Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Technology

Retailers Explore Radio-Emitting Threads To Combat Surging Theft (bloomberg.com) 140

Posted by msmash from the how-about-that dept.
Major retailers are considering embedding radio-emitting threads into clothing as a novel anti-theft measure amid soaring retail crime rates, according to Bloomberg, citing industry sources. The technology, developed by Spanish firm Myruns, uses conductive ink derived from cellulose to create threads five times thinner than human hair that can trigger security alarms.

Zara owner Inditex has discussed implementing the system, though the company says it has no plans for in-store testing. Retail theft caused an estimated $73 billion in lost sales in the U.S. in 2022, according to the National Retail Federation, while UK losses doubled to $4.2 billion in 2023. The crisis has prompted retailers to increase security personnel and surveillance systems. The threadlike technology could provide an alternative to traditional metal-based security tags, potentially offering biodegradable and recyclable anti-theft protection.

Retailers Explore Radio-Emitting Threads To Combat Surging Theft More | Reply

Retailers Explore Radio-Emitting Threads To Combat Surging Theft

Comments Filter:
  • Maybe those numbers are accurate, but there has been a lot of blame on shoplifting that was later recanted in the us. I think you can probably place a 20% discount on what ever number they give. And a certain percentage of the theft is via their own employees. I'm not saying retail theft isn't a thing, it obviously is and maybe its way up but with such bad examples of reporting on it from non neutral sources.

    This gives a better break down of what the facts appear to be, as imperfect as it is https://www.br

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by waspleg ( 316038 )

      Yea, but unfounded claims of theft help with their insurance fraud for shit no one wants or is too overpriced to consider.

    • Re:According to retailers... (Score:5, Informative)

      by TWX ( 665546 ) on Tuesday November 12, 2024 @11:37AM (#64939921)

      I expect that employee theft is a much bigger issue than the stores are willing to admit, both because it makes them look bad that their employees are dishonest, and because it affects their insurance rates if it turns out that those operating with company agency are behind it.

      Granted it was a very long time ago, but I'd tried to buy something expensive at Fry's Electronics back in the day, something expensive but large enough that it wasn't kept in that processors-and-memory cage, but was kept in backstock storage rather than out on the retail floor. They went to find it, the computer said they had a couple dozen, they had none. Apologetically, the clerk was willing to substitute another product that was same type from another manufacturer, slightly more expensive normally, for whatever the price of the one I was looking at was. Likewise, no stock despite the inventory showing they had something like four or five in stock.

      Later when I knew a few people that had formerly worked at Fry's Electronics, I learned that the culture of employee theft ran rampant in that place, particularly for things like home theater electronics where the individual items were simply too large to properly lock-up but weren't really tracked properly for things like serial numbers through the retail chain's receiving, cross-shipping, and local inventory control. In short they had no idea what serial numbers belonged to their inventory both when they received it from the distributor and when they sold it, so if someone managed to make off with a batch of VCRs or DVD players or home theater receivers, they had no way of knowing what was legitimately sold versus what should still be listed in-inventory. All they had was quantities.

      So their checking receipts thing at the door was a total farce and it's no wonder that in time they went under.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by waspleg ( 316038 )

        Fry's would illegally try to stop people from leaving to "check their receipts" and search their shopping bags. The one near me closed a long time ago. Good riddance.

        • waspleg writes:

          Fry's would illegally try to stop people from leaving to "check their receipts" and search their shopping bags.

          I hate being stopped to show a receipt too, however, it's not illegal to demand to see it or face being trespassed from the chain.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by kobaz ( 107760 )

            Depends on the state. This 'stop and show' practice is illegal in NY State now.

            They can ask, but the transaction of changing ownership happens at the register. They would have to prove otherwise, and they can't stop you from leaving.

            • It's illegal in California too. I suppose they could try to stop you from leaving, but if you've done nothing wrong, you can turn around and sue them for unlawful detainment.
          • I would feel bad but I would always tell the person who requested to see my receipt "no thank you" and keep walking right past them.

