagicBands is that I am being tracked as an individual. Yes, Disney could hire 100,000 CMs whose sole jobs were to follow all park guests but, obviously, this is impractical just as it is impractical to track thousands of individual guests via surveillance cameras. However, technology has reached the tipping point where all of us, as human beings, can be tracked 24/7.

The 4th Amendment protects us against unreasonable searches by the government without probable cause. The Supreme Court has already unanimously ruled that tracking devices constitute a search. The Privacy Act of 1974 establishes the laws determining how the government collects information about us, while the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 provides similar protection to our financial records. However, the 4th Amendment and the two privacy acts do not protect us from corporations. There are few checks in place for private corporations.

If left unchecked, I expect our society to reach a point where corporations require us to wear tracking devices as the price of doing business with them. If that seems ludicrous, consider that in 1977 the concept that I'd have to wear a tracking device in order to visit WDW would have been unthinkable. (And I don't even want to hear about the bogus "opt out" option.) There would have been many who would have ridiculed the idea. Seriously go back and contemplate the quote from the 1977 U. S. Privacy Study Commission. Commission members would be shocked at how much of our individual liberties we've already surrendered to technology.

MagicBands cross the line. MagicBands don't track my data; they track me.

I don't want my children living in a world where The Gap scene from The Minority Report is the accepted norm.

Bingo.

What many people don't seem to understand is that our Constitution has mechanisms to protect the public from government interference, prying eyes, etc. (Although there is a quite the erosion in those departments.) However, it does not have anything to do with corporations, the private sector. Only when we get legislation to restrict some of the absurd "gone too far" policies do any of these companies get any true legal pushback.

Let me give an example to everyone of how pervasive all of this technology is. I've owned a mail-order company for the past decade and a half. Our company is accessible via catalog, phone, and the Internet. When a customer comes to our company's website, we can in real-time access data including the following on what is considered to be an "anonymous" visitor:

IP address - So, we can see your location most likely within a couple of blocks of your actual spot
City location, which is tied to the IP - Although we also get triggered when an anonymous IP is used
Connection speed
Age demographics, sex
OS you're using, monitor size or mobile device that you are using
The exact keywords and original link of origin into our site including specifics of the method of how you got to us and/or why
Every single thing that you've typed into our system
Every single page that you've visited
Where you are in the process
My people can actually push chat right into your anonymous visit (Something we don't do, but have easy access to)
How many times you've visited, last time, length of visits, etc.

I'm sure that I'm missing some items, but you get the point. Those data points are available on just any visitor onto the website and obviously becomes much more detailed once converting that individual into a customer. My company has a very strict privacy policy that in our industry is basically unheard any longer. I've been told that we're essentially foolish for not exploiting all the data that we get in and using it to our business advantage, but I guess there are some of us that still have that little thing called ethics.

 

[Monty]

I swear the fact that people are not more concerned about this makes me fear for the future. I guess it is true now that in the eyes of the public corporations should be above the law.

Did I miss something?

What law has Disney broken? When were charges laid?

This is why I accuse people of being tin-foil hat wearing whackos! There is some speculation, fostered by what is in my opinion some over-zealous paranoia-ridden hyperbole, that the RFID data-gathering might overstep COPPA. That's it, that's all. Disney has been asked to satisfy a Congressman as to whether or not that is what they intend, or more accurately that they have safeguards built in to ensure that it doesn't happen. They have until 14 February to respond, but you've already apparently convicted the company in your mind.

'74 is mildly annoying with his pot-stirring, but you take the tin-foil hat-wearing cake!

 

[alphac2005]

Did I miss something?

What law has Disney broken? When were charges laid?

This is why I accuse people of being tin-foil hat wearing whackos! There is some speculation, fostered by what is in my opinion some over-zealous paranoia-ridden hyperbole, that the RFID data-gathering might overstep COPPA. That's it, that's all. Disney has been asked to satisfy a Congressman as to whether or not that is what they intend, or more accurately that they have safeguards built in to ensure that it doesn't happen. They have until 14 February to respond, but you've already apparently convicted the company in your mind.

