[HN Gopher] Shops return to rural Sweden but are now staff-free
___________________________________________________________________
Shops return to rural Sweden but are now staff-free
Author : BlackVanilla
Score : 230 points
Date : 2021-03-09 12:35 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.bbc.co.uk)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.bbc.co.uk)
| rglover wrote:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48rkq90vOBY
| ed25519FUUU wrote:
| This change is being sped up by the fact employees don't actually
| deter anything anymore. If there is shoplifting they just call
| the police. In fact, intervening will usually get _them_ in
| trouble.
| cromulent wrote:
| At least until a few years ago there were some unlocked open
| stores in rural Finland, where you just took what you needed and
| left the cash. The owner just turned up once a day or so to
| restock and take the money.
|
| They may all be gone now, it doesn't take much to destroy that
| level of local trust.
| Ericson2314 wrote:
| - Retail jobs suck, so this is good.
|
| - warehouses and public dispensaries are content-address-based
| networking for the physical world.
|
| - I don't really care about purchases being deanonymized because
| money itself a public good.
|
| - I do care about the private sector having the data, because
| they will surely do terrible things with it.
|
| Back to the networking analogy, the post is classic local-
| address-based networking for the physical realm. Just as we have
| a state-run post service utility, we should have a state-run
| warehouse-and-store utility.
|
| Even all you free market types: the point is of the free market
| is that the transacting _agents_ are independent, not that the
| market itself is. Running the marketplace and goods distribution
| utility as a public good is perfect fine "market socialism".
|
| The only thing to be mindful of is that there is a standard and
| fair procedure for new sellers to have their goods stocked and
| distributed to bootstrap the demand.
| SamuelAdams wrote:
| I used to work at a major multi-billion dollar retailer. One of
| the biggest complaints from customers was waiting at the check
| out line, especially for small, quick orders.
|
| This is the future of grocery stores, like it or not. Employees
| are expensive and make mistakes, whereas machines are cheap,
| don't take breaks, and work pretty reliably once you set them up
| correctly.
| leetcrew wrote:
| machines may not make mistakes, but the people who program them
| do. I just bought a guitar for $50 under the going rate because
| the in store pricetag was lower than the company's own online
| price. the system had lost track of the guitar entirely, so
| they had no way of knowing they needed to update the local
| price. by policy, they had to pricematch themselves. the
| associate told me this happens all the time.
| tzs wrote:
| I'm enjoying the speed of checkout at Walmart with Walmart+.
| With a little bit of care, checkout takes almost no time. The
| little bit of care is going at a time when it is not so crowded
| that there is a line to get to a self-checkout station.
|
| The way it works is that you scan the bar codes with the
| Walmart app on your smartphone as you add items to your
| shopping cart. The scan function is very fast. If you are
| adding more than one of an item, you can either scan them
| separately or scan once and then set the quantity.
|
| To checkout, you just go to an open self-checkout station, hit
| the "check out" button in the app, scan the QR code that is on
| the home screen of the terminal, tell it how many bags you are
| using (default is zero), hit "pay", and about two seconds later
| a confirmation appears in the app, and you can leave.
|
| The confirmation can be shown to the person at the exit to show
| that you have paid, although usually they don't ask.
|
| If you are buying anything sold be weight, it tells you when
| you add it to your cart that you'll have to weigh it at
| checkout. At checkout, it prompts you to put each such item on
| the scale, weighs it, and adds it in.
|
| It is literally 10-15 seconds from the time I enter the self-
| checkout area to the time I'm pushing my cart toward the exit.
| (I don't bag in-store. I have my reusable bags and some boxes
| in my car trunk, and do my bagging and/or boxing at my car).
|
| This has been great for pandemic shopping. It is fairly easy to
| avoid spending more than a few passing seconds around any given
| other shopper while going around gathering items, but when
| scanning and bagging a full cart of groceries at self-checkout,
| you might be around the same other shoppers for several
| minutes, some within 2 meters.
| the-dude wrote:
| My favorite supermarket has regular and 'quick' checkouts. I
| enjoy the interaction with the employees.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| I love the quick self service checkouts and will line up for
| them even when a regular staffed checkout is free. I'm just
| the opposite and instead dislike interaction I guess.
| kqr wrote:
| One implicit benefit of the self-service checkouts is that
| there's often one line for multiple machines. Any student
| of queuing theory will know how much this reduces waiting
| time compared to the one queue per cashier that's otherwise
| common.
| sethammons wrote:
| This one gets me every time. I've only ever seen a couple
| super markets or stores implement this for human-operated
| check out stations. Ross has this, and Best Buy used to
| during the holidays.
| kqr wrote:
| Ironically, some smaller stores near me have implemented
| this just the past few months. The covid-19 rules that
| stipulate only a few people in the stores have created a
| single queue outside the store, for all cashiers!
|
| I would honestly be fine with making that permanent. It's
| so much easier to pick the things I want with fewer
| people between me and the shelves. All in all a much more
| efficient shopping experience.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| Trader Joe's does it also, at least in LA.
| reallydontask wrote:
| I've seen this in NYC too
| clairity wrote:
| that's odd, none of the trader joes's i usually go to in
| LA regularly have a single line. i've seen it
| irregularly, and seemingly temporarily (when especially
| busy perhaps).
| renewiltord wrote:
| Can't stand Ross in downtown SF for this reason. You get
| placed in the same queue as the high-hagglers who have
| nineteen dozen coupons and constantly argue with the
| checkout agents. They then clog up all available slots.
|
| At least at Safeway I can spot the kind of person who
| looks like they value their time and it'll usually go
| faster.
|
| I'll literally never shop at Ross again because it takes
| forever to exit their damned queue.
|
| The model works better at Trader Joe's in SF where it's
| mostly people who value their time. You can then be
| confident all the counters won't be used by slow people.
| monksy wrote:
| Speaking about friction on leaving. That's one of the big
| reasons I don't go to the Walmart near me anymore. They
| added aggressive receipt checkers.
| bhupy wrote:
| That's a good point. Trader Joe's appears to use this
| approach even for their human cashiers.
| aivisol wrote:
| Whenever I use self service checkout, it always takes much
| longer time for me to get through. I guess I am not so good
| at quickly juggling and locating bar codes at each item as
| the staff working at checkout are. So I leave it to
| professionals.
| t_von_doom wrote:
| Here in the UK some stores offer a handheld wireless
| scanner at the entrance to the store (and some chains
| offer an app so you can use your phone too)
|
| You then scan items as you pick them off the shelf - if
| you're really prepared you put the item directly into a
| bag you brought with you.
|
| Payment is then a case of walking up to the till - human
| or machine - and scanning one final barcode. Your order
| is presented to you for a final review then you tap your
| card and leave.
|
| Arriving at the till and paying instantly means my entire
| queuing experience is over within 5-10 seconds
|
| (Unless you get subjected to an infrequent random poll of
| your items but these are worth the occasional hassle)
|
| Hopefully you get something similar implemented!
| hrydgard wrote:
| This does exist in many bigger stores in Sweden too, and
| it's bliss.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| QFC tried this in the Seattle area. I actually never
| tried because it feels more cumbersome than just scanning
| everything at once.
|
| Also, scales to price veggies and fruits are at checkouts
| in the states. If they had them in the veggie area, like
| in much of Europe, things might be really different.
| EE84M3i wrote:
| Do the scales potentially have to be there by weights and
| measures laws?
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| No idea. In Europe you put weigh them in the veggie
| section, type the code in, put the sticker on your bag.
| In China, the same thing happens, except there is an
| attendant to do it for you.
|
| The USA, this is always done at checkout. If it was a law
| making that happen, it would have to be at the state
| level.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| I'm slower also, but I still think it's worth doing
| myself to avoid interaction.
| delecti wrote:
| In addition to avoiding interaction, I also prefer not
| standing there awkwardly while people work for me. I
| can't help the checkout clerk scan my groceries faster,
| and (if there is one in that lane) I'd just get in the
| way of the baggers, so I just have to stand there letting
| them serve me. I don't like that feeling of
| power/superiority/(not quite sure how to phrase it). It's
| the same reason I don't like mani pedis.
| adamnew123456 wrote:
| Agreed. I find it easier to interact with people in
| service situations if they're responsible for the whole
| experience. The point of going to a restaurant or a
| barbershop or getting take-out is that you're leaving the
| whole process in someone else's hands.
|
| A checkout clerk just feels like a weird adjunct to the
| whole process. I walked to the store, pushed the cart
| around and grabbed all my items, yet somehow someone else
| has to do the quickest and easiest part for me?
| JustSomeNobody wrote:
| Alternative viewpoint:
|
| They'd really rather you not get in their way, anyway. It
| isn't awkward for them until you try to help. They enjoy
| the feeling of power/superiority they have over you.
| That's why they smile while you stand there naval gazing.
| norenh wrote:
| Resident in Sweden here and heavy user of the self-
| checkout. My experience is that self-checkout is slightly
| slower than the serviced one. For a serviced checkout I
| try to put all bar-codes towards the cashiers scanner (it
| is a nice thing to do, the cashiers do not like juggling
| either) when putting stuff on the belt and I will need to
| unpack from my basket, pay and pack it to my bag. The
| same is operations needs to be done for the self-checkout
| but even the best setups needs some managing of the
| machine that the cashier would have parallelized in a
| serviced one. Usually it is slightly more fiddly to do
| packaging and scanning on a self-checkout system than on
| a serviced larger belt.
|
| However, considering that there are usually many more
| self-checkout terminals available with much less queue it
| means that the total time spent is less than on a service
| one. My local store, open until 23, usually closes down
| the self-checkout terminals the last hour since there are
| too few people to make it worthwhile and you rarely have
| a queue to the serviced station.
|
| So I totally agree that the serf service checkout is
| slower for that actual station but considering that the
| store can cram in much more of those in the same space
| and they need much less personnel to manage it saves
| everyone time and money to use them, unless there is no
| queue to the serviced checkout (and personnel is manning
| it at the moment).
| clairity wrote:
| that's my experience too: because i am serializing
| unloading, scanning, paying, bagging, and reloading, the
| checkout process itself is longer, but when buying only a
| few items and including line wait times, total time is
| usually shorter.
| anticensor wrote:
| > serf service
|
| Typo or deliberate?
| scatters wrote:
| Do the employees enjoy the interaction with you, I wonder?
| watwut wrote:
| Pretty often, they do enjoy people who act like the whole
| thing was pleasant. If you force them into long chat they
| will dislike it, but if you smile, are nice to them, thank
| and say one socially appropriate thing, they tend to like
| it.
| the-dude wrote:
| If they are not, they are pretty good at faking it.
|
| And some are greeting me outside of the store. They have no
| obligation to do so.
| dominotw wrote:
| I enjoyed interacting with customers when i worked as a
| cashier. But i was also a young person with lots of energy.
|
| they seem (or pretend) in: costco, whole foods, trader joes
|
| not so much in: walmart, target
| da_big_ghey wrote:
| Yes, HEB is probably the best at this too. Maybe along
| with Costco.
| twobitshifter wrote:
| I was recently at a CVS and the cashier shouted out that
| she'd help us as we walked towards the self checkout. She
| was very friendly and wanted to talk about everything from
| the upcoming time change to the vaccine. Some people just
| crave interaction and with the current pandemic they may be
| too isolated.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > I enjoy the interaction with the employees.
|
| If you want to pay for someone to be social with you why not
| do that separately to shopping? Seems funny to try to mix the
| two.
| devoutsalsa wrote:
| Efficiency. Chat and shop. It's a twofer. And if you like
| interaction but not having to get to close, it's great.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| But it's not efficient, is it? These people could be
| doing something more productive with their time than
| staffing a checkout in order to make small talk.
| the-dude wrote:
| I have heard from employees at supermarkets that
| _shrinkage_ with self checkout is elevated to the point
| it does not really matter.
| Ygg2 wrote:
| You mean theft? Isn't shrinkage just term for employee
| theft?
| the-dude wrote:
| I do mean theft. I am not a native speaker and thought
| _shrinkage_ applied to both.
| winthrowe wrote:
| My understanding is shrinkage typically refers to the sum
| total of all product received but unsellable, whether
| from theft, spoilage, or or breakage.
| null0ranje wrote:
| They are. It's called building goodwill.
| falcolas wrote:
| More efficient for the company, perhaps (though self
| checkouts are typically still manned, though at a reduced
| rate). But much less efficient for the customers.
|
| Who do you optimize for? IMO, ideally not the company.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > But much less efficient for the customers.
|
| I don't know what your experience is, but I always find
| self-checkout massively more efficient for me and I'd
| always prefer it and would choose shops that offer it
| over those that don't.
|
| I can just breeze through with my AirPods still in
| listening to my podcast, not having to wait for anyone
| else or have anyone else wait for me, not having to say
| anything, and just _get on with the rest of my day_ and
| what I really want to spend my time doing.
| falcolas wrote:
| Is it really more efficient (faster, lower effort, etc),
| or are you just busy (as opposed to idle)?
| the-dude wrote:
| Actually at my favorite supermarket _these people_ are
| not only staffing checkouts, they are running the store :
| there are no managers to be seen.
|
| I enjoy seeing this group of young people given such a
| broad responsibility and I acknowledge them and their
| stellar job. And they acknowledge me.
|
| But who am I, I just enjoy _Old Europe_.
| prepend wrote:
| I'm not aware of any decent services that let you be social
| for only 90 seconds.
|
| I like human cashiers because they are faster than
| me+robot. So I tolerate the chitchat for their efficiency.
|
| And I never really want to optimize for typing in codes for
| the price of lemons and whatnot.
| the-dude wrote:
| You are stretching things out of proportion. I am not
| paying them for the interaction.