            Where i lived they had to have proof of theft to attempt to stop. Since I knew I did not steal anything I just continued walking out calmly.

            One time I was aggressively pursued from one of those now defunct Staples like chains. I demanded the manager, made a big ruckus about the harassment, then requested and received a $100 gift card for the ordeal. Spending that free $
        • My Frys local store, did not fking care. Literally could have stolen anything I could fit into a bag. Their job was to mark receipts. So they marked receipts. I think that helped to ensure that you at least bought something. even if you had a bunch of stuff stashed in pockets and transferred to bags. Costco is doing the same thing now. Most people like me do not have bags. Sometimes they eyeball my cart and just mark reciept. Maybe if I bought something really dumb and expensive from them like an apple dev

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by skam240 ( 789197 )

        If "a very long time ago" means the 90's then things have changed a lot since then. Modern major retailers have pretty good systems for tracking all their product stock nowadays. Couple that with cheap modern security cameras that are much easier to make faces out on today than in the 90's.

      • So their checking receipts thing at the door was a total farce and it's no wonder that in time they went under.

        Put a big screen TV in your cart, have your buddy working the register scan a pack of gum, pay for it, and then walk out with the TV and a receipt.

        That's why they check receipts at the door.

        I find it personally offensive to be accused of being a thief when the real problem is their own staff. So I avoid stores where they do this. Another reason I buy most things on Amazon nowadays.

      • So their checking receipts thing at the door was a total farce and it's no wonder that in time they went under.

        Just like at Costco, checking receipts at the door is a way to catch people who are collaborating on theft with employees. Without employee collaboration there is ZERO value in doing that because the customers pass through a register on their way to the door. Customers who go towards the door with products are easy to spot with a camera, you don't even need a human standing there. Consequently they are there to pick up on scams like items not scanned by the checker, multiple items where only some of them ar

      • I expect that employee theft is a much bigger issue

        Yet another reason to replace human employees with robots.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      Some retailers who were blaming theft upticks on lack of cops were later exposed reducing on-floor-help staff, and reduced floor staffing statistically does increase theft.

      • My anecdote would agree.
        I have personally witnessed the fucking huge new wave of people walking into the store, taking shit, and literally walking right now.
        Just about everything of value in the stores are in locked cabinets now.

        This does coincide with a huge reduction in staff.
        Where previously there would have been 8 to 10 people in the store at the hours where this is most common, there's now 1-2 guys and a security guard... Who is there to make sure the thieves don't get violent- not to stop them.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by BranMan ( 29917 )

          Not unexpected since shoplifting is effectively legal. It is not technically legal, but when police, prosecutors - the legal system in general - will not prosecute and jail thieves, it is effectively not illegal anymore.

          People walk in, take stuff, and walk right out. No one stops them, no one confronts them, no one arrests them, no one jails them. No consequences at all. So why *not* do it?

    • If it was really overblown, my local stores would not have started looking like Fort Knox and treating every customer like a potential felon.

      Until actual action is taken against thieves, we will just keep getting an escalating situation until someone gives; that could be the retailer or the customer.
    • Your linked article gets into the meat of it even has it kind of deflects the point. Theft is local, and it's risen measurably in some of the biggest cities even if overall numbers are down. Those biggest cities have the most eyeballs on local news, and they set the mood for much of the nation on a social level (that is what people talk about in person and on social media) and through what news trickles upwards to national news.

    • These statistics are rife with manipulation. If the police don't do anything about shoplifting reports, you stop filing reports. With fewer reports, shoplifting must be going down, right?

      My personal metric is the availability of CVS and Walgreens tagged health and beauty items, laundry detergent, and baby formula available at flea markets for a pittance. By that metric, retail theft is a booming market.

      I'm hesitant to include food generally in this observation, as there is a fairly strong market for people

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by j-beda ( 85386 )

      I was just about to post the same link to https://www.brennancenter.org/... [brennancenter.org]

    • I can't speak for everywhere, but here, specifically, it's *way* *way* up.
      People literally walk into the stores, grab shit, and leave. You will witness yourself every time you shop after 8pm or so.
      It's fucking weird.