'74 is mildly annoying with his pot-stirring, but you take the tin-foil hat-wearing cake!

For some of us, it's not so much about Disney knowing that I like to eat Mickey Mouse ice cream bars, stay at the WL, spend more time in Future World, ride XYZ the most, etc. It's part of a much grander issue, the freight train that giant corporations have become in this country. The fact that our own Supreme Court has granted corporations the legal equality of person-hood. The fact that corporations (and other businesses) are not subject to the Constitution (we're talking privacy related), rather for the most part few (and extraordinarily weak) laws in the realm of privacy.

It's too much of it all. I just want to take a [FILL IN THE BLANK] vacation to Walt Disney World with my family. Period. I want these corporations to have ethos. They'd rather spend hundreds of thousands, millions, and collectively billions of dollars buying off our legislators through lobbying efforts. For what? Money. Period. There was a time that businesses (and there are some still left, but you have to search them out) made a collective pact with the consumer and the worker. We'll make a healthy profit, you'll have make a middle class income, or we'll provide to you the best quality product. That's few and far between.

For many of us, that's what this is all about. Not about whether Disney has technically or not oversteps its legal bounds, it's a vastly larger issue at hand. The company that bills itself as one that is all about children and MAGIC and memories and all the other cliches that they use, really is one big consumer predator.

 

[Skyway]

Actually my car was sick but as it turns out it wasn't a suicide it was a murder: http://www.cfnews13.com/content/new.../01/Celebration_murder_victim_identified.html

That is a 2010 article.

Yesterday's death was a suicide. The guy supposedly sent an email to his coworkers before he did it.

 

[Monty]

But if a person can't view 3D at all due to medical reasons - guess what I come less and less to your cinema and go to another chain that offers the ability to watch 2D...and if you believe Disney came up with this program to satisfy guests needs -then your wrong - whole point is to more easily collect data, siphon more money away(try to at least) and better deployment of staff so they don't have to overstaff...but please as a Consumer, any business that wants me, has to do freaking cartwheels, there is so much more entertainment options around - why would I want to pay for a stale experience when I could do other things...

OK, clearly you missed my point.

If I upgrade my offerings at my place of business, I am under no obligation to provide a magic reset button for consumers who don't "like" change. I suppose the movie example was a poor one since the latest offering of The Hobbit was simultaneously available in 2D,2DIMAX,3D,3dIMAX,3DHFR and possibly twenty other variations thereof.

Disney is advancing a technology that will assist them with data collection, crowd control, staffing requirements and a plethora of other purely corporate benefits and they're providing what they are referring to as an enhanced experience in return. Is the balance of give and take in their favour? Probably. The possibility is there that they will lose a few customers, they may gain a few, it's yet to be seen.

If I choose to "opt out" of their program, there is no reason for me to expect that everything will be perfectly as it was before. Changes take place all the time, you accept it or you do without. In the end, if you're [IMO] paranoid enough to opt out, you will ultimately have a diminished experience as a result of that choice. That's a consequence of freedom of choice. FPs are being phased out in favour of FP+, that's Disney's corporate choice. If you don't like it enough to stop going, that's a consequence of their freedom of choice. I personally think they won't even notice you're gone.

 

[jmb2676]

PR wise...the damage is done. Regardless of the answers Disney gives. They're on the defensive now.

And I'm not worried about not getting the "enhanced experience" if I opt out. I'm worried of getting less than I get now.

This is my biggest concern. If I opt out will I pay the same (well, probably more) for a lesser experience than I get right now???

 

[Monty]

For some of us, it's not so much about Disney knowing that I like to eat Mickey Mouse ice cream bars, stay at the WL, spend more time in Future World, ride XYZ the most, etc. It's part of a much grander issue, the freight train that giant corporations have become in this country. The fact that our own Supreme Court has granted corporations the legal equality of person-hood. The fact that corporations (and other businesses) are not subject to the Constitution, rather for the most part few (and extraordinarily weak) laws in the realm of privacy.