|
| The casual interactivity is what I would call the 'gravy'
| of society. They know I recognize/know them, and I know
| they recognize/know me.
| istjohn wrote:
| Pay for someone to be social with you? Like RentAFriend[1]?
|
| 1. https://rentafriend.com/whatis
| paganel wrote:
| It's not only that, it's the fact that the stores have
| externalised the checkout process to customers themselves.
|
| I could never understood why should I, as a client, do the
| work that someone else can do for me (and more reliably, of
| course)? It's win-win, I'm not stressed at doing something
| wrong, I can do something else while my products are
| checked out and that person doing the product checkout also
| has a job.
|
| But because it sounds tech-y and more automatic-y lots of
| tech-literate people fall for all of this, I don't see
| what's more automatic in me doing the same work that
| another person used to do.
| leetcrew wrote:
| if you want someone to ring up and bag your groceries for
| you, go to a high-end grocery store. meanwhile, I'll be
| paying less and getting out the door faster than you
| anyway.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > I can do something else while my products are checked
| out
|
| But the point is we don't need the 'while my products are
| checked out' step. We could skip that. You save time,
| save more people handling what you're buying, save them
| having to staff a checkout and freeing them to do
| something else instead. That's the real win-win.
| paganel wrote:
| > freeing them to do something else instead.
|
| Yes, the'll be busy looking for other jobs.
| bluGill wrote:
| Hopefully something more useful to society. We still need
| better mousetraps.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| I think it's demeaning to employ people to do something
| that is so clearly not necessary. If we want to create
| and possibly subsidise jobs for people let's create
| useful, productive jobs.
| ahepp wrote:
| Like what, "door dasher"? "uber driver"?
|
| The economy is developing in the wrong direction. We are
| not on track for happy automation.
| mistersys wrote:
| In these stores, cashiers are waiting around most of the
| time. That's the issue. They couldn't stay in business
| because they had to pay for the cashier to checkout as
| well as wait around. By letting customers checkout,
| there's no more wasted money spent on employees waiting
| around.
|
| Also, the stores that are most promising don't require
| checkout at all, so that's an entire category of human
| effort eliminated, for better or worse.
| bluGill wrote:
| Most stores keep one person up front when they are not
| busy, the rest of the checkout clerks wonder the store
| looking for things out of place, stocking shelves,
| finding or customers to help. Each store has their own
| set of duties but for the most part there are plenty of
| tasks to do when people aren't waiting in line.
| sokoloff wrote:
| Analogously, I don't see a reason why I should be forced
| wait in a queue for one of the limited other humans to
| help me do something that I can do myself in one of the 8
| self-checkout lanes whenever I'm ready to do so.
|
| People who want the assistance of an employee can go that
| route, but I prefer the self-checkout process for the
| reduced waiting and self-service nature.
| JustSomeNobody wrote:
| I don't recall getting a discount for self-checkout.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > I don't recall getting a discount for self-checkout.
|
| I don't think I've ever seen a discount for it?
|
| The cost is included in the prices you pay for the
| products.
|
| You're paying it whether you use it or not!
| guerrilla wrote:
| > This is the future of grocery stores
|
| It was already the present in most of Sweden before this too.
| Almost every store has automated checkout im addition to manual
| checkout.
| dehrmann wrote:
| I wonder how much of a concern shoplifting would be. The
| article says it's limited by knowing who's there and security
| cameras, but I also suspect it's kept in check by Swedish
| social norms.
| aboringusername wrote:
| Machines are even better then that, they generate digital data
| which unlocks all sorts of possibilities. Amazon could not care
| less if they lost $1,000,000,0 in stock if they had the data to
| back that up (sensor data, images, video), which is worth that
| much to optimize their systems and become a 'leader' which can
| make money itself. It's why they want to sell data gathering
| devices so cheaply, cameras, smart assistants, prime, anything
| that gives them information they can use for AI is a money
| maker to them.
|
| Even if a machine is _terrible_ and useless, you can collect
| that useless information /data and use it as a data point for
| other machines that are perhaps not so terrible, any data point
| is useful afterall.
|
| Machines are the future for that reason alone.
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| machines implement stupid broken ux patterns which make
| shopping hell.
|
| on edit: evidently people would like their supermarket checkout
| experience to be as pleasing as the typical online shopping
| experience, thus a quick downvote.
| alistairSH wrote:
| I agree. I've found self-checkout (of the variety common in
| US supermarkets) to be no faster than employee-run checkout
| for normal grocery loads. It may be faster for a handful of
| items, but once the shopper has many items, particularly a
| lot of produce, the lookup mechanism (picture matching,
| usually) for he produce slows the whole thing to stand-still.
| Add in manual ID verification for alcohol and drug purchases
| and it slows even more. Add in problems with coupons,
| payment, or other errors, it slows more. And then most of
| them have some sort of scale on the bagging end which never
| works well - bulk items, too many items to fit on the shelf,
| etc.
| msh wrote:
| I think the average online shopping experience is, at least
| for me, far preferable to the average supermarket experience
| with queues and so on.
| megous wrote:
| Maybe to you, but until online shopping will be realizable
| via user chosen User Agent (like e-mail, etc.) via open
| API, online shopping will continue to suck horribly for
| anything but single items. Shopping for groceries online is
| complete hell, for one.
|
| There are queues online too. They are just at the delivery
| side, not at the checkout side.
| msh wrote:
| I often shop for groceries online in these corona times,
| for a family of 5. I usually use nemlig.com (a danish
| online super market) and I dont have any issues with the
| UX. Its easier than searching for things in the physical
| supermarket.
|
| On delivery its not really a queue as I dont have to
| spend my time doing it.
| wasmitnetzen wrote:
| I never experienced that "Unexpected item in bagging area"
| here in Sweden, the UX failures are not universal.
|
| Most stores I visited don't even have scales and just trust
| you to put in the correct items. Especially the ones where
| you get a handheld device to scan while you walk trough the
| store. I would guess that fraud levels are much lower here so
| the stores don't need to do that.
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| >I never experienced that "Unexpected item in bagging area"
| here in Sweden, the UX failures are not universal.
|
| the automated fotex near my house has this, or also put
| your item in the bag, you need to put an item in the bag
| etc. crash because you didn't put item in bag fast enough,
| or you took bag off scale to put new one on.
|
| >the UX failures are not universal.
|
| yes, because they do not have a universal interface which a
| human checker provides. By using a machine you switch from
| having one well understood, pretty standardized ui
| paradigm: put stuff on track, tracks goes to checker,
| checker checks them through, you pay and bag your stuff -
| to having as many ux as there are companies implementing
| automatic checkout machines and however many versions of
| their workflow are in distribution.
|
| The UX failures for a self-service checkout are unique and
| unfamiliar to the user, just like the ux failures of a new
| checkout flow on an online retailer.
| wasmitnetzen wrote:
| The UX of a human being is only good if you have a common
| language. I'm not fluent in Swedish, so for me the
| ability to read the text on the machine instead of listen
| to it is a plus. Of course, I can ask the cashier to talk
| English to me, but that also has some friction to it.
|
| And I only regularly go to two different supermarkets, so
| once I know their flow, there's nothing new to it. In
| contrast, humans seem to like to change their interface
| quite regularly, even between customers...
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| Ok, I've gone to shop in lots of stores in countries
| where I do not speak the language, as part of the whole
| human checkout system there is always (in non street
| market situations) a machine display that says how much
| of the local currency I need to give up.
|
| On the other hand I think I may be abnormally sensitive
| to badly worked out human machine interactions since
| working out these kinds of interactions is part of my job
| as a programmer. So when something is poorly thought out
| I think that I feel it stronger than most people do.
| Smithalicious wrote:
| God, I wish buying things in person was as smooth as buying
| them online. Being able to add and remove things from your
| cart in near zero time, being able to shop at any time of
| day, being able to search for things by name If I could get
| all my groceries delivered at negligible cost I would do so
| jusssi wrote:
| We have it now, where I live. We started ordering our
| groceries when the pandemic happened, but it's so
| convenient that we'll probably keep doing it once it
| passes.
|
| I'm not sure if about 5% of our weekly supermarket spend
| would be negligible enough for you, but it's been worth it
| for us. One big factor for us is that we don't own a car,
| so we'd be (and previously were) hauling all that stuff by
| hand.
|
| My understanding is that the chain is running the delivery
| service at a loss, though they probably make it up by
| people buying more at a time. It remains to be seen if they
| raise prices for the delivery when the pandemic passes.
| fasteddie31003 wrote:
| Envious of Sweden. If that store were in America everything would
| have been stolen the first day.
| elindbe3 wrote:
| They have Amazon stores in the US. There's one I know of in
| downtown Chicago. I don't know if it did particularly well but
| it wasn't robbed bare every day.
| renewiltord wrote:
| The Amazon Go stores in Seattle and (even before full auto
| was outlawed) in SF are more heavily staffed than a normal
| store.
|
| This makes sense since they're not "in full prod" so to
| speak, unless that's changed.
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| Not only Sweden is cash-free but also cash usage is seen with a
| lot of skepticism.
| konschubert wrote:
| So this is basically run on a trust basis, right? And if you
| steal, you will eventually get caught on video and be blocked
| from entering the store?
|
| I can imagine this working well in small villages. You'll get a
| few thieves and vandals, but eventually you can weed them out.
|
| Pretty genius.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| Do you not have road-side produce honesty stands where you
| live? It's no different to that.
| konschubert wrote:
| No, this is different, because they can block you.
| lbhdc wrote:
| Not quite. They have your ID and banking information when you
| enter. You open the doors using the company's
| app, which works in conjunction with BankID, a secure national
| identification app operated by Sweden's banks.
| konschubert wrote:
| Of course they have a way to identify you and prevent you
| from signing up again under another name.
|
| How else are they going to block you?
|
| But just because they have your BankID it doesn't mean that
| they have your account balance or other banking data, if
| that's what you're referring to.
| Grustaf wrote:
| Stealing is still a crime, so there is no need to have
| direct access to your account. At the very least you would
| owe the store for what you stole, just like if you're late
| on an electricity bill. You essentially can't escape that
| without emigrating.
| kalleboo wrote:
| I want to add a note to people who aren't familiar -
| Sweden has a government debt collector[0]. Unlike the US
| where I'l told you can mostly dodge private debts and it
| just becomes a massive nuisance and credit nightmare, in
| Sweden the government will actually garnish your salary
| and repossess your stuff for private debts.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_Enforcement_Aut
| hority
| mytailorisrich wrote:
| > Sweden the government will actually garnish your salary
| and repossess your stuff for private debts.*
|
| It's called "attachment of earnings" in the UK there is
| no special agency for that, it's just a court order sent
| to the debtor employer.
|
| This also exists in most US states, I believe it's often
| called "wage garnishment" there.
|
| Repossession or seizure of property also exists in the US
| and the UK (and indeed most countries). Here in the UK
| there's even a TV show about that, with the cool name of
| "The Sheriffs are coming"...
| Dma54rhs wrote:
| I believe it's also called court bailiff and is fairly
| usual thing in the EU.
| bellyfullofbac wrote:
| And you have to scan your bank card (which apparently in Sweden
| is a secondary ID card) to enter. I wonder if they do an extra
| verification to make sure you just didn't steal someone's card,
| maybe with a PIN?
|
| Hah, I guess for the vandals, being blacklisted by the network
| would be a big hassle...
| estomagordo wrote:
| The bank id is not a physical card. Rather, it's an app that
| provides 2FA and which is backed by the major Swedish banks.
| It is the de facto standard for electronic identification in
| Sweden. Originally, it was mostly a desktop application that
| helped you log on to your internet bank, but it has
| increasingly become a way to log onto web sites - anything
| from e-commerce to government agencies - while proving your
| identity.
| paganel wrote:
| I wonder what will the non-banked people do in the future?
| Their life is in many cases miserable enough as it is, not
| being able to purchase basic groceries because you don't have
| a credit/debit card is next-level capitalist dystopia.
| henhouse wrote:
| A lot of Sweden is already like this. They're a super
| cashless society currently. I have only lived in Stockholm,
| but a large number of places will not accept cash in any
| form. This is done for security and convenience reasons,
| and most Swedes from what I have seen seem to prefer and
| like this method. It definitely has implications of
| course... but none that seem to be bothering the masses.
|
| Here's some info about it:
| https://sweden.se/business/cashless-society
| eythian wrote:
| In some countries, and I wouldn't be surprised if Sweden is
| one of them, it's a requirement that you be allowed to have
| a bank account. You can't be refused.
| paganel wrote:
| That's very good to hear, from where I'm from (Eastern
| Europe) a bank account is very heavily linked to a
| current physical address (as in, you must have a physical
| address officially attached to your name which in itself
| is a quite cumbersome process) and oftentimes with an
| additional proof (like an utilities bill on your name
| attached to that address). That makes getting a bank
| account a little difficult for many people.
| olodus wrote:
| I haven't used the stores themselves but they reference using
| BankId which is an national identification app on your phone
| you link to your bank account that also requires a pin code.
| eCa wrote:
| > So this is basically run on a trust basis, right?
|
| No, from the OP: > works in conjunction with BankID, a secure
| national identification app operated by Sweden's banks
|
| You are identified, so it should be easy to see on camera who
| steals and then they can send the cops on you.
|
| My worry is more about tourists[1]. As someone who has
| travelled extensively in rural Europe I would not appreciate a
| growing network of stores that requires country-specific id.
|
| [1] Technologically disadvantaged people are already mentioned
| in the article.
| mpclark wrote:
| Spot on. I remember trying to get petrol in Belgium at night
| sometime in the late 90s. The country had its own smart debit
| card programme (very leading edge) and garages there had
| unattended pumps that would accept these cards to cater for
| out-of-hours customers. But, being a UK tourist without a
| local payment card, I was stuffed. Stopped at every garage
| along the way, getting increasingly concerned, before
| coasting in on fumes to one that was actually open all night
| and would accept my Visa or MC.