      The folks doing it very often appear homeless. I can't say for certain of course- but they do appear to be so.
  • Kind of feels like we're deploying Skynet to solve a problem that could be more cheaply, easily, and effectively addressed by just paying a twentysomething cashier or an eightysomething "greeter" minimum wage.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by HBI ( 10338492 )

      Additional labor costs would cut into profit. Moaning about it in the media is cheaper.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by TWX ( 665546 )

      It probably depends on the local laws regarding what retailers are allowed to do when they suspect or accuse someone of theft, along with company policy based on fallout from prior incidents. Some stores won't even confront those they would accuse of theft until they look to have exceeded some dollar amount. Also behaviors among customers in the past that would have looked suspicious, like putting hands into pockets and pocketing small handheld items, have become entirely normal in an era of ubiquitous ce

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by spitzak ( 4019 )

        I don't think it will be deactivated, instead the store will record the serial number of each sold item. The alarm will go off if the serial number of the RFID device matches the stores unsold inventory.

    • It actually doesn't even matter because the stores aren't doing any enforcement. All this does perhaps is better help them track shrinkage

  • Why go in store (Score:2, Interesting)

    by zawarski ( 1381571 )
    Just limit to curbside pick-up. Problem solved.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by sconeu ( 64226 )

      Because some of us like to - oh, I don't know - actually try stuff on and see if it fits, or we like how it looks on us, or [whatever] ... BEFORE we buy it?

      • Because some of us like to - oh, I don't know - actually try stuff on and see if it fits, or we like how it looks on us, or [whatever] ... BEFORE we buy it?

        Are you insane? Why would anyone do that? It's far slower and more costly to look for something online, order it, wait for it to arrive (and hoping it doesn't get stolen in the meantime), THEN try something on. And when it doesn't fit or look right, spend more time and resources shipping the product back where it could very well get thrown into a l
        • Wtf are you going on about? You bring up the grocery store app, pick what you want, they give you a pickup time, you arrive and they put them in your car. How is that complicated?

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by sconeu ( 64226 )

            You do realize, that TFA is about CLOTHING???? Thus the discussion of rfid THREADS?

            And as for grocery stores, there are some items that I do not trust the store workers to purchase for me, such as meat and vegetables.

      • Havenâ(TM)t dove that since I was 12z
      • Guess I have better things to do than prance around store seeing if my ass looks fat in these jeans.

      • This is slashdot, where nerds hang out. Not too many nerds are worried about how they look!

        • This is slashdot, where nerds hang out. Not too many nerds are worried about how they look!

          Speak for yourself. I'm holding my eyeglasses together with my very nicest-looking electrical tape. I'd tell you what it matches in my outfit, but I'm colorblind.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mjwx ( 966435 )

      Just limit to curbside pick-up. Problem solved.

      Or... I dunno... Maybe get to the root cause of why people think it's OK or feel the need to steal.

      If the majority of people think it's OK to steal, that usually comes down to one or both of two causes.

      1. Endemic poverty, typically combined with high income inequality. So people are stealing because they cant afford it.

      2. A society that does not value the rule of law. This usually comes from the top down. When those in or with power are never held to account, why should anyone else?

      Basically poor people liv

      • 1. Endemic poverty, typically combined with high income inequality.

        Crime has declined since the 1990s, while income inequality has increased.

  • remove the tag (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bugs2squash ( 1132591 ) on Tuesday November 12, 2024 @11:41AM (#64939935)
    so how does the tag get invalidated so as not to trigger alarms when you re-visit the store wearing the garment. Or is there a serial number embedded so that they can ID and track the wearer ?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by msauve ( 701917 )
      Perhaps this conductive ink washes out in the first wash. IDK, the article is paywalled, so I couldn't see any more detail than what was in the summary.

    • Why would you not wish to be tracked everywhere you go, citizen? What are you trying to hide?