It's too much of it all. I just want to take a [FILL IN THE BLANK] vacation to Walt Disney World with my family. Period. I want these corporations to have ethos. They'd rather spend hundreds of thousands, millions, and collectively billions of dollars buying off our legislators through lobbying efforts. For what? Money. Period. There was a time that businesses (and there are some still left, but you have to search them out) made a collective pact with the consumer and the worker. We'll make a healthy profit, you'll have make a middle class income, or we'll provide to you the best quality product. That's few and far between.

For many of us, that's what this is all about. Not about whether Disney has technically or not oversteps its legal bounds, it's a vastly larger issue at hand. The company that bills itself as one that is all about children and MAGIC and memories and all the other cliches that they use, really is one big consumer predator.

I absolutely agree that the corporate world is losing its way with regard to social values and ethical treatment, but that started long ago with outsourcing jobs to the third world and the politics of the race to the lowest common denominator. That fight is long since lost to the 1%.

Corporations are subject to the Constitution, just not the 4th Amendment, which is specific to the obtaining of evidence through unreasonable search by the State for purposes of prosecution. Corporations can't prosecute you, therefore the 4th Amendment doesn't apply. Corporations were granted "personhood" to afford them the same protections from Government intrusion of the 4th Amendment as individual citizens have, they are not persons in every legal sense, they can't register to vote, etc...

 

[Monty]

This is my biggest concern. If I opt out will I pay the same (well, probably more) for a lesser experience than I get right now???

Yes, you will get a lesser experience. A choice you make and the consequence of it.

They are phasing out FP in favour of FP+. When the transition is complete, you won't get FPs if you've opted out, therefore your experience will be diminished by your choice.

 

[Skibum1970]

The whole Next Gen thing reminds me of the movie "Minority Report". In that movie, you get "eye-scanned" all the time. Holographic advertisements pop up all over the place saying, "Why Mr. Smith, you just have to try this new thing-a-ma-bob" and it is unending. Plus, the eye-scanning allows tracking of movement all over the cities. It was an interesting movie but showed a serious invasion of privacy. Do I think that Disney will get this bad? I really hope not but it does show how far it can be taken.

 

[Longhairbear]

I'm going to flaunt my DVC membership here, so flame me all you want.
I grew up in MA, and my parents rented a vacation cabin on a lake in NH. They would never, ever think of getting a hotel room. We did all our own cooking and laundry, and went out to dinner only for special occasions, or because the food was that good. We grilled steaks, or hamburgers, and went on close by tourist spots. My mom would bake a casserole for dinner, and call us in from the lake to eat. Most of the groceries we used were stuffed in the back of our station wagon along with the sleeping bags we used outdoors.
I use our DVC membership in much the same way, except cocktails are involved.
We buy groceries, because I am a great cook, and refuse to spend money on sub par fare when I can whip up something fabulous in 20 minutes. I am sick of hearing the lazy ones proclaiming that they don't cook, or do laundry because they are on vacation, and don't have the guts to ask the other half to help out. That clues me in that they are vacationing beyond their means.
We come back from the parks exhausted sometimes, but I usually have an easy meal planned. And one that beats, or includes counter service. We throw in a load of laundry, because we pack only half as many clothes, and have dinner, and cocktails by whatever DVC pool we are at.
Are the Magic handcuffs going to tell Disney that? I doubt it. I think my style of vacationing is going to be totally off their radar. I can't be the only one who vacations like this. Not once in all our years as DVC members has any survey asked us exactly how we use our DVC membership, nor will the handcuffs.
The quality of WDW in general,or lack of, will drive us to other sites, much like my childhood vacations of taking the station wagon to other towns, mountain climbing, and a nearby Santa's Village. We'll rent a car and go to the other theme parks, NASA, and others. Our DVC was paid off years ago, besides the annual fee, we are coasting, and enjoying the ride. But a warning to TDO, our ride has many other Orlando/FLA options.