| flanbiscuit wrote:
| This happened to me driving from Germany to the Netherlands
| on a Sunday. We needed petrol but could not stop in Belgium
| because all of the stations were closed and the machines
| only accepted a Belgian bank card. Luckily we were close
| enough to Luxembourg to get petrol there. This was around
| 2004/05. I wonder if it's still this way now
| gambiting wrote:
| I've had that last summer driving through Germany - stopped
| to charge my car, only to discover that all charging
| stations at that particular Auobahn station will only
| accept a German-issued[0] debit or credit cards. As a
| tourist....tough luck I guess?
|
| [0]I knew it because of course you had to use an app to
| start charging, and the app had a pre-filled and
| unchangable country set to Germany for billing details.
| jfk13 wrote:
| I had that problem with rail tickets in Germany, too...
| stations with machines that would only accept the local
| kind of bank card, not my Visa card.
|
| Weirdly, at the main station in Bochum (for example),
| there were _some_ machines that would accept a Visa card
| - but even the staff in the in-person ticket office
| seemed to be completely ignorant of this. (And no, _they_
| wouldn 't accept my card there, either. But eventually -
| no thanks to DB's staff - I found a machine I could use.)
|
| Let's just say I wasn't impressed.
| henrikschroder wrote:
| I've run into a similar problem in Sweden with parking.
| Many places have app-controlled parking, I have the
| biggest apps, but some parking places have other
| solutions. One place had removed the on-site machines
| that took card payments, and only had a phone number. I
| called the number from my Swedish phone number, entered
| my Swedish personal ID number, and then the automated
| service informed me that they couldn't process me because
| I wasn't a Swedish resident... So there was no way for me
| to pay for my parking.
|
| Non-swedes would be even more shit out of luck than I
| was, they wouldn't even be able to navigate the phone
| service. So weird.
| nherment wrote:
| Thats a really good point regarding EU citizens having access
| to this service. Swedish services are thoroughly tied to the
| bankid/personnal number. There is a EU regulation [1]
| somewhat related to this that prevent sellers from
| discriminating the availability of goods based on your place
| of residence.
|
| I wonder if this regulation applies to these shops.
|
| A couple of paragraphs are particularly interesting, #18 and
| #19:
|
| (18) [...] traders should not, through the use of
| technological measures or otherwise, prevent customers from
| having full and equal access to online interfaces, including
| in the form of mobile applications, based on their
| nationality, place of residence or place of establishment.
| [...]
|
| (19) In order to ensure the equal treatment of customers and
| to avoid discrimination, as required by this Regulation,
| traders should not design their online interface, or apply
| technological means, in a way that would, in practice, not
| allow customers from other Member States to easily complete
| their orders.
|
| [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
| content/EN/TXT/?qid=15422088...
| riffraff wrote:
| I'm pretty sure the regulation is violated all the time
| everywhere, i.e. vending machines that require some local
| electronic card (e.g. to prove your age for sigarettes).
|
| It's a pity, of course, but not a "new" problem.
| distances wrote:
| Which EU countries have cigarette vending machines? I've
| never seen such a thing, in the countries I shop they're
| behind a cashier. Sometimes even hidden so that if you
| don't know what to ask for you're not getting it.
| eythian wrote:
| Netherlands and Germany have them.
| detaro wrote:
| Germany, Austria, Italy at least.
| distances wrote:
| Interesting, I'll have to keep my eyes a bit more open
| when traveling.
| majewsky wrote:
| In Germany, cigarette vending machines were incredibly
| common until around 15 years ago, but I haven't seen one
| in ages. Between stricter age verification requirements,
| a decline in smoking in general, and vandalism towards
| those machines, the profit margin was probably stretched
| too slim to continue maintaining these machines.
| Dma54rhs wrote:
| Spain as well, you can't get cigs from gas stations or
| super markets like in the UK.
| [deleted]
| dhimes wrote:
| My grocery store has a self-scan and checkout that works on
| trust basis with random audits. Some stores had to get rid of
| it because of stealing, but thankfully mine has kept it. I find
| it very fast and don't mind the occasional audits at all. Small
| price to pay, and still faster than if I had stayed in line.
| tasogare wrote:
| The value the self-scan systems have for the shop owners is
| not in automation but the fact the work is reported on
| customer, with of course no price reduction. That should be
| forbidden. I boycott those systems and wait for the human
| clerk to do his job, this way a little of the money made by
| the shop is redistributed.
| kalleboo wrote:
| Should flat-pack furniture that you have to assemble
| yourself also be forbidden?
|
| Should Gentoo Linux that you have to compile the kernel
| yourself also be forbidden?
|
| Should cooking at home also be forbidden?
|
| Where does the line go where you have to pay someone to do
| something for you instead of doing it yourself?
| msh wrote:
| I would rather do it my self for very little extra time
| use, rather than waste even more time waiting in line.
| ghaff wrote:
| For me it depends. If I have a shopping cart full,
| including typically, a bunch of produce, I'll go to a
| cashier. If I've got a half dozen bar coded items to
| scan, I'll probably just do self-checkout.
| msh wrote:
| Some shops have scan yourself where you scan things with
| your phone when putting them in your basket, even produce
| then have a barcode, maybe not on the item but then at a
| sign at their location.
| ghaff wrote:
| I've never seen that in the US and produce isn't barcoded
| unless it's shrink-wrapped--which it isn't in most
| stores. And I'm not sure that seems any easier than a
| normal self-checkout in any case.
| dhimes wrote:
| There are scales and look-up tables for the produce out
| in the produce area (the look-up tables are also
| programmed into the scales but the UI is slow and
| tedious).
|
| So you gather your, say broccoli, look up the PLU code
| (it also might be on a sticker affixed to the item), put
| it on the scale, enter the code, and the scale prints out
| your bar code that you scan.
|
| I'm a dozen miles north of Boston, MA.
| dhimes wrote:
| Mine you get a little "zapper" to scan the bar codes
| with. I select, scan, and bag into my cart. When I get to
| checkout everything is bagged, so I save that time as
| well.
|
| The only "pain" is having to look up the produce and
| weigh it, but with a little practice I got to be pretty
| fast at that too.
| sokoloff wrote:
| No price reduction as compared to what? Maybe all the
| prices would be 0.5% higher if all the checkout was human-
| only? At the end of the day, the customer is paying for
| most everything in the shop. (They're the one bringing the
| money into the system. There may be a small amount of
| payment for placement or other advertising, or financing
| via invoices, but the vast majority of money coming into
| the shop is coming from customers.)
|
| I can't see a reason why self-checkouts should be
| forbidden. If people don't like them, don't use them. Why
| should people who do like them be forbidden from shopping
| in a way that they prefer?
| tasogare wrote:
| It should be forbidden because it makes people work
| illegally (because of a lack of contract and pay). In
| France a restaurant was fined by the work inspection
| because they asked their customers to give plates back.
| Using the same logic and existing laws, a shop shouldn't
| be allowed to make its customers work for it.
| jjcon wrote:
| I kinda see this as the next step after self checkout -
| conventional wisdom was that there would be too much theft and
| I think there is slightly more (intentional or accidental) but
| it is more than offset by the fact that you can pay just one
| employee and run 8 checkout lines
| williesleg wrote:
| I love that, gonna grab and dash.
| Bostonian wrote:
| Advocates of much higher minimum wages should understand that the
| eventual consequence will be automating many jobs out of
| existence, not just people doing the same jobs but for more pay.
| bkor wrote:
| > Advocates of much higher minimum wages should understand that
| the eventual consequence will be automating many jobs out of
| existence
|
| That's been proven not to be the correlated in various studies.
| Similarly, there's a huge discussion regarding minimum wage in
| the US, while actually minimum wage adjusted for inflation went
| down significantly over the last few decades.
|
| Automation happens in any case, especially with technology
| continuously getting cheaper.
|
| Anecdotal: In e.g. Netherlands the minimum wage is lower if
| you're 15 until 21. Different amount until you're 21 or so. As
| a result supermarkets often fire anyone over 18 while
| pretending it isn't about the age. The minimum wage is already
| extremely low for 15-18, raising it would encourage more people
| to work in supermarkets instead of the current situation.
| Further, supermarkets are fully focussing on self-checkout.
| Despite the super low minimum wages.
| DC1350 wrote:
| > critics warning that it would make shopping a less sociable
| experience
|
| This is a good thing. Small talk with cashiers who can't walk
| away is borderline harassment
| tpmx wrote:
| The BankID service seems to trip up many people here.
|
| Swedish residents have a personal identity number issued at birth
| or immigration. Format: YYYYMMDD-NNNN. More details:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_identity_number_(Swed...
|
| BankID is a service run by the Swedish banks that interfaces with
| the banks, individuals and third parties (like this chain of
| unmanned stores).
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BankID
|
| The banks know the identities (personal identify number) of their
| customers via their physical offices. BankID offers an app to
| individuals and an online API to paying/approved third-party
| services. Third-party services are able to offer BankID
| authentication in websites and apps. In the end the third party
| receives an authenticated personal identity number.
|
| There is growing awareness that this service should not be run by
| private companies/banks.
| dheera wrote:
| Also worth noting is that this is not Amazon Go. Customers have
| to be honest and scan items.
|
| We're not civilized enough here in the US for such nice things.
| tpmx wrote:
| I'm not so sure it's a matter of civilization - it's more a
| matter of infrastructure:
|
| The other piece of the puzzle is:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_Enforcement_Authority
|
| Basically the government runs debt collection in Sweden. They
| have the ability to withdraw money from your bank account.
|
| All of this is enabled by every resident having a (public)
| personal identity number.
| plumeria wrote:
| Meanwhile in California people can steal from physical
| stores with impunity [1].
|
| [1] https://youtu.be/HmOIQv0yu-U?t=480
| blueblisters wrote:
| Government run debt collection? Is this widely used by
| companies? Are there any drawbacks/cases of misuse? Does
| the government keep a credit score too?
| tpmx wrote:
| > Is this widely used by companies?
|
| Yes. It's a bit cumbersome, so there are companies
| specializing in doing this for small debts (say < $5000).
|
| > Are there any drawbacks/cases of misuse?
|
| Hard to say. My impression is that having one trusted
| party to manage debt collection makes it easier to handle
| the edge cases in a more humane way, but I haven't really
| delved into this area.
|
| > Does the government keep a credit score too?
|
| No.
| cambaceres wrote:
| > There is growing awareness that this service should not be
| run by private companies/banks.
|
| I don't agree. I'm a Swede too (as I assume you are), and I
| have basically never heard anyone complain of BankID being
| owned by the banks. I am really happy that our government does
| not own BankID, since they suck badly at developing software.
| dsco wrote:
| Try starting a Blockchain company and they will violently
| fight you until they've (the big banks) have shut down your
| access.
| gerikson wrote:
| As a Swede, I'm glad this is the case.
| SahAssar wrote:
| I'm guessing you don't just mean blockchain, but rather
| virtual, unregulated currencies. If so I'm glad that's the
| case.
|
| If you actually mean a company using blockchain in other
| ways: do you have any examples?
| cambaceres wrote:
| Have you tried? In that case, what happend?
| dalbasal wrote:
| "Ownership" is can be kind of abstract, in this context.
|
| A service like this needs to be infrastructure, one way or
| another. Secure, reasonably neutral, trusted... You don't
| want it serving as a retaining wall for a monopoly.
| tpmx wrote:
| My understanding: After the recent money laundering
| revelations the banks have become relatively strict in
| accepting/keeping certain customers. I think that most of all
| the banks are afraid of being blacklisted/sanctioned by the
| US.
|
| This leads to friction and situations where some people are
| essentially excluded from large parts of society.
|
| The banks also don't seem to be all that interested in
| interacting with their invidual customers in the flesh.
|
| I think the natural conclusion of this is that the issuing of
| electronic IDs becomes a government responsibility, decoupled
| from banking.
| SahAssar wrote:
| Wasn't all of those scandals tied to foreign branches of
| the banks and the strictness has mostly only been applied
| there? I might be wrong, but I haven't heard of swedish
| residents being denied banking.
| tpmx wrote:
| - 6-9 months ago I started reading online of mostly
| Swedbank customers who had suddenly been asked to move
| their monthly salaries to this bank, or they'd lose their
| accounts. These people were doing stock trading only via
| Swedbank.
|
| - 18 months ago I tried to facilitate creating a
| corporate bank account managed by a foreign CEO from a
| non-EU and very first-world country in order to be able
| to create a Swedish company (AB) with the goal of hiring
| software people here in Sweden. Tried two banks (SEB and
| Handelsbanken) before giving up and going another route.
|
| My impression is that Swedish banks have tightened up
| things quite a lot in the past few years.
| SahAssar wrote:
| Yeah, that first example does sound unexpected based on
| my experience. I might have to deal with something like
| the second example in the soon-ish future, mind telling
| me the route you took?
| tpmx wrote:
| You kinda need to have an EU-based CEO. Swedish-based is
| (marginally) easier.
|
| There might be tricks via Cyprus or so, but that will
| only let you create the AB - you still need a Swedish
| corporate bank account to pay your employees the proper
| way.
| blfr wrote:
| _The banks also don 't seem to be all that interested in
| interacting with their invidual customers in the flesh._
|
| The feeling's mutual! I have been using the same bank for
| over 15 years and only visited once and by accident.
| gerikson wrote:
| Googling " bankid privatagd kritik" gave me one hit - to
| Flashback. Hardly mainstream...
