Most active commenters
  • (6)
  • jonknee(5)
  • joezydeco(5)
  • elicash(4)
  • cobookman(4)
  • karambahh(4)
  • digler999(4)
  • Karunamon(4)
  • TulliusCicero(4)
  • DashRattlesnake(3)

←back to thread

Amazon Go

(amazon.com)
1247 points mangoman | 174 comments | | HN request time: 2.144s | source | bottom
1. elicash ◴[] No.13105963[source]
I worked at a grocery store for several years, and one thing I recall is customers CONSTANTLY putting items back in a random aisle, rather than where they found it.

I wonder how this tech deals with that? Maybe they figured that out, too. But I was amused in the video when I saw the customer putting it back where it belonged, because that's not how I remember that going...

All that said, this is fantastic and exciting.

Edit: I also hope they're already thinking about EBT cards and WIC.

replies(26): >>13105994 #>>13106026 #>>13106046 #>>13106095 #>>13106097 #>>13106098 #>>13106177 #>>13106252 #>>13106276 #>>13106292 #>>13106365 #>>13106391 #>>13106456 #>>13106541 #>>13106638 #>>13106641 #>>13107002 #>>13107318 #>>13107752 #>>13108231 #>>13108233 #>>13108570 #>>13110608 #>>13110959 #>>13111172 #>>13170269 #
2. golergka ◴[] No.13105994[source]
I guess tech like this could collect this information and then create an optimized "garbage collection" path for a single employee to put all the stuff back on the shelves once in a while.
3. sqeaky ◴[] No.13106026[source]
Knowing Amazon they will charge the first few customers for the products, claim it was a glitch the do something panicky to either fix or prevent the problem.
4. Cthulhu_ ◴[] No.13106046[source]
I really wouldn't trust 'picked up off the shelf' detection, not without the whole thing looking like a giant vending machine. RFID tags on products probably works better.
replies(8): >>13106119 #>>13106168 #>>13106227 #>>13106339 #>>13106494 #>>13106561 #>>13107378 #>>13107948 #
5. kirykl ◴[] No.13106095[source]
Avoiding getting charged is an incentive to put it back in the right place that doesn't exist currently. Maybe not even where you picked up just a discard area
replies(4): >>13106228 #>>13106338 #>>13106366 #>>13107454 #
6. valine ◴[] No.13106097[source]
I imagine having people put items in their original position when they change their mind won't be an issue. I know that if it were me I wouldn't risk being accidentally charged for something simply because I couldn’t be bothered to put it back in the right spot.
7. ◴[] No.13106098[source]
8. joezydeco ◴[] No.13106119[source]
I don't think the system works like that.

From my first quick take of the video, the app+turnstyle is used to identify you to the store. The video system then tracks your position as you walk around.

When you walk out, the items are recognized and tallied by a large RFID sweep. Funneling you back out through a turnstyle makes sure the vision system knows it's you. Notice that you don't need to barcode yourself on the way out, and the exit system is phone agnostic (it's not checking for an NFC or Apple Pay tag or anything).

The whole "tracking individual items as they come on and off the shelves" task is a very complex thing. But tracking bodies as they walk around a 1,500 square foot room isn't that hard.

replies(2): >>13106245 #>>13106792 #
9. hodgesrm ◴[] No.13106177[source]
How does this handle produce? The assumption seems to be that everything is packaged.
replies(3): >>13106424 #>>13106598 #>>13106752 #
10. geekamongus ◴[] No.13106227[source]
I can't help but picture Indiana Jones swiping the golden idol from the pedestal with one hand, and quickly replacing it with a bag of sand using the other hand.
11. waqf ◴[] No.13106228[source]
Yeah, or it's an incentive to not shop there at all. You can't just use "incentive" as a reason why you expect to succeed with a UX that punishes your users for small mistakes.
replies(1): >>13107614 #
12. cobookman ◴[] No.13106245{3}[source]
Not as crazy as it sounds. With RAIN Rfid you can get the xyz location of a tag from ~30ft away accurate to 6" in realtime.

Examples: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1LykdRWTfk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hCA8L7v-R8

replies(2): >>13106630 #>>13106875 #
13. devy ◴[] No.13106252[source]
If all merchandise in the Amazon Go store have been RFID tagged, this is a non-issue for checkout, as the turnstile tag scanner should be able to sense the items you take out of the store. As far as randomly put back at a different place of the items, the staff can use the tag scanner to detect that and fix it up even easier as oppose to physically locate the item by human vision which is arguably harder and less efficiently.

We don't know the details yet but RFID may solve this issue completely.

replies(2): >>13106387 #>>13107259 #
14. mulletboy ◴[] No.13106276[source]
> I worked at a grocery store for several years, and one thing I recall is customers CONSTANTLY putting items back in a random aisle, rather than where they found it.

If the incentive is reducing the chances of being charged by the system for an item they didn't buy, you bet people will put stuff back where they found it.

replies(6): >>13106369 #>>13106396 #>>13106423 #>>13106714 #>>13106805 #>>13106962 #
15. Blue3Wheeler ◴[] No.13106292[source]
In the video they said they use deep learning algorithms. Perhaps each product has a unique number and even if it is not put in the right place the algorithm saves its new position.
16. DashRattlesnake ◴[] No.13106338[source]
Honestly, that's an "incentive" that should be illegal. You should only get charged for something if you actually take it home or use it. Anything else is a cop out to push the costs of a deficient system onto the user/customer.
replies(4): >>13106498 #>>13106817 #>>13106983 #>>13107642 #
17. stevenmays ◴[] No.13106339[source]
I think RFID tags are too expensive to put on every product. I may be wrong on this.
replies(5): >>13106393 #>>13106515 #>>13106606 #>>13106729 #>>13107854 #
18. ◴[] No.13106363{3}[source]
19. neves ◴[] No.13106365[source]
The big store chains nowadays doesn't even have someone to put products in their place. Their product provider personal that put the product in the correct place. Now they will have a way to make their own customers to work for them. This is a store owner dream.
20. pbz ◴[] No.13106366[source]
If that happens the customer would just complain and in time we'd lose the trust in the store. So, no, the incentive is most definitely on Amazon to get it right. If they don't, they won't last long. Just imagine news stories with people that later noticed that they "purchased" items that they didn't leave the store with. It would be a huge mess.
21. elicash ◴[] No.13106369[source]
True. And maybe they also figured out a technical solution, too. If not, I'm sure they will eventually.

But I'd also have been more impressed with the video if they showed stressed-out parents with crying kids and their hands full as they've got their cell phones tucked between their heads and shoulders, rather than young people quietly grabbing a single item and leaving.

