this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2023
97 points (93.7% liked)

Technology

59446 readers
4651 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Kroger introducing AI at self checkout to lower both accidental and organized crime theft.::undefined

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] riskable@programming.dev 23 points 1 year ago (11 children)

"Consumers don't like self checkout"‽ Are they crazy? I love self checkout! You know what I don't like? When I have to wait for a self checkout to become available because there's not enough human checkouts.

My local Walmart has about 25% of their checkouts as self checkouts. They'll have 4 lanes open with humans and 1/3rd of the self checkouts won't be operational. This is the worst of all possible options!

If you only plan to have 4 human checkouts why do you have so few self checkouts‽ Arg! It frustrates the crap out of me every time I go there.

Another thing that pisses me off is that the human checkout lanes are designed so inefficiently. In the self checkout I can pick up the scanner and scan everything in my cart at about twice or three times the speed of a human checkout because the human lane has a horrible setup that necessitates taking everything out of the cart to get it scanned whereas with the self checkout one can scan everything while it's still in the cart.

You can scan scan scan at super speed, grab a bunch of bags, then put everything in the bags as needed in your car afterwards. You can be done in seconds!

Or be even more efficient like me and just keep your own bags in the car and skip the whole, "grab some bags" step.

This way also makes the door receipt checker person's job so much faster because they can visibly see everything in your cart; no need to peek into every bag looking for expensive items that may not have been purchased.

Let's move forward, society! Give us 100% self checkout lanes and just have people there to assist with scanning and bagging for the people that need help.

[–] EngineerGaming@feddit.nl 0 points 1 year ago (6 children)

We have self-checkouts at some chains, but you know why they are not usable? Because they are CARD-ONLY. So to pay cash, I have to stand in a bigger queue.

[–] Nighed@sffa.community 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm going to have to ask - why not just use a card?

[–] EngineerGaming@feddit.nl 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because I don't like to broadcast all my transactions and use money that doesn't belong to me.

[–] Nighed@sffa.community 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Would a debt card from a non profit building society not be ok?

(Are building societies a UK thing only?)

[–] EngineerGaming@feddit.nl 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What do you mean even? Wouldn't it still be a debit card that tracks your activity and where they can theoretically take away your money?

[–] Nighed@sffa.community 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Building societies (similar to mutuals elsewhere?) Are not trying to get every last penny out of you so won't be tracking/selling that data. (Though their credit cards might?)

Not sure where the taking your money comes from?

[–] EngineerGaming@feddit.nl 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I doubt it would even be technically/legally possible to not keep logs of spendings from a debit card. I like to have privacy at least in my day-to-day transactions, and I do want more people also using cash.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)