      I feel like the permanently sealed rubber rooms for each individual are coming closer with each passing day. Do everything virtually. It's safer, and that way you won't ever have to worry about someone doing something crazy to you. Can you imagine what used to happen? When people interacted directly with one another? The fear? The paranoia about whether today was the day you didn't make it home? This is much better.

    • Or, if you buy the item, and wear it when you go back to the store. Is that going to trigger an alarm, too? How do you verify that you previously bought the garment? Are we supposed to carry receipts ad infinitum?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mjwx ( 966435 )

      so how does the tag get invalidated so as not to trigger alarms when you re-visit the store wearing the garment. Or is there a serial number embedded so that they can ID and track the wearer ?

      RFID tag gets disabled at the back end when it's scanned at the till. the tag is still active (well, passive, these tags are not active, usually they're transceivers) but the back end knows that the item has been paid for. Otherwise we'd be able to find a way to disable them without the store knowing.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      It's not clear how it works. If it's a serial number they could just have a list of all the ones in their shop. Some shops already use RFID for stock management. The more advanced ones can scan multiple tags in a bundle, so e.g. at the checkout they just scan the whole shopping bag in one hit to get a list of all the garments in it.

      As you point out, if they don't disable or remove the tag then it's a wearable tracker.

      It could just be passive as well, tuned to a particular frequency by the length of the thre

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by spitzak ( 4019 )

      They will be recording the numbers of each sold item. Yes this likely means they will be able to tell that you are wearing something you bought previously from the store. More insidiously they probably can get your name from this. They may even be able to tell if you are wearing products bought at different stores.

      • It has interesting implications for having bought garments at thrift stores, tag sales, and the like too. "You didn't buy this from us!" No, I bought it from an estate sale for $2.
  • It's one thing to weave it permanently into clothes but the second part of an anti-theft device is the ability to disable or remove it so that when a customer who has paid leaves the store the alarm does not sound. I suspect removal is not an option for this device so how can it be disabled in a way that it is not easy for thieves to replicate?

  • What could possibly go wrong? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Miles_O'Toole ( 5152533 ) on Tuesday November 12, 2024 @11:48AM (#64939951)

    The scope for either practical jokers or actual criminals to misuse "trackable clothing" absolutely boggles the mind.

  • Maybe start policing and enforcing theft laws? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Fly Swatter ( 30498 ) on Tuesday November 12, 2024 @11:48AM (#64939953) Homepage
    The problem right now is that shoplifting is one sided: the thief takes it and no one cares. Even if they are seen doing such the retailer really has no power to fight back.

    Instead of increasing prices and remaking your store like a prison, hire some damn security with permits to physically detain and arrest people.

    Stop treating shoplifting like IT cybersecurity. This is real fucking life, punch back!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dirk ( 87083 )

      So what happens when they get it wrong in your scenario? Say a store thinks someone is shoplifting (probably based on their race) and physically detain them. Then it turns out the person did not steal anything? If the person just supposed to accept that the store handcuffed them and forced them to sit in the store until the police showed up and walk away OK with that? Are you OK with the store basically being able to kidnap people physically whenever they want?

      • Pfft. Easy workaround. We don't have to racially profile anyone if we don't allow people "of that sort" in the store in the first place. Right, Fly Swatter?
        • WTF is wrong with you people (and no I don't mean 'you people' you fucking racists), are we just supposed to sit back and let civilization rot to hell?

          I did not mention race, you did. As for the other poster yes mistakes will happen. I personally like to shop and am always 'handling the merchandise' to look at it and decide if I want to buy it. Here's the thing: I would rather be mistaken for a thief and released for lack of proof instead of the actual criminals increasingly driving up the price I have t

          • Here's the thing: I would rather be mistaken for a thief and released for lack of proof

            Spoken like a white guy.

            Here's the thing: people of color go through this shit all the time, and it almost never ends up with just "released for lack of proof." Once in the hands of the cops - if they're not shot at the outset - they're jailed, abused, put through the legal system, given a record, can't get a job, end up poor and desperate. Even if there's a "lack of proof." It's never a harmless interaction with the authorities if you're not white. You need to step out of your cozy bubble.