This can actually HELP with those problems because a lot of those problems happen while in a line. Maybe they expect their customers to be like the ones in this video, but certainly my store was a little more chaotic. They should design for that chaos -- and maybe they did, but the video doesn't show it, is all. Presumably because they wanted to stress how easy it was, but to me that comes off as alien to the real world, based on my experience.

replies(1): >>13106717 #
22. simonvc ◴[] No.13106387[source]
Faraday cage bags are already a thing.. I can see them being a lot more popular..
replies(2): >>13107396 #>>13107407 #
23. s_kilk ◴[] No.13106391[source]
Way back when I worked retail we had a cohort of particularly ignorant customers who would get fresh meats from the deli counter, wander about the shop then decide they didn't want said meats and stash it behind random products in whichever aisle they happened to be in at the time.
24. iainmerrick ◴[] No.13106393{3}[source]
I have a feeling you're wrong -- I see RFID tags on almost everything these days, even tiny cheap products.
replies(1): >>13106534 #
25. xexers ◴[] No.13106396[source]
I can tell you've never worked in QA :)

you must assume you're users will do whacky things and they will have no idea how the system works.

26. exhilaration ◴[] No.13106423[source]
If that risk exists it will turn into a disincentive for people to even pick up items and look at them closely. If this gets in the way of people making impulse purchases it could significantly reduce the store's sales volume - after all few people stick to their shopping lists and retailers know this. I'm looking forward to seeing the results!
replies(1): >>13106549 #
27. xeroaura ◴[] No.13106424[source]
It seems like everything is already prepackaged in the store according to what they have for sale. I know my local grocery store has certain things prepackaged into bundles instead of allowing people to bag them.
28. agumonkey ◴[] No.13106456[source]
Meh, cheap rfid, or funny barcode positionning to ensure their sensors can always track stuff.

I'm not that thrilled, somehow I'm not in love with todays tech and progress (that's on me). Moreover I wonder what people living on cashier jobs (it's an easy target for unqualified and hurried people) will feel.

Goodbye profession.

replies(1): >>13106651 #
29. jpalomaki ◴[] No.13106494[source]
RFID has some privacy concerns, since the tags continue work when you are outside the store and somebody can scan what you are carrying.

Using these as EAN barcode replacement also has the problem that the system can't tell if you bought the product from Amazon GO or if you just happen to be carrying it with you when you enter the store.

replies(3): >>13107361 #>>13107657 #>>13113127 #
30. Karunamon ◴[] No.13106498{3}[source]
It's the store's fault when you selfishly and silently put perishable goods in non-refrigerated areas so they can spoil? IMO the store would have the right to charge you with destruction of property, if not the cost of the goods they're now out entirely due to your actions.

The number of people that never learned "put stuff back where you got it" from their parents is astounding.

replies(4): >>13106628 #>>13107267 #>>13107518 #>>13110507 #
31. jpalomaki ◴[] No.13106515{3}[source]
Quick search on Alibaba shows that on volume these are just $0.01 each (and probably lower when you buy larger volumes). Of course sticking these to each product is inconvenient and I would assume the tags are not yet built in in most grocery product packaging.

https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/China-Professional-ma...

replies(2): >>13107007 #>>13109248 #
32. mattlondon ◴[] No.13106534{4}[source]
Yep, in smallish bulk (low 1000s), you can get them for about 10-20c a tag (and these are "self printed" ones you can print in-store as needed via dedicated RFID printers) (e.g. https://www.atlasrfidstore.com/rfid-label-4x2-for-the-zebra-...)

I am sure that amazon/walmart/tesco/whoever will need more than 1000 at a time and so obviously get a larger discount. Probably down to well under a penny or two - starts to make a lot of sense when you factor in the other benefits (lower staff, easier stock-tracking/taking etc)

33. makecheck ◴[] No.13106541[source]
One interesting benefit of the “detect removal from shelf” concept is that there might finally be a time stamp associated with the removal of the item.

Right now, if you see a random perishable item sitting on a shelf, you HAVE to throw it away because it could have been there for a long time. On the other hand, if you can see that some Frozen Peas were only taken off the shelf 2 minutes ago, you can just put them back and they’ll be fine.

Although, what I’d really want is not only the time stamp but the customer. I’m sorry but if you cost the store $25 by leaving a damned ROAST in the cereal aisle, I would be perfectly happy to never let you in the store again.

replies(5): >>13106589 #>>13106649 #>>13106687 #>>13107061 #>>13107485 #
34. mulletboy ◴[] No.13106549{3}[source]
This. That 80$ champagne bottle over there? Better get my hands off it!
replies(1): >>13106689 #
35. solatic ◴[] No.13106561[source]
RFID probably works better if you control the packaging, for instance, for deli counter products. But for packaging that you don't control, you either have to slap an RFID tag on when the items get to the store, negotiate with suppliers to start to include RFID tags in their packaging for items shipped to your store, or arbitrarily limit yourself in terms of which products your store may sell. Not to mention that, if your store slaps on RFID tags itself, it raises the OpEx of running the store as well as needing to come up with tamper-resistant tags, because somebody would be able to steal a product by discreetly removing a tag and then walking out of the store.

In essence, RFID tag technology already exists, and there's a reason why it hasn't taken off in grocery stores.

replies(1): >>13106690 #
36. saosebastiao ◴[] No.13106589[source]
UPC codes are not uniquely identifiable to the unit, only to the product. You could narrow it down to all of the people who took that item off the shelf, but you'd probably be into surveillance reviews after that.

An option is to label all the items with a unique identifier, but that is typically seen as too costly, which is also the reason Amazon hasn't fully fixed the FBA counterfeit problem.

replies(1): >>13106694 #
37. Guest98123 ◴[] No.13106598[source]
At a lot of grocery stores in Europe, you weigh and tag your own produce. Basically you put your bananas in a plastic bag, set them on the scale in the produce section, and push the number for bananas or select them on the touch screen. It prints out a barcode and price, you stick it on the bag, and the cashier scans it.

Perhaps this could be similar, but instead of printing the barcode, it automatically adds the item to your Amazon cart.

38. cobookman ◴[] No.13106606{3}[source]
RAIN Rfid tag is < 10cents.
replies(1): >>13106749 #
39. monsieurbanana ◴[] No.13106628{4}[source]
> It's the store's fault when you selfishly and silently put perishable goods in non-refrigerated areas so they can spoil?

I find it really annoying when people put words into somebody's mouth.

Misplaced perishable goods are certainly a problem, but not the one they're discussing right now.

replies(1): >>13106740 #
40. benmcnelly ◴[] No.13106630{4}[source]
Also, since the app is still on your phone there is no reason they can't be using it to gather data as well.
replies(1): >>13106966 #
41. pmarreck ◴[] No.13106638[source]
It could be flagged as "must restock"... one cool thing is it could then tell you exactly where it needs to go back to, finding that was always a pain (source: I was a cashier in a large grocery store, once upon a time)

To this day (20-odd years later), I always put grocery items back where I found them (and bag my own groceries). Don't be a dick.

42. rhino369 ◴[] No.13106641[source]
This made me think of a possible exploit. If these sensors are using weight sensors and cameras, it might be possible to pick up similar items and then put back the much cheaper version.
replies(2): >>13106707 #>>13106736 #
43. 0xfeba ◴[] No.13106649[source]
> I'm sorry but if you cost the store $25 by leaving a damned ROAST in the cereal aisle, I would be perfectly happy to never let you in the store again.

Wouldn't a better solution be to charge the customer for the roast and if they complain, you explain: "sorry, you didn't put it on the proper shelf, the technology considers that as a purchase", and possibly eat the cost in the form of some incentive to come back to try to keep them. The ones that don't complain either didn't notice, or they don't care enough to stop shopping, or they won't come back like you suggest.

