3 ms·
Interesting, I was not aware of that, but it just seems like there would be a lot more bank tellers if not for ATM's. It may not be a good example, although, on
by zw123456 11y ago
Interesting, I was not aware of that, but it just seems like there would be a lot more bank tellers if not for ATM's. It may not be a good example, although, on the other hand, it might be prescient in that food service workers will probably not ever be completely replaced perhaps for the same reason bank tellers haven't, there is a segment of the population who wants to be served by a human whether at a restaurant or at a bank. It might end up being a similar percent mix in the end ?
- Eridrus 11y ago> it just seems like there would be a lot more bank tellers if not for ATM's Depends on how you look at it. If you believe that ATMs were instrumental to the growing of retail banking to the otherwise underbanked (lower cost of providing a service), then without it you wouldn't really have more bank tellers, you'd just have more unbanked people. The full article has some more details. But these machines are still making very simple foods and most people (ignoring soylent fans) enjoy variety in their food, so it seems like it will be quite a while before robots will take over large parts of the restaurant/take-out market.
- zw123456 11y agoI agree, it seems like the better fit for this type of technology would be McDonalds type fast food, not health food. It probably works in downtown SF, but in mainstreet USA, not so much. ATM's are used for simple transactions like getting cash, maybe the parallel in fast food is getting a big mac, fine to get it from a machine if it keeps the price down, but for a sit down meal I would like to see a wait person serve me.