            I don't

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by mjwx ( 966435 )

      The problem right now is that shoplifting is one sided: the thief takes it and no one cares. Even if they are seen doing such the retailer really has no power to fight back.

      Instead of increasing prices and remaking your store like a prison, hire some damn security with permits to physically detain and arrest people.

      Stop treating shoplifting like IT cybersecurity. This is real fucking life, punch back!

      Turning Walmart into a police state run by unchecked thugs with minimal training and few limits... yeah, that sounds like a fantastic idea.

      How about getting to the root cause of it, that's cheaper in the long run but it means admitting there are a few broken things in your society.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      You can't solve problems like that with force. It just escalates. At a certain point the only people willing to risk being security for your store are as desperate at the thieves.

      The real problem is that fixing the root cause - poverty - is impossible in certain countries for ideological reasons.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by spitzak ( 4019 )

      The problem is such security is much more expensive than the inventory loss. Almost all of the expense is liability and health coverage. This is also why they tell their employees to not stop shoplifters: if the employee gets injured doing this the store is on the hook for all the medical coverage.

    • They don't pay people enough to punch back. They certainly don't want the liabilities and potential criminal charges that would result if they did.

  • surging theft from corporate greed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by sdinfoserv ( 1793266 ) on Tuesday November 12, 2024 @11:51AM (#64939961)
    Theft is surging because people can't afford anything anymore. Despite "inflation", wage increases (cough, cough), and crying about theft, the worlds largest in store retailer Walmart experienced surged profits to $157.983B for 2024, a 7+% increase over 2023. Stock has surged 54% just in 2024. https://www.macrotrends.net/st... [macrotrends.net]
    The 3 surviving Walton spawn have a combined wealth in excess of $304B. https://www.businessinsider.co... [businessinsider.com]
    The source is corporate oligarchs and their greed. Pay livable wages, charge reasonable prices, and theft will magically disappear.

    • Profit (Score:2)

      by JBMcB ( 73720 )

      Why are you using gross profit as a metric for inflation? It tells you nothing.

      • It isn't that's the point.

        • Are you trying to argue that Wal-Mart is making more profit because of inflated prices? If so, you use net profit or EBITDA, not gross profit.

          Kroger made $33 billion in gross profit last year, an increase of 4%, but lost $3 billion in net profit during the same time span.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by cayenne8 ( 626475 )

      Theft is surging because people can't afford anything anymore.

      I'd go along with this theory a BIT more, IF....these thieves were only stealing necessities of life, like food, etc....

      But no, I see them stealing power tools, expensive purses, etc....this is all being stolen for resale for profit for the criminal, often as part of a criminal gang organization.

      Hell, the groups rushing stores together in gangs and just grabbing and going...breaking jewelry cases, etc....

      No, this is due to lax laws and non-pr

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by HiThere ( 15173 )

        It's a part of what's going on. Another part is that people are looking at the places they shop as an enemy that deserved being pillaged. Another part is people are socially disconnected from the power structure, so feel no honor towards it. Another is...

        There isn't a simple answer. And the stories we tell about "the good old days" are "lies to children". They were never all that good. The first time I saw a store where the merchandise was behind a barrier, and the guy at the register was behind plexi

      • You know you can sell all those things, right? Jewelry, power tools, expensive purses. And if your wholesale cost is $0, it's all profit. I'm sure some of the purses, at least, are kept, but I'm betting more of the stuff is sold on the street. If I'm a tradesman, I don't care where my tools come from, if I can save a couple of bucks.

      • this isn't due to the poor not being able to afford to live.

        That's happening too, but you probably just don't live in an area where you're likely to witness it. I've seen people lifting food from the local Aldi quite a few times.

        I thought it was bad where I live, but then I stopped to charge my car at a Wawa in Jacksonville where they kept the damn empty soda cups behind the counter, because people were stealing drinks from the Coke Freestyle machines.