The ones that complain get it taken care of, the ones that don't don't cost you anything. Win-win-break even?

replies(6): >>13106753 #>>13106784 #>>13106998 #>>13107074 #>>13107356 #>>13108549 #
44. scholia ◴[] No.13106651[source]
All the supermarkets I use already push you to self check-out stations....
replies(1): >>13106965 #
45. Spooky23 ◴[] No.13106687[source]
Good luck with that. The customer is always right.

You start doing stuff like that it will bite you back 10x.

replies(3): >>13108678 #>>13110071 #>>13110599 #
46. beberlei ◴[] No.13106689{4}[source]
Dont take the kids to that store :)
47. gohrt ◴[] No.13106690{3}[source]
> because somebody would be able to steal a product by discreetly removing a tag and then walking out of the store.

That's already handled in grocery -- people can mess with regular barcodes if they want. it's a known cost of business

replies(1): >>13107016 #
48. jonknee ◴[] No.13106694{3}[source]
Amazon is boasting it involves "computer vision, sensor fusion, and deep learning" so there is definitely quite a bit more going on than the UPC code. It also doesn't appear any UPCs are actually being scanned in the first place.
replies(2): >>13107760 #>>13108602 #
49. gohrt ◴[] No.13106707[source]
It turns out the most people aren't interested in complex strategies to steal a grocery items while under intense video surveillance with ID verification.
50. mxfh ◴[] No.13106714[source]
If they were trained on normal shopper, how long does it take for the first exploits to appear, like some ML-equivalent of tag switching.

Like I heard from HEB Central Market employee, that they had a hard time with their bulk self-portion coffee beans, where the price range is quite large yet the beans look pretty identical.

Like most bigger shops, I think amazon will just tolerate the loss without enforcing it too much, if it stays manageable and under enforcement costs, which includes a too negative impact on the general shopping experience.

replies(1): >>13107809 #
51. jonknee ◴[] No.13106717{3}[source]
> But I'd also have been more impressed with the video if they showed stressed-out parents with crying kids and their hands full as they've got their cell phones tucked between their heads and shoulders, rather than young people quietly grabbing a single item and leaving.

It's an 1,800 square foot convenience store in a yuppie area stocked with what appears Whole Foods like take and go food, not a Wal Mart Supercenter. It will be quite a bit different if they open a large store out in the suburbs.

replies(1): >>13106788 #
52. jonknee ◴[] No.13106729{3}[source]
Also never underestimate Jeff Bezos' willingness to lose money in the short term.
53. jonknee ◴[] No.13106736[source]
Or just go to literally any other store and you won't have to defeat sophisticated algorithms to shop lift.
54. Karunamon ◴[] No.13106740{5}[source]
We are talking about people misplacing goods in a store, are we not?

Perishable goods are a subclass of goods in a store, are they not?

replies(1): >>13107159 #
55. Someone ◴[] No.13106749{4}[source]
1% is a decent average margin in a grocery store (http://smallbusiness.chron.com/industry-standard-gross-margi...).

So, it would require a $10 item to break even on a €0.10 tag.

replies(2): >>13106987 #>>13107300 #
56. jonknee ◴[] No.13106752[source]
It's an 1,800 square foot store, I doubt it has a produce section other than for individual fruits and the like.
57. cpmsmith ◴[] No.13106753{3}[source]
IMO, any messaging in the format "sorry, $thingYouDid, the technology considers that as $notWhatYouDid" is a recipe for customer loss.
replies(3): >>13106774 #>>13106852 #>>13107049 #
58. johnwheeler ◴[] No.13106774{4}[source]
Not at all in this case. The benefits of this technology and the disincentives for bad behavior are strong enough that this would work.
59. makecheck ◴[] No.13106784{3}[source]
Aside from putting up the odd sign to discourage certain behavior, no, I do not think that stores have any good reason to bend over backwards to keep individual customers.

Retail is far too accommodating already. Some people figure that being a “valued customer” means they can be an unending source of sunken costs in time, effort and stress, among other things. And those costs can be multiplied across the other customers waiting in line, too.

If a “customer” is destroying your inventory, annoying other customers, or commanding far more of your time than warranted, there is no reason to put up with them. Protect the larger investment, which is: all your other customers, your store, and your employees.

replies(4): >>13106896 #>>13107816 #>>13107996 #>>13108365 #
60. elicash ◴[] No.13106788{4}[source]
That's fair. Although yuppies have kids, too!
replies(1): >>13107176 #
61. TulliusCicero ◴[] No.13106792{3}[source]
> When you walk out, the items are recognized and tallied by a large RFID sweep.

But the video clearly shows the items being recognized as someone takes them from a shelf (and puts them back). The items don't need to be recognized at the time you walk out, the store just needs to know that you've walked out.

replies(1): >>13106912 #
62. ◴[] No.13106805[source]
63. TulliusCicero ◴[] No.13106817{3}[source]
Why? If it's understood that the way the system works is that it's in your 'virtual cart' as soon as you take it off the shelf, why isn't it the customer's job to put it back if they don't want it anymore? There are other checkoutless systems that use the customer scanning a barcode as they pick up each item; same deal there.
replies(2): >>13109219 #>>13109239 #
64. Declanomous ◴[] No.13106852{4}[source]
I agree with your point, but at the same time, you should be charged the price of the food if you grab perishable food and place it in an area that renders it unsafe. I worked in retail and at theme parks, and I'm personally of the opinion that it's better for everyone in the long run if you fire entitled customers.
replies(2): >>13106902 #>>13107006 #
65. joezydeco ◴[] No.13106875{4}[source]
I don't think that helps in the use case presented here.

What is really needed is a way to talk to multiple RFID tags quickly without any crosstalk. Think of a handbag with a dozen candy bars in it. How do you scan them all quickly without missing any?

The goal has always been to scan something large in one pass, say a shrink-wrapped pallet of items that could number in the hundreds or thousands. Obviously this is technology that Amazon could benefit from as well, I wouldn't be surprised if there's a lot of technology overlap here.

replies(1): >>13107280 #
66. dogma1138 ◴[] No.13106896{4}[source]
Stores bake that into the cost of doing business, it's like dropping something and breaking it, in the vast vast majority of cases you won't be charged for it, just be clean up on aisle 3...

Heck I've dropped jars or similar things during bagging after paying for them several times and every time I was offered a replacement.

Mistakes happen, it's often considerably more expensive to deal with customer complaints especially in the age of social media than it is to replace an item.

It's also important to note that this is baked into the cost of doing business all along the supply chain, if items are not sold they will be often returned by the store to the distributor which would chuck them as a loss, or more often than not sell them for other uses other than human consumption.

Some perishables are thrown away others are then sold to other industries e.g. the roast that was left over might end up as dog food...

For a dog food company it's cheaper to buy discarded meat produce the dog food take samples and while it's being shipped do the cultures to ensure that there are no contaminants or bacteria and if something fishy is found just do a recall upstream for specific batch than it is to buy "fresh" meat and ingredients which are fit for human consumption.