 

[alphac2005]

I absolutely agree that the corporate world is losing its way with regard to social values and ethical treatment, but that started long ago with outsourcing jobs to the third world and the politics of the race to the lowest common denominator. That fight is long since lost to the 1%.

Corporations are subject to the Constitution, just not the 4th Amendment, which is specific to the obtaining of evidence through unreasonable search by the State for purposes of prosecution. Corporations can't prosecute you, therefore the 4th Amendment doesn't apply. Corporations were granted "personhood" to afford them the same protections from Government intrusion of the 4th Amendment as individual citizens have, they are not persons in every legal sense, they can't register to vote, etc...

The context that I was framing the argument is about privacy, business, and the Constitution, not the full slate and I should have been clearer in that. The vast majority of what corporations are subject to is regulation by legislatures, not constitutional provisions because they are in-fact not people, except in the debated amendments, where interpretation has turned them into people, so to speak. The actual people in the functions within the corporation are the ones truly held accountable in terms of the Constitution, so it I've always considered the corporation to essentially be a superhuman that although they are subject to the Constitution, they don't feel the pain or suffer any true consequences, rather those within the corporation running it, or in fact the investors that could say get burned by illegal activities.

I'm not going to debate political merits here, but our current Supreme Court has gone a bit farther in the definition of personhood for our corporations, as while they can't vote and are legally not people, they now have broad political fund raising abilities that allow them to act as such without the legal act of voting under their definition of the 1st amendment. And, as you well know, the 14th amendment is the most contentious of all when it relates to whether there is application to corporations and the original intention of the amendment. I find one of the biggest ironies is that not only were the colonialists fleeing the monarchy, but the English corporations, and corporations have seeped their way into influencing all the types of things (e.g. policy and elections) that the original colonists were trying to start anew from.

 

[pixargal]

I wanted to respond to this @pixargal before it got lost in a much more important topic. I don't have a perspective on the film because I haven't seen it. But I definitely want to. And I suspect I will at some point. If you were wondering whether I thought Disney would some how bury it, I doubt it. It's the talk of Sundance and that genie can't be stuffed back in the bottle.

That said, there is nothing wrong with looking (not leering) at young people (or old people or any people). We are social and sexual beings. When someone attractive walks past me at a pool, I look. Whether they are 15, 26, 41 or 67. It doesn't matter. Hell, it doesn't matter whether they are female or male. I look. I admire and move on. There's nothing unhealthy about it. Or creepy about it (yes, that film scene may have been, but it was supposed to be). I don't know of one male who doesn't check out most everyone who walks by...

It's like when some little tween has way too short shorts on with 'Juicy' written across her . I look. And if that makes me a dirty old Spirit, then what does it make her parents that let her go out wearing clothes that are designed to draw one's attention to her young assets?

Thank you for clarifying. Of course I understand that people stare, however, I was taken back at the use of the word "ogling". It has a creepy connotation to it. I have great respect for you and find your posts witty and clever, so that comment threw me for a loop. Sorry if I offended thee. Stay warm!

 

[lazyboy97o]

I'm not really sure Congressman Markey is the guy who would really be able to hinder Disney. He has a reputation for trying to butt heads with the fixed amusement industry.

 

[ULPO46]

Please read this article if you have more concerns for My Magic + http://www.orlandosentinel.com/the-...collecting-bracelets-20130124,0,1971615.story
This just goes to show you that the billions spent may have gone to the wrong place. Americans will probably protest sure. But foreign tourist wont. They will just come in and enjoy the park and think its just the expierence. But common do you want to let everyone in Disney World know your name. I get it for the little ones thats cool but unless i have a reservation at one of the restaraunts, i don't want to hear my name at the park while being a client at their park.