| cycomanic wrote:
| Well the Swedish banks are pretty much the worst I've
| encountered anywhere, while the government is comparatively
| efficient (tax returns are very easy, apply for parental
| leave etc.). So yes please don't let the banks control it.
| tpmx wrote:
| In their defense: They used to be pretty good, before
| international money laundering became a _giant_ thing.
| After recent regulations there are very few reasons for why
| they would want to accept foreign customers. Just too much
| risk.
|
| I agree that something needs to be done.
|
| They have been innovative in the past:
|
| 1996/1997: Mass adoption of two-factor hardware devices
| providing secure authentication for online banking.
|
| 2003: Leveraging the two-factor hardware devices to create
| BankID.
| Entalpi wrote:
| Honestly banks are pretty regulated and some insights are
| already in place (as they shiuld be). This does not exclude
| the need for more regulation and insight mind
| greensea wrote:
| It is an issue that digital identification in Sweden is run
| by a single private company. The drawbacks are not clearly
| seen from a consumer standpoint, but they do charge service
| providers for each login, and can set their prices freely
| since it's a monopoly.
|
| They also have rules against being logged in for too long,
| and against identity transfer (directly or indirectly using
| BankID to authenticate for a different login method) [1],
| since that would result in fewer BankID logins and less
| revenue for them.
|
| One result of the latter restriction is that any letters
| containing authentication codes need to be sent by physical
| mail, since all digital mailboxes such as Kivra and the
| government-run "Min myndighetspost" support login by BankID.
| The University Admissions service (antagning.se) were forced
| to stop sending codes through digital mailboxes due to this
| [2].
|
| [1]:
| https://twitter.com/antagningse/status/1178957770978140160
|
| [2]: https://computersweden.idg.se/2.2683/1.643894/skatteverk
| et-s...
| cambaceres wrote:
| That's some good arguments, I change my mind.
| rattray wrote:
| Those sound like good rules?
|
| Are you sure they can set the prices "freely"? Many
| regulated monopolies like this are restricted in their
| pricing.
|
| (disclaimer, not a swede)
| jariel wrote:
| It would be a good idea to remove the 'date' from the number.
|
| Edit: because having your birthday right there as part of
| common ID number is an obvious transgression of privacy that
| wasn't probably thought of back when the number was
| established. How anyone could disagree with this is beyond me.
| dalys wrote:
| Well it makes it pretty easy to remember. Never heard of
| anyone complaining about their birthday being known, so it
| seems to work pretty well.
| jariel wrote:
| Do people really have a hard time remembering their phone
| numbers, which are relatively private?
|
| Having one's date of birth signalled to the world is an
| obvious breach of privacy in the modern age, and since
| there is obviously no need for it, it shouldn't be used.
|
| That you have 'never heard of a concern' not hugelry if
| there are obviously people who are going to take umbrage -
| moreover - in this new information world order it can be
| used for all sorts of shady reasons.
|
| There's clearly no need of it.
|
| If the scheme were designed today, there's a 0% chance of
| DOB being used in the number.
| alvarlagerlof wrote:
| I've thought of this too. I cannot come up with any practical
| reason for it.
| jariel wrote:
| The practicality is uniqueness of the ID. So date+increment
| is an easy 'citizen UUID'. In 1970 it makes perfect sense
| in 2020 not so much.
| smhg wrote:
| Same thing happened in Belgium in the last few years where it
| is called 'Itsme'. Including government openly promoting it in
| their messaging and services.
|
| There is sadly little awareness of it being a private joint
| venture between banking and telecom.
|
| I don't know if it is realistic to expect governments to come
| up/run this, but when they promote it, I think it should at
| least be open source.
| NicoJuicy wrote:
| I don't think it should be open source.
|
| But it's very expensive to integrate it and it's Ogone all
| over again ( most expensive option = the Belgian one) ~3EUR /
| user/year for the most complete option for ( what is
| basically) a login verification.
| opayen wrote:
| It's also worth noting that BankID requires access location
| permission access (at least on Android).
| edb_123 wrote:
| Wait - BankID requires an Android or iOS app in Sweden?
| Sounds cumbersome. Here in Norway BankID is a SIM application
| that follows your SIM card regardless of OS or if you swap
| your phone. So you could basically stick your SIM in a stone
| age cell phone and still use your BankID.
| rightbyte wrote:
| > Wait - BankID requires an Android or iOS app
|
| No you can use it on a PC too.
| [deleted]
| xmodem wrote:
| On iOS it's optional with the explanation, "Increase your
| BankID security by allowing location." Yeah, nah.
|
| I've always had it turned off, never had an issue.
| hannob wrote:
| Practical question: Does this mean as a foreigner you cannot
| use these shops?
|
| I know from trips to sweden that a lot of people use a custom
| payment system called swish that only exists in sweden, but I
| never had trouble paying with a visa card (with cash is
| sometimes a problem in sweden).
| tpmx wrote:
| You probably can't, at least not in the first iteration. I
| suspect they might be forced to accept credit cards
| eventually, because of EU legislation.
| throwaway4good wrote:
| The Danish parallel to BankId - NemID / MitID is also partly
| owned by the banking cartel:
|
| https://digst.dk/it-loesninger/mitid/partnerskabet/
|
| It is a curious construction; we wouldn't accept a personal id
| card issued / owned by banks but for the digital equivalent we
| do so with little debate.
| gerikson wrote:
| Banks issued ID cards in Sweden for decades. Source: I worked
| as a teller and knew the procedure.
|
| Passports only became legal IDs in the last decade or so.
| SahAssar wrote:
| Even then you usually needed a letter proving your identity
| (personbevis) from the government, right? So the bank was
| not the arbiter of "who was who", but issued the ID cards.
| gerikson wrote:
| Correct, but banks were responsible for devising security
| features etc.
| azalemeth wrote:
| I just got NemID as a foreigner -- it took me about 4 months
| of circular references (x is closed because of covid, get it
| from y; y is shut because of covid -- try x) and a rooting
| trick on my phone to get the app to work. I am sure that it
| is nice for the government and the banks having a unified
| point of sale, but it _really_ took a lot of work to get
| sorted. I think I prefer the decentralised, less secure,
| presumably easier to defraud method...
| matsemann wrote:
| In Norway the usual form of ID for anyone without a driving
| license used to be your debit card. Banks have mostly stopped
| issuing cards with profile pictures on them now, as they
| don't want the responsibility. But the national id card has
| been delayed for a decade. So many now have to bring their
| passport to buy beer...
| TomatoDash wrote:
| Short clip of a customer entering a competing swedish cashless
| store via BankID app https://youtu.be/Rbm_puP4PgA?t=13
|
| Swedes also use the BankID app for online interactions with
| health care and other public services. Last year I did my taxes
| in under 60 seconds. (Get notification; BankID login; check
| prefilled values from bank, employer etcetera; BankID sign.)
| JasonFruit wrote:
| > There is growing awareness that this service should not be
| run by private companies/banks.
|
| At risk of sounding snarky, I'm growing in awareness that the
| anonymous nature of paper money and coin had a lot of
| advantages. I would be unhappy if the only option for groceries
| in my area required me to strongly identify myself to shop
| there.
| renewiltord wrote:
| Well, previously "no shop for you", now "no shop for you". So
| no big change for you really. No net decrease in happiness
| for you and a net increase in happiness for others.
|
| This is a Pareto optimal action.
| slt2021 wrote:
| there are prepaid visa/mc cards which can give you anonymity
| while still using card. accepting cash, means a store has to
| be staffed with people and it makes it more expensive to run
| business=>higher prices for products
| etiam wrote:
| > there are prepaid visa/mc cards which can give you
| anonymity while still using card.
|
| There kind of isn't, at least in Sweden. The option that
| does exist is a seedy borderline scam with exorbitant
| overhead and hidden usury fees, which will effectively
| confiscate your remaining money a few months in.
|
| Also, in stark contrast to real cash, it still results in a
| log of all the transactions and ties them up to one weakly
| pseudonymous identity which will be re-identified at one
| single purchase with an identifiable connection, or could
| by from a collection of weaker clues. That is, for
| instance, goodbye to ever using it for anything with an
| account, unless you also want to announce you probably
| bought everything else the card was ever used for.
|
| It's cheaper to dump toxic waste in the bay than to have
| someone neutralize it as well, and personally I'm
| positively delighted the resulting products cost more
| instead. There are lots discounts that should be shunned,
| and in my opinion this one is a prime example.
| TehCorwiz wrote:
| Those cost money and act as a regressive tax on the poor.
| Effectively raising prices on them.
| fjfaase wrote:
| And yet, you are probably happy if some criminals are caught
| with the help of surveillance camera footage. In the past
| when there were shops in every neighbourhood, the owners of
| these shops knew all their customers. They exactly knew who
| they could trust and who not. It has happened to me that when
| I went to an open air market, where you stil have to make an
| order, they people behind the stall after some time just
| remembered what I was coming for, while they must see
| thousands of customers each week.
| saiya-jin wrote:
| That sounds all nice and small-town rosy, but I would pick
| anonymity any day. Road to totality and 1984-esque society
| only takes 1 step at a time to build, and this is
| definitely one of those steps. Although coming form
| smallish town, this familiarity with shop owners ain't
| something high on my list of priorities, in contrary.
|
| The strongest reason for it would probably be the old
| 'power corrupts', as we can see just about anybody with
| access to it, be it a person or organization in the past.
| No reason to be so naive to think some other place is
| special and avoids it. And knowing basically everything
| about any individual is a massive amount of power and very
| personal. Also rarely are these kinds of laws repelled, in
| contrary, the data are just too sweet and there is always
| the next terrorist threat to prevent.
| EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK wrote:
| What about people from out of town, were they allowed to
| buy at that shop?
| INTPenis wrote:
| Why? Why are you worried about disclosing how much milk and
| eggs you buy?
|
| I know this is the age old "I have nothing to hide" argument
| but I truly am curious why people are so afraid of saying
| where they're travelling (train tickets) or what they're
| buying (shops).
|
| Don't you think that once that dystopian future comes - when
| that info might be used against you - we'll have much worse
| things to worry about?
| azpotufi wrote:
| This data will invariably be sold to health insurance
| companies who will use any excuse to make you pay a
| premium.
|
| Bought four bottles of olive oil? You're going to get very
| fat, better make you pay a premium! Who cares if you
| actually used it to make soap?
| nivenkos wrote:
| Good thing Sweden has decent public insurance then...
|
| Don't hold back technology and society just because of a
| few other issues - those other issues can be better
| resolved directly. In this case, with single-payer public
| healthcare.
| hnbroseph wrote:
| > Don't hold back technology and society
|
| conversely, don't presume that what you're advocating for
| is "advancing" technology and society, either.
| BoorishBears wrote:
| Why don't you share with the workd your in-person purchases
| over the last year complete with location and time?
|
| It's just eggs and milk after all...
| okprod wrote:
| I don't agree with any information tracking, but should
| note that this type of collection, e.g., of shopping
| data, doesn't exactly mean the information will be leaked
| or used for nefarious purposes, etc. And, for many, they
| do share with the world what they're buying/many parts of
| their daily lives, just not by pushing a commit or
| updated a webpage; e.g., Twitter, Instagram, Snap.
| roody15 wrote:
| Yes. Information absolutely can be used against you.
| Imagine if you perhaps decide to smoke... now the bank (and
| others). know this behavior and can calculate it into your
| overall credit score / health care score / behavior score.
|
| You could use lots and lots of examples where market forces
| and banks could influence human behavior through this
| method. There is freedom and power in using cash.
| slt2021 wrote:
| the actual dystopian future is corporates have so much data
| they have collected for years that they don't know what to
| do with it.
|
| so the most likely scenario is even if data will be
| collected on you, nobody will be able to use it in any
| meaningful way
| jerry1979 wrote:
| Why would people not use the data? Would they stop having
| questions?
| llampx wrote:
| Never thought I'd read the "What have you got to hide?"
| argument on HN of all places.
|
| First of all, you're being disingenious by putting up a
| strawman argument about "how much milk and eggs you buy."
| It is never about only milk and eggs. Advertising is only a
| part of it. Once you have an ID required to shop there, you
| can easily track who was there. You can follow their
| movements around the shop with cameras once you've
| identified them at the register. You can see who was with
| them. You can use this for your own gains, let's say you
| are a bank employee or police officer who wants to keep
| tabs on your spouse. Or maybe you are a politician who
| wants to run a smear campaign on your opponent.
|
| Also whether we'll have much worse things to worry about
| doesn't mean everything else before guillotines on the
| street can be hand-waved away.
| badestrand wrote:
| > You can use this for your own gains, let's say you are
| a bank employee or police officer who wants to keep tabs
| on your spouse.
|
| I think it's obvious that the data would not be public
| domain but stored strongly secured somewhere with very
| limited access. There are already very strict data
| privacy laws in Europe and the trend is clearly towards
| even more strictness.
|
| I, too, don't see any issue as long the as the laws
| punish misuse of private data.
| teawrecks wrote:
| "Let's just amass a huge amount of power in a place that
| only I can get to it, and I'll just promise that I'll
| never misuse it and that no one will every break in to
| take it."
|
| That plan has literally never worked throughout history.
| zdragnar wrote:
| > I think it's obvious that the data would not be public
| domain but stored strongly secured somewhere with very
| limited access.
|
| That may be an obvious intent, but I do not believe it is
| obvious the implementation will succeed in achieving
| those goals. From past experience, it rarely has.
| milesvp wrote:
| The laws may punish the misuse of data, but laws change,
| as do vilified minorities.
|
| Never forget that while you may be one of the privileged
| now, your status will change throughout your life. If
| you're lucky you will only become a more privileged
| individual, if not, you may wish to have a few more
| anonymous interactions on a regular basis.