Supply chains are huge and complex and all these little annoyances don't really count for much, it only really bothered very small stores that have to buy everything almost up front and they aren't leasing effectively shelf space for distributors.

replies(3): >>13107943 #>>13110350 #>>13111227 #
67. iamdave ◴[] No.13106902{5}[source]
, you should be charged the price of the food if you grab perishable food and place it in an area that renders it unsafe

That'd constitute a massive retooling of consumer behavior and logic and would require quite a bit of conditioning over many years, no?

replies(3): >>13106921 #>>13107360 #>>13108526 #
68. joezydeco ◴[] No.13106912{4}[source]
You mean that floating list in the air?

I think that's just visually giving you an idea of what's happening. Like I said earlier, I'm giving a simple naive presentation of how the system might work. Or, at the least, how I would design it without dealing with finicky shelf sensors. Ask anyone that has ever worked in a hotel with in-room minibars how well those things pan out in real life.

Unless that store is just a mockup and not how it really looks and works, I see nothing on those shelves or in the sky above it that is watching you put that cupcake back on the shelf.

The real way to find out is if someone in the demo video can pull their phone out of their pocket mid-trip and see their current inventory and total price. But I didn't see that in the video.

The girl in the video at 1:26 looks at her list and total, but after she's been through the exit turnstyle.

replies(2): >>13106981 #>>13107839 #
69. Veedrac ◴[] No.13106921{6}[source]
That sounds like exactly what Amazon are trying!
70. pastullo ◴[] No.13106962[source]
Would it be feasible solution to have drop-off basket at the counter for items that you do not want to buy? Also there could be refrigerated and non-frigerated baskets, along with a nice sign saying that it's ok to not change your mind.
71. agumonkey ◴[] No.13106965{3}[source]
True, but these often require one or two hosts to unlock issues.

I was for the test but I find the self checkout annoying. It's less efficient than the usual kind. You have less space to unload you stuff; less space to rebag them, and the cashier is lighting fast at scanning and grabbing the money because of 7h/day of doing so. I'm not pro human cashier, I don't think lots of cashier really like it either. But self checkout is not as good as I thought.

replies(1): >>13110577 #
72. tedmiston ◴[] No.13106966{5}[source]
They did say sensor fusion. I'm not sure if they have indoor location tracking in the app but it seems reasonable.
73. pastullo ◴[] No.13106981{5}[source]
Agree with you, would be much easier to just checkout once when you leave.

The video makes it look like it's constantly up to date, but that sounds quite complicated (despite dropping the ML, DL buzz words).

74. veritas20 ◴[] No.13106983{3}[source]
Interesting considering the case of hotel mini-bars. In some cases, you get charged regardless of use it. If it senses that you removed the item, you will be charged.
75. tgb ◴[] No.13106987{5}[source]
I don't think you can make that conclusion. Presumably this store will be saving money on cashiers by instead using RFIDs.
replies(1): >>13107126 #
76. mortenjorck ◴[] No.13106998{3}[source]
According to the cupcake example in the video, this is all in real-time, right? A much better experience would be warning the user as they go - the ham remains in their "cart" and is clearly flagged as abandoned (maybe with a push notification if they don't have the phone out, though I imagine most customers will be double-checking).
replies(1): >>13119635 #
77. remarkEon ◴[] No.13107002[source]
Another thought I had was how it will handle multiple people filling the same "cart". Often I'm shopping with my girlfriend and, being the time-strapped millennials that we are, we'll split up the grocery list to divide and conquer and meet back up at the checkout aisle. How does this reconcile that? Would both of us have to scan in when we enter the store, or link our accounts in some fashion?
replies(1): >>13107251 #
78. digler999 ◴[] No.13107006{5}[source]
> if you fire entitled customers.

That would be fine in the ages before social media. Now everyone "takes to twitter" and tries to organize a social pitchfork campaign. The victimhood mentality is real. People get off on the celebrity from being wronged by a big bad corporation. It wouldn't be long before some jerk posts a video of himself leaving a roast on the cereal aisle and being '86'ed from the store, then post it straight to Youtube for all the delicious karma points. Corporate image is a big deal.

replies(2): >>13107083 #>>13107191 #
79. tedmiston ◴[] No.13107007{4}[source]
Also the cost of labor and/or machines to stick them on.
80. altcognito ◴[] No.13107016{4}[source]
And if they know who you are because of your phone, and they are doing inventory on a really regular basis (every 6 hours, maybe even less), they might actually be able to track down who it was.
81. maxerickson ◴[] No.13107049{4}[source]
Getting rid of bad customers is exactly what is being suggested.
82. stevarino ◴[] No.13107061[source]
No plan survives first contact with the customer's kids.
83. criley2 ◴[] No.13107074{3}[source]
>Wouldn't a better solution be to charge the customer for the roast and if they complain, you explain: "sorry, you didn't put it on the proper shelf, the technology considers that as a purchase",

It might be legal federally, and in red states, but this sounds like a class action lawsuit in a liberal state with strong consumer protection laws just waiting for hungry lawyers.

84. zimbu668 ◴[] No.13107083{6}[source]
Sounds like that place would have lower prices since the costs of customers like that isn't spread around to considerate people, I think I would like to shop there.
85. Someone ◴[] No.13107126{6}[source]
The article I quoted claims 1% is the _gross_ margin, in which case my argument is valid. I now think that is incorrect, as other high-ranking Google results claim it is the _net_ margin.
86. ◴[] No.13107159{6}[source]
87. hx87 ◴[] No.13107176{5}[source]
It's not the kids that cause trouble--it's the carts with 250 items, the arguments over price, and the paying by check.
88. lmkg ◴[] No.13107191{6}[source]
Unless you make it "your thing." Take for example the Alamo Drafthouse, a chain of movies theaters that are aggressive in removing patrons that disrupt other viewers' experience. In the few times that people have tried to complain, the company has generally come out of it for the better.

I will admit this strategy won't work for everyone. Most corporations are not willing to respond to a complaint by using social media to (accurately) call the complainer an obnoxious asshole.

replies(2): >>13107541 #>>13110441 #
89. 8draco8 ◴[] No.13107251[source]
Exactly that. Or what if you go to shop with a child and he puts candy bar to the "cart"?
90. stale2002 ◴[] No.13107259[source]
Ehh, there'd probably just be a "don't buy" bin that you out the items you don't want in.
91. digler999 ◴[] No.13107267{4}[source]
It sounds like the careless actions of the general public really bother you. Let me tell you something: grocery stores are low margin retailers who make their money by volume of sale, not enforcing conformity. The moment you open your doors to the public, you are going to get all kinds of mentally ill, aloof, high/drunk, distracted, disabled, elderly/senile, and (literally) retarded people in your store. It's futile to judge their actions using your idealist looking glasses.

The moment you start kicking people out over subjective "rule-violations", you are eating into your own profits, pissing off people, and projecting your own morality onto strangers. Aunt Minny may have set down that roast because it hurts her hip to walk across the store, and she realizes she already bought a roast yesterday. But over the last 10 years she's spent $25,000 shopping there. Some guy with Crohn's disease may literally shit on your floor if he doesn't drop his perishable item and run home/to the rest room. If both of those people are regular shoppers, sure the lost perishable item eats into your bottom line, but in the long run you are making a profit off them.