 

[The Mom]

I'm going to flaunt my DVC membership here, so flame me all you want.
I grew up in MA, and my parents rented a vacation cabin on a lake in NH. They would never, ever think of getting a hotel room. We did all our own cooking and laundry, and went out to dinner only for special occasions, or because the food was that good. We grilled steaks, or hamburgers, and went on close by tourist spots. My mom would bake a casserole for dinner, and call us in from the lake to eat. Most of the groceries we used were stuffed in the back of our station wagon along with the sleeping bags we used outdoors.
I use our DVC membership in much the same way, except cocktails are involved.
We buy groceries, because I am a great cook, and refuse to spend money on sub par fare when I can whip up something fabulous in 20 minutes. I am sick of hearing the lazy ones proclaiming that they don't cook, or do laundry because they are on vacation, and don't have the guts to ask the other half to help out. That clues me in that they are vacationing beyond their means.
We come back from the parks exhausted sometimes, but I usually have an easy meal planned. And one that beats, or includes counter service. We throw in a load of laundry, because we pack only half as many clothes, and have dinner, and cocktails by whatever DVC pool we are at.
Are the Magic handcuffs going to tell Disney that? I doubt it. I think my style of vacationing is going to be totally off their radar. I can't be the only one who vacations like this. Not once in all our years as DVC members has any survey asked us exactly how we use our DVC membership, nor will the handcuffs.
The quality of WDW in general,or lack of, will drive us to other sites, much like my childhood vacations of taking the station wagon to other towns, mountain climbing, and a nearby Santa's Village. We'll rent a car and go to the other theme parks, NASA, and others. Our DVC was paid off years ago, besides the annual fee, we are coasting, and enjoying the ride. But a warning to TDO, our ride has many other Orlando/FLA options.

I wouldn't be surprised if you started getting coupons or something similar for reduced price meals in the parks - perhaps a BOGO? A portion of your money spent on food in the parks is better than none. That's what nexgen will tell them - they need to offer a carrot to get you to spend more money in the parks during your stay.

 

[ULPO46]

I'm going to flaunt my DVC membership here, so flame me all you want.
I grew up in MA, and my parents rented a vacation cabin on a lake in NH. They would never, ever think of getting a hotel room. We did all our own cooking and laundry, and went out to dinner only for special occasions, or because the food was that good. We grilled steaks, or hamburgers, and went on close by tourist spots. My mom would bake a casserole for dinner, and call us in from the lake to eat. Most of the groceries we used were stuffed in the back of our station wagon along with the sleeping bags we used outdoors.
I use our DVC membership in much the same way, except cocktails are involved.
We buy groceries, because I am a great cook, and refuse to spend money on sub par fare when I can whip up something fabulous in 20 minutes. I am sick of hearing the lazy ones proclaiming that they don't cook, or do laundry because they are on vacation, and don't have the guts to ask the other half to help out. That clues me in that they are vacationing beyond their means.
We come back from the parks exhausted sometimes, but I usually have an easy meal planned. And one that beats, or includes counter service. We throw in a load of laundry, because we pack only half as many clothes, and have dinner, and cocktails by whatever DVC pool we are at.
Are the Magic handcuffs going to tell Disney that? I doubt it. I think my style of vacationing is going to be totally off their radar. I can't be the only one who vacations like this. Not once in all our years as DVC members has any survey asked us exactly how we use our DVC membership, nor will the handcuffs.
The quality of WDW in general,or lack of, will drive us to other sites, much like my childhood vacations of taking the station wagon to other towns, mountain climbing, and a nearby Santa's Village. We'll rent a car and go to the other theme parks, NASA, and others. Our DVC was paid off years ago, besides the annual fee, we are coasting, and enjoying the ride. But a warning to TDO, our ride has many other Orlando/FLA options.