|
| Protecting privacy isn't so much about not caring who
| knows the quantity of eggs you buy a week it's about
| acknowledging history and the fickle winds of change.
| It's sort of easy to believe that progressive attitudes
| will continue to prevail and that history tends to lead
| to increasing enlightenment, but there are often major
| backslides on issues of social norms and inclusiveness.
| It's also about realizing that what you do today might
| not get you in trouble, but what you did last year might,
| even though last year no one would have thought twice
| about what you did.
| [deleted]
| akudha wrote:
| Let me turn around and ask you - if you think this is not a
| problem, why don't you publish all your purchase info
| online? Along with where you bought them, what time, how
| etc? While you are at it, also publish your travel info -
| including mode of travel, time of travel, source,
| destination...
|
| I might be the boring-est person on the planet - lets say
| nothing about me is of any value to anyone. It is _still_
| nobody 's business to know even the most mundane aspect of
| my life. My life is my business, just like your life is
| your business. Thats all.
| matz1 wrote:
| >why don't you publish all your purchase info online?
| Along with where you bought them, what time, how etc?
| While you are at it, also publish your travel info -
| including mode of travel, time of travel, source,
| destination...
|
| Yes I prefer that for everyone (not just me), including
| people in government, so that I don't have to worry about
| hiding the information. Hiding the information has its
| associated cost.
|
| Transparency for everyone to level the playing field.
|
| Sure its your business to be private but as times goes
| and as technology advances it going to be more difficult
| and expensive.
| akudha wrote:
| _I prefer that for everyone_
|
| I don't understand why you should decide for others? If
| you want to put all of your info online, that is your
| choice. If I don't want to put my info online, that is my
| choice.
| matz1 wrote:
| Because otherwise it will create power imbalance that
| will put me at disadvantages, other know about me but I
| don't know about other.
| sokoloff wrote:
| Does that strike you as a reason for privacy for no one,
| or privacy for all? I lean (strongly) to the latter.
| matz1 wrote:
| yes, whereas I lean (strongly) to the earlier
| lliamander wrote:
| The big worry in my mind is whether this tracking would be
| used to prevent you from buying milk and eggs in the first
| place.
| EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK wrote:
| Easily. Liked a tweet of a "canceled" author? No milk for
| you!
| avidiax wrote:
| Even something as seemingly innocuous as milk and eggs can
| be a big deal. Suddenly spending more? Maybe you have
| guests. Maybe you are hiding refugees. Might be innocuous,
| might be life and death.
| nivenkos wrote:
| Maybe just don't have a government where that's an issue,
| rather than holding back the technological development of
| society.
|
| Why use mobile phones or credit cards? Or ID cards? or
| ISP subscriptions? It could all be tracked! Let's just do
| everything by landlines and faxes like Germany...
| hnbroseph wrote:
| > Maybe just don't have a government where that's an
| issue
|
| oh, good idea. but i think that's quite literally the
| entire point of people's concerns in the first place.
| AlecSchueler wrote:
| I'm not very much worried about my personal data being
| collected, what worries me is that when it is pooled with
| the data of many other individuals the entity who controls
| that pool will be able to do all sorts of analysis and make
| all sorts of predictions about behaviours on the small and
| the mass scale, the benefits of which might allow them to
| engage, with an advantage, in various fields and with
| various intentions which cannot be predicted or understood
| by other entities.
| DougN7 wrote:
| Jews in pre-Nazi Germany didn't know they had anything to
| hide. Are you religious? You could one day be targeted. Are
| you an atheist? You could one day be targeted. What
| political party do you agree with? You could one day be
| targeted. You can't decide to be against this stuff once
| it's out there and starts affecting you.
| ska wrote:
| > I know this is the age old "I have nothing to hide"
| argument
|
| If you know that, you already know why it is a specious
| argument.
| JasonFruit wrote:
| For example, I'm disclosing my schedule: when I'm likely to
| be in a given neighborhood, at a certain store, or simply
| not at home. I'm disclosing my habits: do I buy alcohol
| frequently? Do I buy certain magazines?
|
| None of it is critical information, but I'm not only
| handing it out, I'm wrapping it up into a neat, searchable
| bundle for bulk analysis. And more importantly, there will
| soon be no easy way to opt out; anyone who truly does have
| something to hide will be obvious by the lengths they must
| go to in doing so. This is one more step in a dangerous,
| inhuman direction.
| brabel wrote:
| > I'm disclosing my habits: do I buy alcohol frequently?
|
| Not in Sweden, because only state-run stores can sell
| alcohol (above 3.5% alcohol to be exact) - it's called
| Systembolaget and they already know exactly how much you
| drink!
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systembolaget
| jdeibele wrote:
| In the State of Oregon only state-licensed stores can
| sell hard liquor. "Hard" seems to be about 20% because
| you can buy wine and beer under that percentage in
| grocery stores.
|
| The price is the same at all stores and there's a price
| list online: http://www.olcc.state.or.us/pdfs/monthly_alp
| ha_price_list_c....
|
| A lot of business is done in cash at these stores.
| They're traditionally a lucrative place to rob because of
| the cash. There seems to be some people who don't want to
| be tracked but mostly the cash customers seem to be
| people who deal more with cash themselves.
| scbrg wrote:
| > it's called Systembolaget and they already know exactly
| how much you drink!
|
| Not if you pay with cash they don't.
| brabel wrote:
| They are allowed to ask your for your ID to make sure
| you're old enough (even if you look much older than
| enough), so they will still know who you are (just half-
| joking - they don't use that information to store
| information on you... or do they).
| vmception wrote:
| Its not the milk and eggs its the condoms and birth
| control.
|
| Its the data on why you suddenly stopped buying alcohol
| after buying a pregnancy test a month before.
|
| Who works at the store? Your former teacher? A prior fling?
| A neighbor? Does it matter when it can all be leaked with
| everyones data by a hacker anywhere when the ransom isn't
| paid by the store?
| karaterobot wrote:
| > Don't you think that once that dystopian future comes -
| when that info might be used against you - we'll have much
| worse things to worry about?
|
| What if this kind of technology helps create that dystopian
| future? What if this kind of technology makes it worse, or
| at least harder to fix? More sinister and more protracted,
| so to speak.
|
| We aren't in that future yet, and it won't happen overnight
| or through one big rollout. We'll get to that future
| through small, incremental steps that all seem perfectly
| reasonable at the time.
| Proziam wrote:
| > Why are you worried about disclosing how much milk and
| eggs you buy?
|
| They can see sexual activity, if you're a parent/expecting,
| a ton of health information, if you're a smoker, your
| physical location, and more.
|
| This isn't about eggs and milk. The data in combination
| constitutes a greater breach of privacy than the most
| dedicated stalker could hope to achieve.
| random_upvoter wrote:
| I worked in a supermarket for a while and there was plenty of old
| people who came to that shop almost daily just to interact with
| another human being.
| BlackVanilla wrote:
| Very true, and young people too! I think these shops could
| reduce loneliness as customers may talk to each other. There's
| more chance of interaction with a shop than no shop. The
| concern is where technology is used in place of staffed-shops,
| but perhaps you would have to make small talk with the security
| guard instead.
| Zitrax wrote:
| I don't think there is even a security guard there.
| BlackVanilla wrote:
| Perhaps in cities, where there is more footfall, it might
| save money to employ one. But you're certainly right, in
| these rural Swedish shops, there doesn't seem to be.
| qmmmur wrote:
| What's your point? That people should be indentured in low
| paying jobs to be old people's friends?
| okareaman wrote:
| You may want to brush up on the concept of 'service' before
| you start a business selling to the public
| OskarS wrote:
| It's a little bit... weird to think of "working in a grocery
| store" as indentured servitude. You know, not everyone has to
| be a software engineer or full-stack whatever. There's
| absolutely nothing wrong with working in a grocery store,
| it's a fine way to make a living!
| NullPrefix wrote:
| No one's forcing you to be full stack dev, you could always
| hang out with the mole people. Errr... I mean linux
| sysadmins.
| DC1350 wrote:
| > it's a fine way to make a living!
|
| The problem is that they don't make a living. People who
| work in grocery stores aren't working there because they
| want to, but usually just because it's their only option.
| If they quit their jobs they would be homeless by the end
| of the month. Do you understand what their living
| conditions are like? It's really sad and it makes me
| uncomfortable to talk to them. Minimum wage workers in high
| cost of living cities are just slavery as a service.
| random_upvoter wrote:
| Don't underestimate the satisfaction of a job where you don't
| have to prostitute your brain and where you can send a smile
| to people a couple of times a day.
| jtxx wrote:
| worked in restaurants for years before moving to software
| engineering. despite being 'good' at coding, it screws me
| up a bit that I was a lot happier in many ways while
| working at a restaurant. i felt I had a lot more brain
| bandwidth for my personal activities outside of work, too
| rootsudo wrote:
| People aren't indentured to work in Sweden. They don't have
| to work and have choice of where to work.
|
| It's also nice, to talk to people, instead of talking down to
| them.
| qmmmur wrote:
| I have done plenty of jobs that are shit pay in the same
| tier of manual labour (stockist, hospitality) and have
| never met anyone in that field who didn't want to do
| somethinge else if possible.
| Mediterraneo10 wrote:
| In the Nordic countries, those manual labor jobs are
| union jobs. Sure, pay is lower than other jobs, but
| thanks to collective bargaining and the union having your
| back in case of unforeseen overtime, it isn't "shit pay"
| like it might be in, say, the United States. I worked
| some of those jobs when I was in uni, and many of my
| coworkers were older people who had decided to stay for
| the long haul, because it does feel like a stable,
| acceptable working environment.
| hellbannedguy wrote:
| In the USA, we used to have union grocery stores.
|
| It seems like every year we are loosing more union jobs
| than ever.
|
| Safeway has always been a hated place to work, but it
| used to pay their employees a decent salary with
| benefits.
|
| Now--they have a weird semi union status. They load up
| the stores with desperate people, and still manage to
| make them maybe the most angry workers I have seen. I
| overheard one manager tell an employee yesterday to drive
| to a store two hours away, and be there by 7:00 am! The
| employee just looked crushed. That kind of crap didn't
| happen in union shops.
|
| I guess the future will be self checkouts, security cams
| everywhere, and facial recognition to track.
| Ygg2 wrote:
| That there is more than one facet even something as simple as
| a shop? Kinda like chatting with a Cab Driver.
| lawxls wrote:
| Isn't people work at these jobs because there's no other
| options available for them?
| CivBase wrote:
| Where I'm at, the vast majority of employees working
| "grunt" positions in supermarkets are high schoolers along
| with some elderly and disabled folks. Given those
| demographics, I strongly suspect most of them are not
| working there to make a living.
| [deleted]
| inter_netuser wrote:
| Disabled people work for fun in grunt, manual labour,
| positions?
|
| Seems hard to believe.
| CivBase wrote:
| I never said anybody was working for fun. The disabled
| people to which I am referring are certainly dependent on
| others for their care. The livelihoods of most people in
| the demographics I mentioned are not dependent on a part-
| time job like that.
| draw_down wrote:
| Thanks for posting
| Kinrany wrote:
| Or that the government could subsidize these jobs if they
| have positive output not captured by the businesses.
| dtech wrote:
| I would recon that isn't a problem in small rural communities,
| especially if the alternative they have now is no shops.
| crocodiletears wrote:
| I could see this being beneficial for some communities real
| far out in the sticks
|
| If major chains is all a small rural community has left, then
| I'd liken this to cracking open the bones of a well-pecked
| carcass and sucking out the marrow before discarding the
| corpse
| AniseAbyss wrote:
| There are supermarkets here that have a special slow lane for
| those people. I use the self check one.
| crocodiletears wrote:
| There's an interchangeable, overpriced, soulless gas-station
| chain on nearly every street corner in my town. When I fill up
| my tank at any one of them, I'm forced to listen to the sound
| of 9+ pumps puke out celebrity-gossip, advertainment pieces,
| and PSAs telling me about the coronavirus. You can't mute them
| anymore. Inside, the shelves are lined with nearly identical
| selections of overpriced merchandise.
|
| I could be anywhere in the midwest.
|
| I still have have a preference for the station I use, because
| the staff and I at a couple of the stations recognize each
| other, and have developed rapports over the course of many 30s
| smalltalk sessions. It's superficial, but it helps build social
| trust. We exchange small favors. I forgot my wallet one day,
| and the guy behind the registered covered for me and told me to
| pay him back when I could. I've told off a belligerent customer
| or two in ways they couldn't without being fired. We've
| discussed the local jobs market, and at points turned each
| other on to different employment opportunities.
|
| I'd pay higher prices if I knew it got them more money (and got
| rid of those damn telescreens).
|
| Nevertheless, I wouldn't pay for that kind of interaction
| directly if I could. I have a couple groups of regular friends.
| If I wanted social interaction alone, I'd get with them.
|
| It's not really about the interaction itself, it's about having
| some semblence of place and community in a world that's too
| big, too standardize, too indifferent, and too increasingly
| automated to think about you as anything other than an
| instrumentalizeable commodity, or a function to be optimized.
|
| Every technological step forward like this puts us under
| increasing surveillance, dedifferentiates the spaces in-which
| we live, and obviates the labor of large segments of our
| society while reducing the power of all but a select few.
|
| Hyperbolically, I feel like we're all just a few years from
| being stuffed in padded rooms with an ad-supported games
| console and permanently affixed morphine drips to optimize
| mortality, health, and quality of life metrics.
| grep_name wrote:
| > You can't mute them anymore
|
| Just for the record, I've found I can still mute them if I do
| the right combo of button presses.