Waging an unnecessary morality war can only impede your ability to run a profitable business.

Edit: why not just give employees handheld IR thermometers, and if the temperature of the product is < $MEAT_MAX or $VEGGIE_MAX degrees then allow them to restock it.

replies(1): >>13108000 #
92. cobookman ◴[] No.13107280{5}[source]
> How do you scan them all quickly without missing any?

Most RAIN Rfid readers have a read rate of 800+ tags/second. Door portals are a solved solution and now phased arrays are on the market which scan all items in realtime. Take a look at the impinj marketing material for more information. For example the RS2000 chip: http://www.impinj.com/products/reader-chips/indy-rs2000/

replies(1): >>13108092 #
93. cobookman ◴[] No.13107300{5}[source]
But if using RFID saves them more than the cost of the technology its a win.

Basically if Savings from reducing sales persons > Cost of New Technology, you'll add the new tech.

replies(1): >>13110260 #
94. mikeash ◴[] No.13107318[source]
The emphasis on machine learning and computer version makes me think that they're recognizing the products based on what they look like, not just where they are.
95. maerF0x0 ◴[] No.13107356{3}[source]
> Wouldn't a better solution be to charge the customer for the roast and if they complain, you explain: "sorry, you didn't put it on the proper shelf, the technology considers that as a purchase", and possibly eat the cost in the form of some incentive to come back to try to keep them. The ones that don't complain either didn't notice, or they don't care enough to stop shopping, or they won't come back like you suggest.

One could simply retrain the customer by literally charging them the moment they take it off the shelf, refunding them if they put it back. It would look crazy on your bank/credit bill but i think a legion of micropayments maybe the future anyways. There might be an opportunity there to turn a stream of 100s of micropayments into meaningful data for the end user.

96. JaphyRyder ◴[] No.13107360{6}[source]
Not really. Customers already pay more if they don't have the company card, aren't "loyal" etc... Instead of it being framed as a fine or punishment or way to "fire customers" it is simply referred to as a discount and a way to get coupons.
97. Natanael_L ◴[] No.13107361{3}[source]
Bring a Faraday's cage, or rather Faraday's bag. Use it once you've paid to store your goods.
98. maerF0x0 ◴[] No.13107378[source]
Given the turnstiles that the users entered/exited from I'd have guessed there is RFID in play too.
99. devy ◴[] No.13107396{3}[source]
RFID along cannot solve it - it's Computer vision + RFID. Don't forget cams are everywhere in the store that will capture the moment you pick something up...
100. Natanael_L ◴[] No.13107407{3}[source]
If the system detects tags disappearing while inside the store, it can trigger an alarm and tell approximately where they were (to be combined with surveillance footage).
101. CrLf ◴[] No.13107454[source]
It's actually an incentive to not take the product of the shelf (i.e. not buying it).
102. TheOneTrueKyle ◴[] No.13107518{4}[source]
The number of people who think that people had parents growing up is astounding! -_-
103. digler999 ◴[] No.13107541{7}[source]
who's got more profit: Alamo Drafthouse or Regal Cinemas ? Or rather, if you own X-thousand shares of XYZ corp, do you want them to "aggressively wage morality war" at the cost of $1.00/share, or maximize profits ?
replies(1): >>13109900 #
104. kirykl ◴[] No.13107614{3}[source]
incentives can be positive or negative
105. kirykl ◴[] No.13107642{3}[source]
if the costs of the products are reduced along with the operating and spoilage costs then its a net + to the customer, which aligns with Amazon's basic value propisition
106. moftz ◴[] No.13107657{3}[source]
Someone can already walk around a grocery store and see what's in my cart or they can just watch me checkout. Buying groceries isn't exactly a private experience unless you buy your stuff online. Securing tags in things like a passport or credit card is important since identity theft is real and hardware to read the tags is cheap. Knowing what things I buy in the grocery store might help some marketers know what sells but I can't really think of any nefarious use of that kind of data.

Maybe you could use it to make some guesses about a person. An older guy buying frozen dinners, beer, and not much else is probably single or divorced. A woman buying prenatal vitamins is probably pregnant. Someone buying both Special K and Fruit Loops might have a family. But someone can already make these determinations from using their eyes. RFIDs might make it a bit easier but don't really add any new infosec facet to this grocery store experience.

replies(1): >>13113527 #
107. flinty ◴[] No.13107752[source]
you are forgetting by the time this becomes a reality we would have all become perfect human beings with perfect ethics and morals and social responsibility just the way silicon valley has always intended and designed every product for
108. mpclark ◴[] No.13107760{4}[source]
It's certainly buzzword compliant...
109. gnopgnip ◴[] No.13107809{3}[source]
Like self checkouts, these technologies will not work well in high crime areas. By requiring customers to have a cell phone and an amazon account they can avoid a lot of the higher risk customers at least.
replies(1): >>13116174 #
110. 0xfeba ◴[] No.13107816{4}[source]
Perhaps my example was a bit too extreme. But someone else replied to me with a better example of notifications on an app, or warnings that items are still in their cart but did not pass the store threshold, etc.

Seems like the maximized value could be somewhere in the middle, maybe without trying to sneak in replacement costs for items left on other shelves..

111. TulliusCicero ◴[] No.13107839{5}[source]
> You mean that floating list in the air? I think that's just visually giving you an idea of what's happening.

A friend at Amazon said he tried to trick it by taking two items at a time and it got it right every time, so yeah it does appear to track when you take the items.

replies(1): >>13108103 #
112. zenware ◴[] No.13107854{3}[source]
Most libraries RFID all their books now so you can just drop them on a scanner that detects all the books you have, swipe your library card and go.

I don't think that's actually what Amazon Go is doing though.

113. dimino ◴[] No.13107943{5}[source]
It'd be nice, for the stores, if they didn't have to bake so much "attrition" into their accounting.
replies(1): >>13108865 #
114. josephjrobison ◴[] No.13107948[source]
I would assume RFID would be more accurate to begin with. Seems like there's a lot of room for errors with their proposed technology.

BUT what if their goal isn't to make razor thin margins at grocery stores, but to test out their tech on human tracking. You've got to believe that they have a more long term plan than making a better self-checkout.

They can now tie in your Amazon Go app with you as a person. Most likely all the sensors and cameras in the store will be both tracking you via your app with Bluetooth, but also perhaps body heat sensors and the like that track you based on your unique body pattern.

Then they can tie this in with your Amazon Prime account to better improve recommended purchases to you, they can tie this in with your Prime Now account and your home address and more immediate delivery needs. Drones, Kindle, Echo as well.

The goal is deeper analytics and tracking on individual humans. That's how Facebook makes their money, and Amazon can perhaps have deeper data on individuals than any other company tracking browser cookies.

115. mpolichette ◴[] No.13107996{4}[source]
I agree, especially you see those videos on youtube where the kids are intentionally 'slipping' and throwing multiple jugs of milk onto the floor.
replies(1): >>13108393 #
116. Karunamon ◴[] No.13108000{5}[source]
It sounds like the careless actions of the general public really bother you.