      • I'd go along with this theory a BIT more, IF....these thieves were only stealing necessities of life, like food, etc....

        Yeah, nobody ever had to pay rent, nobody ever sold items to buy food, etc. What a genius you are.

    • Prior to the insane policies of allowing theft of anything under $900, most people that shoplifted had the money to pay for their stolen goods in their pocket. Paying higher wages, charging reasonable prices, etc. won't stop this.

  • Right, because preventing theft is all this would ever be used for.... Are we really going to have to go back to making our own textiles again to prevent companies and governments from tracking us at all times? Is the fact billions of us freely carry around GPS devices in our pocket most of the time not enough for you?

  • Go look it up:
    The Bible expressly forbids garments made of more than one source material.

    • The Bible states lying is a sin yet Christians just elected an adulterer who is an endemic liar.

      • Fortunately, the left has no such scruples as you do it all the time.

    • The bible is primarily used as a blunt force melee weapon against non-believers and marginalized sexual minorities. Few so-called Christians actually bother to read it.

    • Show me a Christian and odds are I'll be able to show you someone who knows fuck-all about the bible and doesn't want to know. They're still eating pork and shellfish, too.

  • I'm of the naive opinion that theft detection technology does precisely fuck all if you don't apprehend and prosecute the thieves. Is that incorrect?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by HiThere ( 15173 )

      Slightly. If the social context severely frowns upon theft, and it youths are humiliated when they are caught and it the chance of being caught is high, and if their friends don't do it, and...then theft will essentially disappear with no further punishment needed.

      Well, we don't live in that environment, and there's no obvious way to get there from here. So... what is needed is that detection and punishment is RAPID. (Not severe, except that it shouldn't be profitable, but rapid. Severity is not really

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by PPH ( 736903 )

        So... what is needed is that detection and punishment is RAPID.

        Not really. They nabbed a homeless guy for shoplifting down the street from a market in a little strip mall. It was a typical "catch and release" situation. But before the punishment phase could proceed, the strip mall burned down.

        You want to put pressure on these people? Fine. But you are on your own. The city can't/won't help. And your business had better be fireproof.

  • Because that would need to be true if the title is accurate. Probably just a converter or reflector in actual reality or maybe even only an RFID type thing. The story is behind a registration-wall, so I am not going to read it.

  • I am not arguing that theft isn't a problem, but I am confused that if Theft is such an issue, why are profits even higher than what theft is and is it possible that lowering the price of goods could in some weird way, I don't know, deter theft as people might be able to actually afford what's being sold.

    I know, it's a wild concept. Lowering prices to goods so that they are more affordable so people can buy them instead of trying to steal them.

    I also know that these people are creating a black market for t

  • Couldn't read the entire article (paywalled), but thread alone doesn't emit RF in the absence of power and circuitry. Presumably the threads would be woven into an RFID (or similar) circuit that would re-radiate a particular code in the presence of an RF field?
  • The first thing is that you must prosecute people for stealing. Identifying thieves can do nothing if there is no punishment. Stealing must become dishonorable and socially unacceptable again. First step is to get rid of welfare entitlements. When people have to work for what they have they understand the pain theft causes.
  • "Retail theft caused an estimated $73 billion in lost sales in the U.S. in 2022, according to the National Retail Federation, while UK losses doubled to $4.2 billion in 2023."

    So, the US, with about five times the population of the UK, has SEVENTEEN TIMES as much retail theft, or more than three times as much per capita. We're Number One!

  • Across the pond (Score:3)

    by dlarge6510 ( 10394451 ) on Wednesday November 13, 2024 @03:19AM (#64941945)

    Not worth installing these in the UK.

    Why?

    Well, shoplifting was de-criminalised as long as you dont take more than £200 worth of stuff at any one time you can just walk away. Security cant touch you, the shop staff cant touch you and the police are not botherded with petty crime.

Slashdot Top Deals

What we anticipate seldom occurs; what we least expect generally happens. -- Bengamin Disraeli

Close