|
| Most of these pumps in my state have a column on either side
| of the screen of four or five unlabeled buttons. If I press
| the left side top to bottom (usually by running my finger
| straight down the line) on the left column, then the right,
| then the left, that shuts up 90% of them in my area.
|
| Still sucks though
| istjohn wrote:
| I hate those auto-playing advertisements at the pump with a
| perhaps inexplicable passion. The worst is that they often
| can be muted by pressing one of six unlabeled buttons. As if
| they knew there would be people who would find the adverts
| obnoxious and want to mute them, but wanted to ensure that
| only people so enraged as to take to blindly smashing buttons
| would find the mute feature before they bashed the screen
| with the pump handle. Such blatant distain for their
| customers.
| jiveturkey wrote:
| > You can't mute them anymore.
|
| Oh but you can! A pin, paper clip, etc through a couple of
| the speaker openings will do the trick nicely.
| the-dude wrote:
| I used to shop daily when I was poor.
| plumeria wrote:
| Shopping daily does not implies being poor, I'd argue its
| mostly cultural, for example, many Japanese prefer to buy
| daily and keep low stocks on their pantries.
| proverbialbunny wrote:
| It sounds like you guys could use a YMCA or community center
| catering to these types. My grandmother was lonely so I
| convinced her to go to a YMCA for exercise reasons and she made
| a bunch of friends.
| Proven wrote:
| But the wage is $15/hour!
|
| Take that, capitalist swines!
| dehrmann wrote:
| Where's my rural, 24/7, unstaffed Systembolaget?
| vages wrote:
| There will be a market for both automated and manned grocery
| stores in the future.
|
| Until we have developed artificial general intelligence, I
| wouldn't trust a computer to recommend a cheese to with a certain
| kind of crackers. In stores with a reasonably wide selection of
| goods, I usually have to ask for the location of at least one
| thing.
|
| Although locating stuff _could_ be solved by looking it up with
| an app, I would rather pay the markup. And I'm quite certain that
| a lot of other people will, because as opposed to with a lot of
| other goods, you're often low on time when shopping for
| groceries. I guess the urgency of shopping is why online grocery
| shopping hasn't taken off as much as even I would have predicted
| a few years ago.
| 14 wrote:
| I like your sentiment but you are here on HN so assuming you
| are somewhere with food and an internet connection. Life is
| good. I see people around me begging on Facebook from the
| public library internet connection for cans to return so they
| can eat. They won't care for one second about a human in the
| store they only care about getting the cheapest food they can.
| These automated stores I can really see being a hit especially
| if they can cut the costs of a regular store even by a small
| percentage.
| JoeAltmaier wrote:
| I seriously doubt they are cost-saving. Small volume,
| expensive electronics, remote location == higher prices, not
| lower?
| NickNaraghi wrote:
| > Although locating stuff _could_ be solved by looking it up
| with an app
|
| It's already being solved with an app [0]. I think people will
| want different ways to interface with the store depending on
| their use case.
|
| [0]
| https://twitter.com/InfopopHQ/status/1357719866149490688?s=2...
| mytailorisrich wrote:
| > _Until we have developed artificial general intelligence, I
| wouldn 't trust a computer to recommend a cheese to with a
| certain kind of crackers._
|
| Supermarket employees, if you can find one around, have no clue
| about this and can indeed at most tell you the location of a
| type of item.
|
| > _In stores with a reasonably wide selection of goods, I
| usually have to ask for the location of at least one thing._
|
| Which is easily doable through an app on your phone or
| touchscreen in store.
|
| The reality is that as soon as the technology is there, and we
| seem to be very close, many supermarkets' staff will become
| redundant across the board.
|
| Having real people providing real service will still be a
| thing, I think, but more of a luxury experience. To take a
| British example: There won't be many staff left at Tesco but
| there will still be at Harrod's.
| offtop5 wrote:
| >wouldn't trust a computer to recommend a cheese to with a
| certain kind of crackers.
|
| What stores are you going to now where this is the case, every
| time I buy some food I need to know exactly what I want. I
| wouldn't expect some 19-year-old clerk to be a culinary expert
| either.
| leetcrew wrote:
| the cheese counter staff at whole foods are usually pretty
| knowledgeable (more so than me anyway).
|
| but even at a lower end store, the people that work there
| aren't idiots. they might not be able to tell you what cheese
| would go well with a california syrah, but they can probably
| recommend a good blend for homemade mac and cheese.
| calvinmorrison wrote:
| You'd be surprised how useful local butchers are at big
| chains. They really know their stuff and have been able to
| sort out cuts for me, even are happy to slice up some cheap
| big beef cuts into stir fry, they can make special orders
| of sausage, etc.
|
| Same goes for the bakery, I stand by my local ACME bakery
| being the easiest and very tasty birthday cake around, even
| above mom and pop shops.
| leetcrew wrote:
| oh for sure. I'm probably gonna go to an independent
| butcher if I want a nice ny strip, but otherwise I'm
| going to the local chain and asking the butcher what cut
| they recommend for the recipe I'm making.
| offtop5 wrote:
| I didn't call anyone an idiot, but if I'm a 19-year-old
| clerk I have other things on my mind than what type of
| cheese people like.
|
| Nor would it be this 19-year-old's job to guess what your
| preferences are
| macspoofing wrote:
| >I wouldn't trust a computer to recommend a cheese to with a
| certain kind of crackers
|
| Why not? Also, it's not necessarily a computer recommending
| anything. The decision of which cracker to pair with which
| cheese was already made by human experts employed by vendor,
| the computer just scales the suggestion of pairing to thousands
| or millions of people.
| hrvTGKFyDyko3aK wrote:
| There can be one person making recommendations remotely for 10
| stores. That same person can be sitting in front of an
| interactive map which allows them to look up the location of
| items and since there is a a camera in the store they will know
| where you are in relation to the item to direct you.
| freddie_mercury wrote:
| This seems like a strange counterfactual to insist on when the
| article is empirical evidence that, in this case, there _wasn
| 't_ a market for both kinds of stores and that people _weren
| 't_ willing to pay the markup.
| throwaway6734 wrote:
| Couldn't this be replace with roaming alexa style bots on r
| even something stationary at the end of each aisle?
| have_faith wrote:
| Given the quality and scope of most state of the art chat
| bots and personal assistants I can only imagine this being an
| immensely frustrating experience.
| JoeAltmaier wrote:
| My store will shop for you, and deliver to your car. So if you
| value the time, that's a solution here.
| ac0lyte wrote:
| As long as it's not produce. Everytime I try a shopping or
| delivery service a good chunk of the produce is trash.
| Bruised, under ripe, over ripe. Yes I am picky.
| polack wrote:
| You still have to make an order for everything you need and
| then go to the store to collect it. So the only time you
| really save here is the difference between collecting stuff
| from the physical shelves and the online counterpart.
|
| Cant imagine that being more than a couple of minutes of
| saved time for me.
| rjsw wrote:
| Some UK supermarkets have the same online user interface
| for delivery to your car and for delivery to your house.
| JoeAltmaier wrote:
| That was the comment being responded to. That it takes an
| app to find stuff. Which is onerous and presumably takes
| more than a couple of minutes.
| thatfrenchguy wrote:
| > I wouldn't trust a computer to recommend a cheese to with a
| certain kind of crackers.
|
| I mean, anyone who likes cheese just a little bit would never
| ever recommend you crackers with it ;-)
| Mediterraneo10 wrote:
| > There will be a market for both automated and manned grocery
| stores in the future.
|
| I don't think there will be. In countries like the Nordic
| countries with very high costs of labor, specialty physical
| retail locations of all sorts have been closing left and right,
| with people now ordering those things online. Certainly some
| consumers enjoy shopping in a shops with social interaction,
| but not enough to keep those shops solvent in the long haul.
| alexf95 wrote:
| Ok but what if I wanted to shop without a smartphone, or don't
| own one?
|
| Don't get me wrong this is great for the current situation but
| like all things it doesn't _only_ have good things about it.
| cik wrote:
| Then you've selected yourself out as not the target audience.
| There are plenty of shoppes that I don't patronize as I'm not
| the target audience. This is no different.
| raverbashing wrote:
| Thankfully the Swedes are not as luddites as the Germans and
| adopt more easily solutions that make their lives easier
|
| In fact I wouldn't be surprised if these stores were cashless,
| in several Scandinavian countries shop attendants handling
| change manually are already on their way out
| tchalla wrote:
| > Thankfully the Swedes are not as luddites as the Germans
| and adopt more easily solutions that make their lives easier
|
| Germans are not luddites, they are careful with privacy. They
| have more than one reason to be careful with it [0, 1].
| There's a tradeoff between "personal convenience" and "civil
| liberties" like privacy.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennkarte
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi
| raverbashing wrote:
| > Germans are not luddites, they are careful with privacy.
|
| Being scared of Google street view and continuing to use
| fax machines are not wise worries about privacy, sorry
|
| Yes I know about the historical reasons they're "worried"
| about privacy, but it's a misplaced worry because they
| don't address their real privacy shortcomings, like
| requiring registration of people (+ sensitive privacy info)
| who live in a city, using last names (and not apartment
| numbers) in mailboxes, limited anonymous internet access
| (to please the copyright lobby, etc) and their lax internet
| security capabilities (like the Berlin courts who were
| still on Windows 95)
|
| So again, if they really worry about privacy they're
| addressing it through the wrong angle.
| Mauricebranagh wrote:
| And this is a 100% a good thing the Swedish central bank has
| floated the idea of enforcing -ve interest on accounts in the
| past.
|
| This drive to a cashless system has downsides for the more
| vulnerable, poor and elderly - it also pushes extra risks
| onto the customer (which is why I don't do online Banking the
| UK)
|
| *edit* Banking for Baking
| vybbc wrote:
| Yawn. Hail to user tracking and dictatorial fintech startups?
| No thanks.
| WanderPanda wrote:
| Looks like a prime example of Whataboutism
| Grustaf wrote:
| There is an offline version of BankID if you insist. At least
| last time I checked.
| aboringusername wrote:
| Then you're excluded, simple as that. We're rapidly approching
| the point where you're:
|
| a) Expected to have, engage with and be active on a smartphone
|
| b) Be accessible via the mobile network (have an active phone
| number that can get SMS)
|
| c) Be "always online", frequently checking the bank in 'real
| time' to verify transactions, account balance etc
|
| d) Have battery life on your device. It's no good if you have
| just 5% and your phone turns off, your smartphone to person
| uptime needs to be very very good (your phone needs to be
| online quite often to be a very good citizen!).
|
| e) Be verifiable to you. The make, model and other information
| needs to be tied to you as a person. The SIM card needs to
| belong to you and you need to be traceable and trackable via
| your smartphone at all times, 24/7.
|
| If you do not meet those requirements you WILL be locked out of
| some functions in society. This is already the case today and
| will be the case in the future. No smartphone? No digital cash?
| Not for you.
|
| Our phones are becoming and will eventually be a part of "us",
| they will be a digital heartbeat and will need to output a
| "pulse", if your pulse stops, so will your societal inclusion
| (perhaps you can't go to a place without scanning a QR code,
| for example).
|
| The levels of exclusion will vary depending on criteria, for
| example, Covid passports will likely use an "app" as most
| things do otherwise you'll be denied access.
|
| Eventually, it'll be a law to ensure your digital pulse is
| active and working 24/7, every citizen will be issued a digital
| ID and a personal device that will need to be kept on your
| person at all times, it'll talk to various networks (telephony,
| GPS etc), and will act like a "tag". We're not there _yet_ but
| the pathway to reach that point has been made obvious during
| the covid pandemic. "Health passports" are the next step,
| various smartwatches that record health data (Apple, Fitbit)
| are getting into that territory. Eventually you as a human will
| be constantly monitored and uploaded to a server 24/7
| nivenkos wrote:
| While I agree this level of possible exclusion isn't great,
| what is the alternative?
|
| In Germany for example, that had resisted a lot of
| technological progress (online credit cards, Google Street
| View, etc.), I had to cancel my internet subscription by fax
| in 2015... It was hard enough to get a fax service, and then
| send personal details, etc. to prove my identity.
|
| I'd rather have a streamlined experience with apps and
| technology than have to deal with loads of bureaucracy.
| alexf95 wrote:
| It does appear like that, I guess it just isn't very apparent
| to me yet how smartphone dependent we are. The change just
| kinda creeped up.
| ghaff wrote:
| That's how most changes happen.
|
| For example, "we" didn't collectively decide one day we
| absolutely need to have credit cards. But if you don't have
| one now, there are a ton of things you can't really do.
| ryukafalz wrote:
| > Expected to have, engage with and be active on a smartphone
|
| And not just any smartphone: a smartphone controlled by Apple
| or Google. Further cementing their influence over society.
| wil421 wrote:
| Would it have been any better if Nokia and Blackberry had
| dominated the market?
| klmadfejno wrote:
| It would have been, at least to some degree, better if
| Nokia, Blackberry, Apple, and Google had dominated the
| market instead of Apple and Google.
| ryukafalz wrote:
| Not particularly, if that just means you're beholden to
| those companies instead.
|
| My issue is not that you need to be using Android in
| general for example (base Android is FOSS, so the user
| can in principle have full control over their device),
| but that often for these things you need to be using
| _Android with Google services_ , with all the tracking
| and such that entails.
| program_whiz wrote:
| Just want to point out that the same people who say "sorry if
| you don't have a phone you can't shop" are probably the same
| who claim requiring ID to vote is "voter disenfranchisement"
| and that disabled people should have special exceptions made
| for them.
|
| The claim "sorry you don't have a smart phone you can't buy
| food / clothes" has implications for people (children, the
| elderly, the disabled, the poor). Just replace "smartphone"
| with "stairs" (if you can't climb stairs sorry no food /
| clothes for you). Hey if its a problem, just order online, or
| get a friend to do it, why should we have to cater to people
| who aren't normal?