That's accurate. Ask me how many times I wish I could find the guy that carelessly tossed a cart out in the parking lot (given easily accessible corrals) which subsequently bashed into the side of my car. Or found a packet of hamburger (with accompanying drippy juices) in with the toys. Or...

The moment you start kicking people out over subjective "rule-violations", you are eating into your own profits, pissing off people, and projecting your own morality onto strangers.

Leaving aside the misuse of the word subjective, this is why we avoid the "kicking out" part altogether and use financial incentives instead. It's no different than, say, ALDI charging you a quarter to get a cart (that you get back if, and only if, you put the cart away). Put stuff back where you found it like a civilized person, and there's never a problem.

117. joezydeco ◴[] No.13108092{6}[source]
That's a definite plus. I was just saying that the long-range position tracking might not be as important.
118. joezydeco ◴[] No.13108103{6}[source]
Did the system know before checkout, or after?
119. samstave ◴[] No.13108231[source]
If youre on EBT/WIC, what % of those folks have both a smartphone, Amazon Go installed AND an amazon account?
replies(1): >>13109118 #
120. wccrawford ◴[] No.13108233[source]
I'm assuming that the position on the shelf has very little to do with adding the item to the cart. I'm guessing that taking the item out of range of a scanner and into range of your phone is what does it.

I've not seen anyone so far suggest that people will still work at the store. There will still be people who help customers do what they need, but instead of mindlessly scanning groceries, they'll be there for the things people actually need help with. Returns, price problems, finding things, lifting heavy items, etc.

replies(1): >>13108300 #
121. elicash ◴[] No.13108300[source]
If that's the case, that this is a solved problem, they should have showed that off!
122. falcolas ◴[] No.13108365{4}[source]
> I do not think that stores have any good reason to bend over backwards to keep individual customers.

Funny; want to know how Amazon CS became so popular with people? They gave complainers what they wanted, and only shut down repeat abusers. You want to exchange or return this TV for no reason at all? Go ahead. You bought this a year ago and want to return it now? Get a rep on the phone and it's done.

It was fascinating to watch from the inside. CS reps became easier to hire (no need for independent thought when 95% of the calls can be answered with binary flags determined by a "follow the prompts" wizard), Amazon's CS approval rating skyrocketed, and they're still making money to this day.

So, yeah, they have proven that there is a really good reason to keep all but the most abusive individual customers.

123. pshc ◴[] No.13108393{5}[source]
The store will have video footage of everything... maybe their sensor AI will eventually distinguish between intentional and accidental spoilage.
124. jachee ◴[] No.13108526{6}[source]
> retooling of customer behavior

One or more hits to the wallet would be strong negative reinforcement.

125. qyv ◴[] No.13108549{3}[source]
There are many potential reasons that an item could be put back in the improper spot on a shelf that does not induce a loss for the store nor is malicious by the shopper. Things very often get put back into the same shelf but a different position.

But what about this: What is to stop someone from pulling items out of other people carts?

replies(1): >>13110020 #
126. spuz ◴[] No.13108570[source]
For what it's worth, some customers DO put unwanted items back where they found them. I'm guessing you wouldn't necessarily notice those cases so you might perceive a higher proportion of those bad actor customers than there are in reality.
127. karambahh ◴[] No.13108602{4}[source]
I think it might be purely rfid based. All major rfid vendors have theft prevention devices which can detect in real-time products crossing a given line.

Decathlon, the world largest sport goods retailer already use that technology.

They still have checkout lines but technically speaking they would be able to charge you when you leave the store.

Last time I spoke with them they were using Embisphere hardware, but any vendor, Checkpoint for instance, could be used to similar effects.

If all products are rfid tagged (which is entirely possible given the current price of metallic ink) then this store is at most state of the art.

If they actually use vision techniques then it is actually quite a feat. Current vision techniques used in retail are either too crude (when based on the store cctv cameras) or too costly (another French company, IVS, has demonstrated a self service buffet style automated checkout but AFAIK it is still prototype).

Disclaimer: I have links with investors in both Embisphere and IVS.

replies(1): >>13108992 #
128. TeMPOraL ◴[] No.13108678{3}[source]
> The customer is always right.

This adage only works when marginal value of a customer is high, and monetary preferences aren't utterly dominating customer's thought process. Business dealing with necessities, or ones where demand outweights supply, aren't like that - that's why in a grocery store, customer is trash. There's plenty more where he/she came from.

replies(1): >>13109926 #
129. dogma1138 ◴[] No.13108865{6}[source]
The attrition is going to be high anyhow, tons of stuff gets damaged during shipping, handling and stocking, tons more is never sold.

Most large stores take out nearly everything off the shelves at night even if it's still within it's "use before" date which on it's own is utterly nonsensical to begin with as most items don't expire for days, if not weeks, months and even years from the "use/best before" date.

People drop stuff, people mishandle goods, how many people squeeze a vegetable or a fruit to check if it's ripe damaging it? how many apples get a mushy spot because they banged around in the crate?

You are literally scraping the bottom of the barrel of inventory attrition when you are talking about perishable misplaced items, compared to everything else they are a rounding error.

There is a lot of loss baked into every supply chain, unless you are going to change it in it's entirety really don't bother with the end, the loss at the point of sale is minimal compared to everything else.

replies(1): >>13111386 #
130. politician ◴[] No.13108992{5}[source]
The last time I checked, the price of a printable RFID tag was around 10 cents. That's far too expensive for a 15oz can of beans.

What sort of prices are you seeing?

replies(1): >>13109099 #
131. karambahh ◴[] No.13109099{6}[source]
The ballpark of 10 cents per printed RFID is right.

I have reasons to believe several ink manufacturers/printers are working on an order of magnitude less per tag.

But are you so sure that 10 cents is too much?

What do you think the gross margin on that can is ? ;-) What do you think the net margin on that can, once the checkout lines (and their personnel) are removed, would be?

If a stitched RFID chip on a 2€ thsirt is currently cost-effective for Decathlon, I see no reason why printed RFID tags would not be cost effective in the very near future, if it is not yet the case (and once again, I have reasons to believe it is almost already the case).

replies(1): >>13109858 #
132. protomyth ◴[] No.13109118[source]
So Amazon Go is a defacto rich peoples store? Sadly, this will probably be a selling point for some.

You would be surprised how many EBT/WIC folks have smart phones since they are often part of educational plans and back-to-work initiatives. It was often easier to order product off Amazon than locally (gift cards, debit cards).

replies(1): >>13109971 #
133. ◴[] No.13109219{4}[source]
134. DashRattlesnake ◴[] No.13109239{4}[source]
Why is it the customer's responsibility to figure out and comply with the rules of your (nonstandard) system to avoid getting charged for something they don't intend to buy and didn't in fact use or take out of the store?

There are all kinds of reasons why that is unreasonable:

* different stores might have systems with different rules and policies, causing confusion;

* people may not remember where to return the item;

* the magic machine-learning system might glitch and not recognize the item was replaced, and you probably won't notice since there's little feedback from the "virtual cart" since you're not interacting with it directly;

* another glitch could put another customer's item in your "virtual cart", so you have nothing to return;

* etc.

