I realize that helicopters have a lot of flight freedom, but it is
still shocking to see one flying directly towards oneself like this.

Why? It is always flying towards somebody.

But not at eye level, which it almost was just a few seconds before
that photo was taken. It was climbing rapidly when I took that shot.

Anyway, if that helicopter is
only 50-70 feet up it is an RC model. I know that you insist that you
were
there and know better, but what did you do, use a tape measure? How
the heck
do you know that it was only 50-70 feet up?

I know it wasn't 1000 feet up, as someone suggested. I might accept 200
feet feet, as an outside stretch. 100 feet does not look like an
unreasonable estimate. But, my impression at the time of the photo was
that it was about 50 feet above the ground when I took the picture.
But, then, as I say, it was in a rapid climb, from just high enough to
clear the parked cars, to high enough to clear the roof of the
building. Keep in mind, too, that I was running towards the windows of
the store, as I tried to get a shot before the helicopter got out of my
field of view. It takes my camera 5 seconds to boot up, then another
few seconds to lock onto a target and snap the photo. I jogged from the
cash registers in the front of the store over to the windows at the
front while my camera was booting. I did not have time to get a second
photo, which I would have done if I could have.

The helicopter didn't start climbing very fast until I had almost
reached the windows, and I was trying to decide whether to get the shot
from inside the store, or risk another few seconds going outside the
store. When I saw the helicopter begin to rise quickly, I quickly took
the shot from inside the store. Within another 3 seconds, it was over
the top of the building.

This one, measuring by the height of the fuselage, is at least 150
feet up.

I'm pretty certain it was under 150 feet, and over 50 feet.

There are some third hand accounts of Wal-Mart having a policy of not
allowing photography in their stores.

Photography, I understand banning. But, they aren't just banning
photography. They are banning cameras completely.

Apparently the chain is concerned about competitors who have been
sending corporate spies into the stores to study inventory control.

Several years ago, I worked for a marketing company. I carried around a
portable computer, called a Telxon, which I used to scan the bar codes
of products I was paid to monitor. I had to perform my job in several
different stores, including Albertsons, Krogers, Winn-Dixie, Target,
K-Mart and various other stores, in addition to Wal-Mart. Sometimes,
when I would finish, I would go grocery shopping. Several times, a
Wal-Mart manager (obviously on the verge of hysteria) would demand to
know what I was doing as I pushed my grocery cart with my Telxon in the
cart. After I explained that I was buying groceries for myself, the
manager would give me a lecture about not scanning any of their prices,
and then go away.

Just as a guess, analysis of a series of pictures
could tip off competitors into Wal-Mart's ordering and restocking
practices, which would be very valuable information.

Oh, I can tell you what Wal-Mart's restocking practice is. There
practice is to fill up all the aisles with pallets of goods, while
removing the products that I had become accustomed to buying. Even
though there are pallets of goods in all the aisles every night, they
are always out of stock of something that I want.

OK, I hope I didn't give away too many company secrets with that.

Given enough study, one could re-engineer Wal-Mart's whole
computerized inventory control system.
Considering that Wal-Mart spent a fortune on this system, I doubt
that they
would be interested in just handing it over to a competitor for free.

If I wanted to spy on Wal-Mart, I would find a better way of doing it
than by hanging an Olympus around my neck.

Right now, I could buy cameras that fit inside the frames of my glasses
and the buttons of my shirts. If I wanted to do so, I could record
every inch and every product code in their entire store, and they would
never even see it. Indeed, the true value of security would not be in
keeping someone out; it would be in making it too expensive for them to
use the information they obtained.

Places like MIT are prototyping personal video systems that are
intended to record all the events of a person's day, for their entire
life. I have seen several of these prototype systems. I expect they
will become fairly common within 15 years, much like cell phones are
now. Wal-Mart is not going to stop progress.