|
| Combine that with a culture where your phone can be disabled
| for many reasons (failure to pay, socially unacceptable
| views, employer owned) and you're creating a rather distopian
| picture.
|
| I'm all for a more streamlined version for people who are
| able, and that may well be the vast majority, but it makes
| sense to make provisions for those who aren't and not to say
| "sorry history has moved forward, if you don't have a car you
| can't have a job or go shopping." (as another example)
| [deleted]
| aboringusername wrote:
| Covid has already accelerated a cashless society, whereby
| you are incentivized to have a digital means of paying;
| GPay, Apple pay, Contactless card (and payment limits have
| increased as a result). You also have various testing and
| tracing schemes, perhaps using QR codes to scan as you
| enter a place, an "app" to monitor closeness to people who
| might have Covid.
|
| Those who cannot, do not or will not have a smartphone will
| become marginalized and excluded from society. The
| expectation and norm will be to obtain and fully use your
| digital extension (and there are many smartphones that are
| very cheap).
|
| Eventually, smartphoneless people will become a percentile
| point of the population that are easily discarded and
| hidden, and from my perspective that's becoming more and
| more obvious as time goes on.
|
| To me this is simply an observation, not a commentary as to
| whether it's good, bad, but it seems this is the direction
| society is accepting since I don't see any movements
| against smartphones or this type of future.
| johnday wrote:
| > Just want to point out that the same people who say
| "sorry if you don't have a phone you can't shop" are
| probably the same who claim requiring ID to vote is "voter
| disenfranchisement" and that disabled people should have
| special exceptions made for them.
|
| What makes you think that those are the same people? At
| first blush it seems like people in favour of easier access
| to vote and easier access for the disabled would be the
| _same_ people that advocate for more inclusive access to
| shops.
| colejohnson66 wrote:
| > why should we have to cater to people who aren't normal?
|
| Because (in the USA) the ADA exists, and has been shown to
| help even _non disabled_ people. Elevators were mandated on
| multi floor buildings because of wheelchairs, but they have
| a benefit of also being available for non disabled people
| who have their hands full of groceries.
|
| Also, what is "normal" to you won't be the same as someone
| else. Is a wheelchair bound person normal? A highly
| autistic person? What about high functioning autism? If
| you're going to define "normal", you'd be drawing a line
| _somewhere_ where you can't please everyone.
| quirkybeats1 wrote:
| I think you may have read a specific bit of that posters
| sentence and taken it as a direct attack and not the fact
| that you are 100% in agreement with them.
|
| They are saying that with the way society is moving
| forward, if you do not own a smartphone you are not
| considered "normal". We have the ADA in the USA for this
| reason, so that all aspects of society are accessible.
|
| There is nothing currently that prevents you being
| excluded if you do not have a smartphone and are
| therefore not considered "normal".
| [deleted]
| agustif wrote:
| Yesterday on Spanish local tv show they showed how in a small
| rural town without banks / ATM's, a pharmacy dubbed as a bank /
| cash retrieval service in a rural town...
|
| In another town the banks shared an office and each day of the
| week was for one of the banks to recieve customers lol. WeBank
|
| Could have the same but backwards, give cash, recieve e-coupon,
| scan e-coupon in store.
| p_l wrote:
| Some banks in Scotland do traveling bank, essentially a small
| bank office built into a lorry, serving areas with no other
| means of banking.
| Mauricebranagh wrote:
| Why not just install an ATM in the pharmacy or don't Spanish
| banks allow their atms's to access other banks?
|
| Having a mobile bank that drives around is another solution.
| bkor wrote:
| > Why not just install an ATM in the pharmacy
|
| In Netherlands we used to have ATMs in loads of places.
| Stores had semi-moveable ones. That stopped due to
| criminals blowing regular ATMs up. The explosives sometimes
| took out entire walls and made the entire building unsafe.
| Most stores removed those semi-moveable ATMs. Similarly,
| loads of regular ATMs were removed, especially ATMs close
| to a house.
|
| As Netherlands tried to do something about it the criminals
| started to attack the ATMs in Germany more. The criminals
| also often stole really quick cars, so Dutch police
| recently and finally have a few quick cars again. Before
| the quick chase cars the criminals often just outran the
| police. Oh, Dutch police take safety into account (try to
| minimize the risk for others).
| el-salvador wrote:
| The first example is very common in El Salvador too.
|
| The largest store in every town is usually a "financial
| correspondent" of one or more banks.
|
| The services available are: Remmitance sending/receiving,
| deposit and withdrawal using bank card, credit card payments,
| service payments (Eelctricity, Phone, University), service
| withdrawal, (Drive sharing driver withdrawals), among others.
|
| The tricky part for banks and businesses is offering services
| with similar deposit/withdrawal amounts so cash is always
| available without having to organize cash delivery to/from
| the bank correspondent.
| alexf95 wrote:
| I see that would make a lot of sense but of course you would
| need to set all this up in addition.
| cr3ative wrote:
| Many shops have a barrier/qualification to entry; membership at
| Costco for example.
|
| Smartphones are now cheap as dirt. The bigger problem would be
| having a bank account.
| el-salvador wrote:
| A Swedish bank account with Swedish Bank ID.
|
| Do they have a work around for non Swedish users?
| Shaanie wrote:
| You don't need to be a Swede to get bankid, but you do need
| a national registration number which you can apply for if
| you intend to live in Sweden for something like a year or
| more.
|
| In other words, if you live in Sweden you'll likely have
| bankid. As a tourist or seasonal worker, not so much.
| bellyfullofbac wrote:
| I'm reminded of a redditor commenting how he visited a
| music festival in Sweden as a foreigner, and how annoying
| it was for him, because all the food stands were expecting
| the Swedish payment system. And he couldn't even ask other
| visitors to buy stuff for him and take his cash, because
| the Swedes were very cash-averse.
| Shaanie wrote:
| Most people nowadays carry very little (if any) cash.
| However, I really doubt it would be a problem to find
| someone to buy food for you if you give them cash.
| TravelPiglet wrote:
| Except for supermarkets, I don't expect any stores to
| actually accept cash anymore. This have lead to a growing
| bag of small change that is not leaving my home, so I can
| understand people not wanting cash :)
| guerrilla wrote:
| Then you're going to have an extremely difficult time in
| Sweden. The same system is used for online banking, paying you
| taxes, verifying online purchases, accessing online pharmacies
| and medical systems, and using online doctors. I'm sure there's
| a dozen more services that I'm forgetting that use BankID.
| kalleboo wrote:
| I read it's also required to book an appointment to get the
| covid vaccine
| guerrilla wrote:
| Yeah, that's be part of what I meant by online medical
| systems. It'd be required for booking any type of medical
| appointment online.
| plorntus wrote:
| If there is a need and its profitable then surely someone would
| provide that service?
| gumby wrote:
| This is Scandinavia. Such a situation would be extremely rare
| and if that were the case visiting this shop would be a minor
| issue by comparison.
| fogihujy wrote:
| There's plenty of older-generation people without a smart
| phone in the Nordics. It doesn't matter though, since the
| smart-phone carrying majority will be enough to keep a store
| running in most places.
| Voloskaya wrote:
| From a business point of view you obvisously don't need to be
| accessible to 100% of potential customers to be viable. People
| without smartphones are probably less <0.5% of the population.
|
| Shops without access ramps lose probably more customers, and
| yet there are plenty of them.
| alexf95 wrote:
| I was looking more from a customers point of view but I get
| what you are saying.
|
| Your point about the access ramps also makes alot of sense,
| didn't really think about that case.
| zurn wrote:
| Smartphone penetration seems to be 40-80% in industrialized
| countries, according to 2019 figures from here: https://en.wi
| kipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_smartphon...
| dagw wrote:
| In the Nordic countries it's over 90%
|
| https://www2.deloitte.com/se/sv/pages/technology-media-
| and-t...
| zurn wrote:
| That percentage is of "consumers", might not include the
| entire population.
| kzrdude wrote:
| However, a shop without access ramp might be illegal (in
| Sweden), while no regulation exists for phone requirements.
| astatine wrote:
| If a area that has not had a shop for a decade can now have 80
| or 90% of the population served with this method, then I
| believe not looking for the mythical 100% coverage is a
| perfectly good thing to do.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| Many grocery stores nowadays have hand scanners in addition to
| a smartphone app (they often had the hand scanners before a
| good app), so that + a payment point = problem solved.
| alexf95 wrote:
| Ah i didn't know about that, thanks!
| twic wrote:
| Exactly. My local supermarket in the UK has this, including
| handsets for people not using the mobile app. Here's a decent
| overview of how it all works:
|
| https://uxdesign.cc/the-ux-of-sainsburys-
| smartshop-f7b94af6e...
|
| Sorry to disappoint aboringusername, but this is not a ploy
| to starve us all into carrying surveillance devices. Still,
| the tinfoil hat at least looks fetching.
| dageshi wrote:
| I guess you've chosen to travel to a larger town and do your
| shopping there?
| mrweasel wrote:
| I believe Sweden has pretty good policing, and the Swedes are
| just about as honest as you could ever expect a nation to be, but
| if this was in "rural" Denmark and someone decided to raid the
| store, there would be very little stopping them. Police is in
| many cases at least 30 minutes away, if not more, and have no
| resources to investigate the theft of 10L of milk.
|
| In many cases the staff is a store is just as much present to
| scare of any one wanting to steal. Even if we've seen gangs just
| walk out with massive amounts of goods, and the staff
| understandably choosing to not confront them.
| WhompingWindows wrote:
| I'm not sure that'd be a solid strategy. You have to scan your
| ID to get into the store. So just to raid for a 10L of milk,
| you'd have to then break and enter, not just steal the milk.
| The store is probably riddled with cameras and, with the low
| population density, there's not a great chance you can get away
| with breaking and entering, much less stealing.
| mrweasel wrote:
| Currently no one would think twice about a masked person
| entering a store, so I'm not sure about the usefulness of the
| cameras.
|
| I would like to see how secure the entry points really are,
| because I doubt it a lock.
| DownGoat wrote:
| BankID which is used to open the doors uses a password and
| a second factor for authentication (hardware token or
| secret from SIM card).
| hrvTGKFyDyko3aK wrote:
| As most grocery stores aren't open 24 hours there is plenty
| of opportunity for people to break into grocery stores with
| no one in them and steal but that isn't a common enough
| issue to worry about.
| null_object wrote:
| My experience is directly opposite yours, funnily enough. I
| spend almost all my summers in Denmark and find people
| amazingly honest and friendly.
|
| I think people are just people, wherever you go - neither more
| nor less honest than anywhere else (given the opportunity).
|
| Even in Stockholm the 'local' police branches often close over
| the summer.
|
| I've only needed to dial the emergency number twice (luckily)
| and both times I was placed in a queue. Another time when kids
| were smashing bikes on my street in central Stockholm on a warm
| summer evening, the police simply said there was no-one
| available to send.
| martindbp wrote:
| People in rural towns are also as honest as they come, but even
| so I'd expect trouble by youngsters. But maybe the cameras are
| enough of a deterrent.
|
| I could also see a solution where you need to identify yourself
| in order to be let in through the doors. If you have been
| spotted letting someone else in who proceeds to steal or
| vandalize, that person could be held accountable.
| guerrilla wrote:
| > I could also see a solution where you need to identify
| yourself in order to be let in through the doors.
|
| The article explains that it requires BankID authentication
| and a pre-registered banking card to enter.
| martindbp wrote:
| I see, somehow I missed that. Well, then I think they have
| their bases covered. Looking forward to trying one out.
| mrweasel wrote:
| I was thinking that, something like what Amazon has done,
| where you need to ID with the app on your phone, but with no
| security, you can just jump whatever is blocking your entry.
|
| The stores can't be to secure, people need to be able to exit
| safely.
| bluntfang wrote:
| >Police is in many cases at least 30 minutes away, if not more,
| and have no resources to investigate the theft of 10L of milk.
|
| Just for reference [0], NYC police's response times for
| "serious" and "non-critical" 911 calls are close to or over 10
| minutes. Responses to "alarms" (which I assume would be things
| like B&E to a shop after hours) is over 30 minutes.
|
| [0] https://www1.nyc.gov/site/911reporting/reports/end-to-end-
| re...
| Grustaf wrote:
| > I believe Sweden has pretty good policing
|
| This was true 30 years ago. Today the police is all but
| abolished, especially in rural areas. I wouldn't be surprised
| if there were police regions the size of Denmark with a single
| police car.
| [deleted]
| adamcstephens wrote:
| So how will the people who would have worked in a shop like this,
| afford to shop for food? In Sweden this probably isn't as big of
| an issue, but not every country is as socially conscious.
| lr4444lr wrote:
| Did the manure shovelers' families all die in squalor once
| Henry Ford brought the auto assembly line to scale?
| adamcstephens wrote:
| You're comparing two labor intensive efforts. This is an
| article about a store that has no in-store employees. What
| jobs does such a store have to offer as a replacement?
| [deleted]
| colechristensen wrote:
| The whole history of human civilization is one kind of labor
| replacing another, with no shortage of people wondering about
| how the new being a destructive force doesn't make it a social
| evil.
|
| The people who would have worked at this kind of shop will find
| other jobs created or otherwise enabled by the lowered costs of
| automation.
| adamcstephens wrote:
| The whole of the industrial and now computer revolution has
| been the degradation of human existence in the name of profit
| and progress. Elimination of employment that is a requirement
| for sustenance and a non-miserable life is common.
|
| Automation doesn't create jobs, it shifts them, generally
| towards less well paid options. Sure there are a few
| engineers who make more money, but what about the non skilled
| laborers?