Systems like this should fail in customer-friendly ways, and "item returned to the wrong place" is a kind of failure.

replies(1): >>13172434 #
135. makomk ◴[] No.13109248{4}[source]
Alibaba sellers will list almost anything for $0.01 each, though, regardless of actual selling price.
136. politician ◴[] No.13109858{7}[source]
I share your optimism - the future of retail belongs to self-service with the checkout process integrated into the shopping cart. Grab and Go.

However, I don't think that end game is the first use case for an RFID solution - inventory monitoring/LP/loyalty can demonstrate ROI long before the checkout lines are removed. For those use cases, the unit price needs to be much cheaper, but an order of magnitude improvement might be right.

replies(1): >>13109991 #
137. OMGTehAwsome ◴[] No.13109900{8}[source]
From what I've read Alamo Drafthouse has over double the per-screen revenue of Cinemark. Their strict, pro-viewer policies really engender customer loyalty.
138. Spooky23 ◴[] No.13109926{4}[source]
Have you ever worked in grocery?

The customers tend to be brand loyal, and the lifetime value of a customer is very high (family with 2.4 kids and a dog is minimum $10k/year in gross sales), so when you start banishing customers for doing things that they may not even realize that they did, they will loudly tell everyone they know what a bunch of assholes you are! The $25 roast will cost you $500.

If I stop shopping at a local grocery that uses a loyalty card for two weeks, they will immediately begin sending coupons worth 10-20% of my average transaction value to get me back. The ROI of giving away $20 at a pretty low margin implies a high value.

replies(1): >>13110595 #
139. samstave ◴[] No.13109971{3}[source]
I wasn't meaning it as a class-based statement... just that I don't expect one of these to pop-up in either oakland or the tenderloin in the next few decades...
140. karambahh ◴[] No.13109991{8}[source]
You are absolutely correct. Inventory monitoring and LP are where money is to be made (or rather "not lost" :-) ).

I have skin in the game on the loyalty part so I will abstain from speaking on that.

Coming back on your thoughts about inventory, the birth of Embisphere, the RFID company I spoke about earlier (and the reason why Decathlon started to use them), was solely the invention of a "racket" for fast instore inventory

http://www.embisphere.com/en/rfid-products/embiventory-power

Other uses (checkout, LP) were almost an afterthought. The sole gain on speed and accuracy of in-store inventory was enough to decide Decathlon to add RFID chips on all its inventory and Decathlon inventory is massive ! They are in the range of 30-70k active SKUs, with sometimes hundreds of thousands units of stock. Sell that in hundreds of stores worldwide, add the warehouses in every country and the manufacturing facilities in China, and you end up with millions of euros of investment just for that damn inventory ;-)

replies(1): >>13110298 #
141. OMGTehAwsome ◴[] No.13110020{4}[source]
There are no carts, just bags. This doesn't appear to be a replacement for traditional grocery stores but rather corner stores or bodegas, so there isn't a need for them.
142. megablast ◴[] No.13110071{3}[source]
The customer is always right just means that if the customer wants a bright pink top with bring pink shorts, they are right.

It doesn't mean every stupid thing the customer does is right.

143. Someone ◴[] No.13110260{6}[source]
It doesn't have to be strictly cheaper, as it also adds convenience. Not having to wait at the checkout will be worth something to customers, possibly quite a lot in the case of a shop targeting richer customers.
144. politician ◴[] No.13110298{9}[source]
Nice! It looks like Nuukik is well positioned to take advantage of that new infrastructure!

It would be lovely if you developed an in-store navigation capability. It's so frustrating to run into a store to pickup something, and not be able to immediately find it.

The results of periodic scans should provide a decent point cloud that could be used to determine shelf/aisle geometry without a blueprint. Foursquare uses this sort of approach for its interior mapping process, but they can't tell me where to find the bean dip. There are multiple obvious ways to monetize that dataset including simply selling it to Foursquare.

replies(1): >>13110611 #
145. Gustomaximus ◴[] No.13110350{5}[source]
In Australia if you break something in store, they typically wont charge you, but if they do, they have to charge at cost. I wonder if this another reason many stores dont charge. As any store with a larger markup would have to let you know that $55 vase they were trying to sell you cost them $6.
replies(1): >>13110557 #
146. kem ◴[] No.13110441{7}[source]
The real problem, though, is that one time when the company is in the wrong over a bug in the AI. Then you basically have a faulty AI, and by extension, the store, falsely accusing the customer of vandalism or some such thing. Not a good way to go.

Maybe this is different, but my experience with recent tech innovations in brick-and-mortar payment systems haven't been positive overall. More trouble than they're worth.

This could very well be different, but the minute the store starts valuing the AI over the customer, I think the store is in for some trouble public relations-wise.

replies(2): >>13110780 #>>13110828 #
147. DashRattlesnake ◴[] No.13110507{4}[source]
> It's the store's fault when you selfishly and silently put perishable goods in non-refrigerated areas so they can spoil?

It's incorrect and misleading to talk like that malicious use case is the only one at play here.

replies(1): >>13110967 #
148. fowl2 ◴[] No.13110557{6}[source]
I've never heard this "rule" before, do you have a source? "Cost" is a pretty flimsy concept.
replies(3): >>13110747 #>>13112252 #>>13112253 #
149. scholia ◴[] No.13110577{4}[source]
Yes. My main supermarket (a former Safeway in the UK) has one person looking after 20 self-checkout stations. I guess most of us have learned the system by now.....

Self-checkout works well for half a dozen items in a hand basket. If you have a trolley full of a week's shopping, you're going to use a cashier. In fact, in this supermarket, you can't even get a trolley into the self-checkout area.

My local M&S store has three different checkout areas. (1) traditional, for people with trolleys. (2) Self-checkout area for people with baskets. (3) Really fast (but very narrow) lane for people just holding a few items in their hands. You almost never see people using the "wrong" area.

What's interesting is that I usually pick the one with the longest queue, ie line 3. The cashiers are really fast so you don't have to wait long.

One other factor is that a lot of us in line 3 are using contactless (Wave & Pay) cards, so the payment process doesn't slow things down. People who don't usually use the waiting time to get their cash ready.

replies(1): >>13110656 #
150. TeMPOraL ◴[] No.13110595{5}[source]
Only briefly, helping with inventory. But my SO did, and well... I eat food, and so does my family. And so I learned that with grocery, the one consideration that literally trumps all others is... price. Other significant factors are geography - people tend to shop closest to home or their commute path, and assortment - the more you can buy in one place, the better. There's very little a grocery store can do to chase away customers living in the area except having prices higher than the shop next door.

Now my experience is of course limited to shops in urban Europe, servicing low- and middle-income populations. Maybe high-income people can afford to vote with their wallets, but with all the people I know, the ability to save $100+ / month by just going to the cheaper store of the few nearby is enough to make them not mind grumpy cashiers.

> they will loudly tell everyone they know what a bunch of assholes you are!

I have never in my entire life seen this behaviour impact a single company. Even though I'm first to badmouth asshole businesses and praise the nice ones. Even in tech, I'm yet to see a single company seriously impacted by people's reaction to bad behaviour. I mean, how is Uber still around? Or how is Lenovo still selling laptops?