The dayt that disney does thatw will be a turning point for anyone who does this. I remeber my mom would always do the same. We'd find a publix got to the DVC and cook. Disney has no problem with that whats so ever. the day that they do will be the dayt hat anyone who ever did it takes their money elsewhere. Anyways Disney i don't know if they changed the policy unlike other parks allows you to bring outside food and drink. Just think of the $$$ you'd be saving there.

 

[Monty]

Please read this article if you have more concerns for My Magic + http://www.orlandosentinel.com/the-...collecting-bracelets-20130124,0,1971615.story
This just goes to show you that the billions spent may have gone to the wrong place. Americans will probably protest sure. But foreign tourist wont. They will just come in and enjoy the park and think its just the expierence. But common do you want to let everyone in Disney World know your name. I get it for the little ones thats cool but unless i have a reservation at one of the restaraunts, i don't want to hear my name at the park while being a client at their park.

Why? What possible difference could it make to your day to be greeted by name instead of being referred to by a generic "Sir" or "Madam" other than to make you feel a little more valued as a client? I already let everyone in Disney World know my name, I wear an old Guest Name Tag I bought a number of years ago. It adds a nice element of inclusion when a CM says "Hi Monty". Birthday buttons have had children's names plastered on them for years and I've never seen one other than mine that didn't [I get them to write my age there, I'm already wearing my name on the aforementioned tag]. Part of the Disney experience that I have always enjoyed is the socialization that happens between CMs and guests and even between guests. This will enhance that aspect for me and I see it as a good thing.

If the data collected is stored securely, used to study trends and enhance the experience for guests, I see absolutely no issue with the whole program.

 

[ULPO46]

Why? What possible difference could it make to your day to be greeted by name instead of being referred to by a generic "Sir" or "Madam" other than to make you feel a little more valued as a client? I already let everyone in Disney World know my name, I wear an old Guest Name Tag I bought a number of years ago. It adds a nice element of inclusion when a CM says "Hi Monty". Birthday buttons have had children's names plastered on them for years and I've never seen one other than mine that didn't [I get them to write my age there, I'm already wearing my name on the aforementioned tag]. Part of the Disney experience that I have always enjoyed is the socialization that happens between CMs and guests and even between guests. This will enhance that aspect for me and I see it as a good thing.

If the data collected is stored securely, used to study trends and enhance the experience for guests, I see absolutely no issue with the whole program.

Sure I only may put it on once in a blue moon for a birthday or if i have a family reunion, but do i want it or does anyone want it if they go there more than 3 times a month.

 

[flynnibus]

So - you just need to put enough panels like this in doorways, queues etc. and you can get a very good picture of how someone is moving around. You won't be able to track someone at any given point in time, but you can get enough points to get a pretty good picture of their whereabouts.

Yes, instead of actually seeing where you are at all times, the 'tracking' is more about 'knowing you are close to point and being able to record that'. It seems like 'whats the difference' but there is an important distinction in there. The granularity in which they will be able to see your movements will be based on how heavily they layer the place with readers and how they chose to store the information.

There is huge potential - that may never be realized simply due to practicalities. It's extremely difficult to say from the outside alone.

 

[ULPO46]

Yes, instead of actually seeing where you are at all times, the 'tracking' is more about 'knowing you are close to point and being able to record that'. It seems like 'whats the difference' but there is an important distinction in there. The granularity in which they will be able to see your movements will be based on how heavily they layer the place with readers and how they chose to store the information.

There is huge potential - that may never be realized simply due to practicalities. It's extremely difficult to say from the outside alone.

But the thing is not saying this because what you said i think is 90% true, but Disney has not told us how it works. Theyha ve a SKunks Works on how this system will be used and how it will be able to function. Remeber that school in Texas. The girl and her father were not able to win the caseb ecause the company was paying the school district to allow them to track their students evrey move the system works on radiof requenciess o as you pass point a and move to point b it knows and sort of pin points your location. ALthough i don't find it a problem, people can still follow your movements and thats about all. The thing that i dont get is that after spending so much money, why is there that opt out option? Why not tellth e media or the public?