| colechristensen wrote:
| Today's unskilled laborers live in ways that would make
| preindustrial kings envious.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| > Sure there are a few engineers who make more money, but
| what about the non skilled laborers
|
| That's a political problem. Obvious solution is to transfer
| wealth from those who have it to those that don't. Make
| higher education free, pay people to learn, or to do
| research, universal basic income, etc.
| adamcstephens wrote:
| Agreed these are policy problems, but as creators of
| technology we're responsible for the outcomes as well.
| Ignoring the problems in the name of progress, as others
| replying to my thread seem want to do, is unethical and
| immoral.
|
| I'm on board with your suggestion. Let's implement it.
| Alongside the progress in automation, not as an
| afterthought.
| oauea wrote:
| > but not every country is as socially conscious
|
| I think you answered your own question.
| elindbe3 wrote:
| Is your point that there should never be a job displacing
| technology or that retail workers are a special class that
| should be protected from automation?
| adamcstephens wrote:
| My point is that our fellow citizens deserve dignity of work
| and an ability to feed themselves. This is but one example of
| automation displacing workers, but there are plenty of other
| examples that also include non automation related job
| eliminations.
| elindbe3 wrote:
| So you're arguing the first one, never implement technology
| to save labor because people deserve the dignity of work.
| How far should we take this? Should we burn the tractors?
| We could create lots of new jobs for agricultural laborers.
| Or perhaps the government, instead of handing out welfare,
| could pay people to dig holes and fill them in again.
| alexf95 wrote:
| Yea I see more problems with this than benefits. Sure it's nice
| to have during corona times but what about after it when it's
| not necessary anymore?
| elindbe3 wrote:
| If it's necessary during COVID times, it could still be
| beneficial during non COVID times. Even if COVID goes away,
| there are plenty of other viruses lurking around that kill
| lots of people each year.
| cr3ative wrote:
| As per the article: "[..] if there's less footfall than
| expected in one location, the wooden containers can easily be
| picked up and tested elsewhere"
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| Grocery stores will always be necessary, unless I
| misinterpret your question?
| docdeek wrote:
| It's not always about what is necessary because customer
| preferences can change, too. The automated ordering on
| machines in fast food restaurants or self-checkout in
| supermarkets may have been introcued to save businesses money
| and reinforced to limit interactions under COVID, but some
| people just prefer not to have that human interaction when
| it's not absolutely required. As more people get used to and
| come to prefer managing things like that for themselves, the
| fact that it isn't necessary will be overcome by the fact
| that people like it.
| violetgarden wrote:
| Yeah! I have a very soft voice. I've practiced to make it
| bigger, but even my loudest voice is not terribly loud.
| Ordering things behind the counter can be tough for me
| especially if there's background noise of people chattering
| or machines whirring like in a coffee shop. Kind of an odd
| situation, and I've been able to get through life fine
| without self order kiosks, but I'm glad when they're there
| because I just feel like I'm easier to deal with as a
| customer.
| [deleted]
| ceejayoz wrote:
| The answer seems to be that these stores wouldn't have existed
| in the first place. For now, at least, they're not taking jobs
| away.
|
| > The store is part of the Lifvs chain, a Stockholm-based
| start-up that launched in 2018 with the goal of returning
| stores to remote rural locations where shops had closed down
| because they'd struggled to stay profitable.
| adamcstephens wrote:
| Except these aren't the only stores like this, and they
| aren't and won't stay in only remote locations. Automation
| and self service will continue to grow, and collectively we
| need to figure out how to care for our fellow humans that
| will lose out due to the evolution.
| ramraj07 wrote:
| Broken window fallacy argument - we can't artificially keep
| doing demonstrably less efficient things for the sake of jobs,
| it has never worked and never will. If it becomes a problem
| then we have to deal with it by finding new avenues to employ
| people or not need employment to live a life.
| jjoonathan wrote:
| > we can't artificially keep doing demonstrably less
| efficient things
|
| Well then it's a good thing adamcstephens didn't suggest
| that, is it not?
|
| > If it becomes a problem then we have to deal with it by
| finding new avenues
|
| That's the correct approach, but so far the strategy has been
| a combination of denial (which I hear an echo of in the word
| "if") and inaction. Protectionism is a dead end, but so are
| denial and inaction. It's going to get worse before it gets
| better.
| KptMarchewa wrote:
| >so far
|
| Since alphabet's invention put ancient egyptian hieroglyph
| writers out of jobs, we as a society has put up with it
| just fine.
| jjoonathan wrote:
| After 50 years of a rising tide failing to float most
| boats in the US, "putting up with it just fine" wouldn't
| be my take on the issue.
| KptMarchewa wrote:
| You're just paying the price of rest of the world
| catching up. Privilege of getting out of World War 2 as
| the pretty much only major unaffected economy could not
| be sustained for a century, ya know?
| adamcstephens wrote:
| Straw man argument - I didn't say we have to pay people to do
| this, but today you have to be paid to eat. I'm all for
| eliminating the requirement for work to live.
| m12k wrote:
| Yep, refrigerators also wreaked havoc on the "blocks of ice"
| delivery industry, but trying to prevent that change would
| have been as useless as trying to hold back the tide with
| your arms. The effort should be put into ensuring everyone
| can have decent lives in a world improved by increased
| efficiency, not holding back progress.
| rgrieselhuber wrote:
| That's assuming that efficiency is the only thing we should
| care about in society.
| m12k wrote:
| Efficiency is the reason we can have this conversation
| instead of standing out in a field, manually trying to coax
| a living out of the unforgiving soil every day. Efficiency
| isn't the goal, but it's one of the best tools we have for
| improving what a human life can be - like for example
| giving us enough leisure time to be able to read, have
| hobbies, do art or spend more time with loved ones.
| eertami wrote:
| >like for example giving us enough leisure time to be
| able to read, have hobbies, do art or spend more time
| with loved ones.
|
| You say that like it is a universally accepted truth, yet
| the American worker allegedly takes less vacation time
| than a medieval peasant[0]. Going even further back,
| prior to agriculture we likely had even more "free"
| time[1].
|
| Efficiency is a goal is nice, but the modern work day
| does not strive for efficiency.
|
| [0]: https://www.businessinsider.com/american-worker-
| less-vacatio...
|
| [1]: https://www.earth.com/news/farmers-less-free-time-
| hunter-gat...
| m12k wrote:
| Sure, the American ass-in-seat mentally is not efficient.
| The American for-profit healthcare system is not
| efficient. And the American way of leaving its poorer
| citizens to fend for themselves instead of investing in
| them is not efficient. That's not an indictment of
| America's belief in efficiency, that's an indictment of
| its blind belief in the market as the best source of all
| solutions.
| rgrieselhuber wrote:
| There's nothing wrong with efficiency and it provides a
| lot of benefits, as you say. But the efficiency argument
| is also used to knock out local businesses in favor of
| big box stores and so on. Everybody likes efficiency but
| we should be wary of using that as the only way to
| measure outcomes.
| m12k wrote:
| I agree that a singular focus on efficiency without
| regard for unintended side effects or negative
| externalities is crazy too. "Sustainability" should be
| right up there with efficiency as a main tool - doing
| something efficiently in an unsustainable way
| (societally, economically or ecologically) will by
| definition not be efficient in the long term anyway - but
| our society is often organized in a way where those who
| benefit from short term profits are not the same as those
| who must bear the long term costs, so they don't balance
| out like ideally they should. So the effort should be put
| into aligning those incentives, make it unprofitable to
| chase short-term profits in ways that harm society - not
| to fight efficiency as a concept.
| bopbeepboop wrote:
| > for example giving us enough leisure time to be able to
| read, have hobbies, do art or spend more time with loved
| ones
|
| Do you have a citation we do more of that now than in
| agrarian societies?
|
| My impression was the opposite:
|
| We have more creature comforts, and exert less physical
| activity, but actually do all of those things less as
| well for "efficiency" reasons.
|
| A rough analysis suggests that chimps have as much or
| more leisure time than I do and spend more time with
| their families than I do, on a daily basis.
| EvilEy3 wrote:
| Because people who would have worked in a shop like this can
| only work in a shop like this.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| How many people would have worked in a small grocery store for
| a town of 1000? I'm no expert, but I know there's small corner
| shops that have just one person running them with maybe another
| one or two people helping them. Full rotation staff, maybe 10?
| That's 1% of the local workforce.
|
| I mean what do the 1000 people in the town do for a living to
| buy food?
| adamcstephens wrote:
| Let's extrapolate then. Assume these stores spread to an
| entire country, since they're not just located in rural
| areas. We'll also stick with 1% of the population losing
| jobs. In the US that's over 3 million people. What should
| those people do instead?
| [deleted]
| null_object wrote:
| I'm hoping this can have even wider implications for society and
| the way people interact. In rural Sweden the last decade all the
| small local village stores have totally disappeared. This means
| that when people who are spread around the countryside could
| previously just cycle a few kilometers to a nearby shop, they now
| need to take their car and drive (say) 25 kilometers to the
| nearest town - which also has usually built an out-of-town
| shopping area that sprawls enormous car-parking over land that
| might previously have been forest or farmland.
|
| The roads are therefore constantly clogged by speeding cars, and
| have become seriously bike-hostile, discouraging local
| interactions even more.
|
| I think these small stores could actually become a focus for
| local activity again - even without staff.
| xen2xen1 wrote:
| I'm waiting on Automats to come back, esp. in a complex firm.
| Basically a bunch of little windows with stuff. Half expected the
| article to be about that.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automat
| msoad wrote:
| This makes Amazon Go look like an over-engineered solution!
| splitbrain wrote:
| how does refilling these container shops work? who does it? staff
| riding along on the truck? or is the entire shop replaced?
| m12k wrote:
| From the article:
|
| "There are 24-hour surveillance cameras too, which alert the
| store's manager Domenica Gerlach if there's a break-in or a
| stock spillage.
|
| She looks after four stores in the region, usually visiting
| once a week to clean, stack the shelves and put together click-
| and-collect orders made online. Lifvs uses artificial
| intelligence to work out what stock to order for each store,
| based on the data it collects about locals' shopping habits"
| ejolto wrote:
| > Lifvs uses artificial intelligence to work out what stock
| to order for each store
|
| The "AI" is an if test if stock <
| stock_threshold: buy_more(stock)
| aloisdg wrote:
| You can use statistics to determine what can of stock you
| should favor (e.g. winter clothes vs summer clothes) and
| the quantity (more Christmas food in December less after).
| If you have enough data from previous years or a good
| heuristics, you can start this one easily. Even a plain old
| markov chains could help.
| m12k wrote:
| I'm stunned that week after week, I'll come across the
| same shelf, with one variant of a thing sold out by
| midweek, and the unpopular variant next to it virtually
| untouched, as always. The amount of statistics or
| programming required to prevent this, and balance the
| stock to what the market shows that it wants, is fairly
| trivial, and yet my local supermarket has failed to do so
| for several decades now.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| I had a good chuckle in March of last year when I
| realized the shelves had plenty of "all natural, non-
| toxic cleaner" sort of products during the run on Clorox
| wipes and bleach.
| sct202 wrote:
| The on hand inventory is most likely wrong in the system,
| so it probably thinks there are phantom units available.
| This happens a lot with products that could have been
| lost, stolen or expired and the system was not updated.
| tom_mellior wrote:
| The article also speaks of "fresh fruit and vegetables"
| though. I don't think visiting once a week would be enough
| for many fruits and vegetables.
| Animats wrote:
| This could be the future of charging stations. A parking lot with
| chargers, and an automated convenience store.
| dalbasal wrote:
| This is potentially interesting... maybe.
|
| A lot of retail has a trade off between small convenient stores
| and bing inconvenient ones. One is convenient. The other is
| better stocked, better priced, etc.
|
| Software is eating the inconvenient stores. Better stocked,
| Better priced. Hard to beat. Maybe robots eat convenient stores.
|
| Depending on how these scale and what price economics are like,
| this might work well.
| specialist wrote:
| Privacy (encrypt data at rest) requires global identifiers like
| BankID, RealID, or equiv.
|
| It's a counter intuitive conclusion.
|
| cite: Translucent Databases
|
| source: worked on medical records and voter privacy stuff
| cheph wrote:
| > BankID, a secure national identification app operated by
| Sweden's banks.
|
| Wow, that sounds pretty racist. Do better Sweden, we all remember
| what you did in WW2.
| Ceezy wrote:
| What happened to Sweden anti-confinement stance? Finland, Norway,
| Danmark are all below 1000 death from COVID total. Sweden is
| above 10 000 death...
| kebman wrote:
| I remember visiting a fully automated store already in the 90's
| in Tromso, Norway. It was like an extended vendoring machine. It
| was quite fun watching the robot hand go up and down based on
| your order. I believe such stores were already common in Japan at
| the time. The shop didn't make it, though, and was discontinued
| after a year or two.
|
| Today automated checkouts are popping up in more and more shops
| in Norway, though they're not present in all stores yet. You
| simply do your shopping as normal, but instead of having a shop
| clerk beep them for you, you have to do it yourself. It's pretty
| straightforward, and no app is needed. Sometimes there will be a
| guard overseeing the terminals, but mostly you're left to your
| own devices. Otherwise there's usually a normal teller on hand
| for questions or for products that don't scan. Or if you simply
| want to pay with legal tender, which Norwegian shops are still
| obliged to accept per law.
| Thlom wrote:
| In the Coop stores (at least Coop Obs) you can use both the
| coop app and one of the handheld scanners to scan products
| while you pick them. Then you scan the device or your app in
| the checkout to pay.
| tengbretson wrote:
| Can we just skip this step and go directly to auto-dispensing
| kibble bowls?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-03-09 23:02 UTC)