151. syncsynchalt ◴[] No.13110599{3}[source]
This is a tangent, but I think that's better stated as "the customer is never wrong". That frames it as a customer support challenge rather than a surrealist exploration of what your customer may claim as their desire.
152. rezashirazian ◴[] No.13110608[source]
I would argue the fact that you are automatically charged for an item when it is removed from shelf is incentive enough for people to ensure they put it back in its right place if they decide not to purchase it.
153. karambahh ◴[] No.13110611{10}[source]
We may or may not already have developed proofs of concept of in-store navigation systems for european retailers ;-)

In-store location of products is deeply linked with very complicated discussions between retailers and product manufacturers.

Moreover, facing is a very strategic part of retail and I doubt retailers would be happy to release their facing strategies to outsiders or competitors.

Even inside a retailer's organization, several opposing views exist, between maximizing breadth of product range, giving prime exposure to the private label, etc....the equation they have to solve is very complicated and I don't think there's an ideal solution to this. A retailer facing strategy is linked to its core values. It has a direct impact on its bottom line and an indirect one: the consumer's unconscious perception of facing "strategies" is probably very significant.

154. JoeAltmaier ◴[] No.13110656{5}[source]
In our local stores in the USA, its one person looking after 4 or 6 stations, 2 or 3 of which are perpetually out of service.
replies(1): >>13113181 #
155. Whitestrake ◴[] No.13110747{7}[source]
I thought "cost" was one of the simpler concepts - the price at which the store bought the item from the supplier.
replies(1): >>13111218 #
156. ◴[] No.13110780{8}[source]
157. digler999 ◴[] No.13110828{8}[source]
Agreed. On a related note, I wonder with the extra efficiency gained from no checkout lines, how much it would offset lost revenue. In other words, if, say, you are able to serve 20% more customers, even if there's 4% more loss from tech bugs (not considering shoplifting), the fact that you're moving more people through the store might make up for it.

If someone buys 45 items, but 3 dont ring up, as long as the 3 were relatively cheap items like a can of beans, as opposed to a $15 jar of spices, does it really matter ? Over time, the system will learn which items "go missing" most often and focus on them specifically for better inventory mgmt.

158. curried_haskell ◴[] No.13110959[source]
Are people forgetting the legal perspective?

You can't charge your customer for an item they didn't buy. Trying to make the computer "dumb" doesn't change this. You're going to get angry customers on twitter, chargebacks, and possibly sued.

159. Karunamon ◴[] No.13110967{5}[source]
Malicious is probably not the right word, more like thoughtless and lazy. The same mentality that leads people to abandon carts willy nilly in the parking lot.
160. 6t6t6t6 ◴[] No.13111172[source]
In a regular store, customers are anonymous, so they can be jerks without fear of consequences.

If I understand well, in Amazon Go, every customer has an account linked to a credit card. I guess that this will work as a deterrent. I a customer does something wrong, they can get a warning. Next time, the account is canceled. Problem solved.

161. Khalos ◴[] No.13111218{8}[source]
Even that fluctuates frequently. When I worked at a grocery store, when you ordered something it would show you what the item would "cost" the store.

This could change from day to day (e.g. fruits, veggies), vary based on quantity ordered, etc.

Then you get into private label (store brand) products, where the "cost" was usually either $0 or some ridiculously low number.

This was a national chain. At the store level at least, we wouldn't have been able to find the value of an item "at cost" with any confidence.

162. DanBC ◴[] No.13111227{5}[source]
> > Some people figure that being a “valued customer” means they can be an unending source of sunken costs in time, effort and stress, among other things.

> Stores bake that into the cost of doing business

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37711091

> "I return half of what I buy," says 30-year-old Alex Demetri, who spends £500 to £700 on clothes each month.

> She also admits to wearing some of her clothes first before returning them.

> It is customers like Ms Demetri who are causing problems for shops, which are "struggling to cope" with the number of items returned, new research suggests.

> So-called "serial returners" are bringing back items which have been used, are marked or have parts missing, making a quarter of it unfit to resell.

Occasional mistakes happen, but some people deliberately do this kind of stuff.

163. dimino ◴[] No.13111386{7}[source]
I get that there's a lot of attrition, but less attrition would be nice.
164. Gustomaximus ◴[] No.13112252{7}[source]
I may be wrong... I read this previously that was very clear about the customer was due to pay the supplier cost. But I did a google now to find the article and the best I could find is this is a civil case and not "not covered by the Australian Consumer Law" and it seems to be at discretion of the court for value lost and how at fault you were.

https://www.consumer.vic.gov.au/shopping/refunds-and-returns...

165. thisrod ◴[] No.13112253{7}[source]
I think the rule is that, when a business charges a consumer a penalty fee of any kind, the fee must relate to actual costs that the customer's actions imposed on the business. A business could estimate the cost of bananas, but they couldn't use the sale price if that was usually ten times the cost. This applies to things like bank overdraft fees and hotel cleaning charges as well. The idea is that consumer contracts can recover costs, but aren't allowed to punish people.

I don't have a source for that.

replies(1): >>13112798 #
166. shermanyo ◴[] No.13112798{8}[source]
Wait til they apply music piracy concepts!

"sir, you ate 4 grapes in store. Our grapes average 2seeds/grape, so we've calculated lost sales in the range of $800.

You see, those seeds could each grow into a vine that will produce an estimated $100 worth of grapes over the lifetime of the plant. You're basically stealing that money from us!"

167. Sami_Lehtinen ◴[] No.13113127{3}[source]
Of course it's trivial to tell. When individual items are tracked, it's exceptionally clear if the item is from the store or not.
168. agumonkey ◴[] No.13113181{6}[source]
Same. It seems that this is just a temporary and fragile step toward something else. Amazon Go or else.
replies(1): >>13119342 #
169. majewsky ◴[] No.13113527{4}[source]
> Someone can already walk around a grocery store and see what's in my cart or they can just watch me checkout.

The problem with electronic surveillance is never the surveillance part. It's the part where we can surveil billions of people at once without the need for billions of spies.

170. sornaensis ◴[] No.13116174{4}[source]
I'm curious, what about self checkouts does not work in high crime areas? Usually stores with self checkouts still have employees and cashiers in the store monitoring for theft.

What about the presence of self checkouts makes theft more likely?

171. scholia ◴[] No.13119342{7}[source]
Maybe an early adopter problem, unless they've upgraded the checkout stations to current technologies? The UK ones are mostly quite recent seem to work fine (though I have no experience outside London).
172. ced_vdb ◴[] No.13119635{4}[source]
Why not just take it out of the cart then if it is clearly flagged as abandoned ?
173. blazespin ◴[] No.13170269[source]
They will detect it and have people in the store replacing it.
174. TulliusCicero ◴[] No.13172434{5}[source]
> Why is it the customer's responsibility to figure out and comply with the rules of your (nonstandard) system to avoid getting charged for something they don't intend to buy and didn't in fact use or take out of the store?

Because that's the store's policy. If you don't like it, nobody is forcing you to shop there.