3 ms·

In the wild this tech will get ripped to shreds. The exploits will be endless. And the interesting question is: is it really shoplifting if their system fails t

In the wild this tech will get ripped to shreds. The exploits will be endless. And the interesting question is: is it really shoplifting if their system fails to register the sale? Not really, so it is open season.

794CD01 9y ago
>is it really shoplifting if their system fails to register the sale? Why wouldn't it be shoplifting here if it is at any other store? If the cashiers and loss prevention officers don't notice you walking out with merchandise in your pocket, is it somehow worse because their eyes and brains are made of flesh instead of plastic and metal?
- dannyw 9y ago
  Well, you don’t know what the system registers until you walk out and get an email receipt a couple of minutes later.
  - prawn 9y ago
    And for a shopping list of more than a handful of items, even reviewing the receipt wouldn't necessarily mean you spot things that were missed.
  - 794CD01 9y ago
    True. That sounds like a fine excuse for the accidental cases. When you are deliberately making an attempt to deceive the system, that is where it crosses the line.
- dx034 9y ago
  It's the same as if you give an item to the cashier and the cashier fails to scan it. I don't think that's shoplifting.
  - 794CD01 9y ago
    If you are presenting your items to the system normally and they fail to register it, yes. If you are hiding the item in your jacket or cart to deliberately avoid the cashier's attention, that is shoplifting.
Johnny555 9y ago
The exploits will be endless Worse than a conventional store?
- notatoad 9y ago
  I challenge anybody who says this makes shoplifting easier to try and steal something from a traditional store. It's ridiculously easy. Stores only work right now because most people are honest. AI powered cameras watching you all the time is not going to make shoplifting easier.
hbosch 9y ago
Seems the scale of the store, the controlled supply of product, and the quality of tracking can essentially undermine most exploit vectors. Perhaps in a larger store, or perhaps with more crowds or variance in product... but as it stands, the Amazon Go store is about 1000 sq ft currently and it has been operating internally, daily, for over a year seeing hundreds of shoppers per day. I assume that if there was any issues they wouldn't be launching this publicly. I'm sure Amazon invites you to come and try to break the system, if you want. Edit: Other commenters state the sq ft of the store is closer to 1800, still very controllable.
mdasen 9y ago
I think there are ways Amazon could approach this. 1) They can have people review recordings for items that the system is less than sure of and charge the customer accordingly. 2) They could ban customers from the store if they determine that the customer seems to be attempting to subvert the system. Customers already steal things from stores. In this case, the fact that you have to tap-in makes it a lot less of an anonymous shopping experience which would likely deter people from trying to cheat the system. If people are trying to cheat the system, it seems relatively easy to ban them (compared to a conventional store). Amazon doesn't need to solve everything. Today, if you claim that you didn't receive a delivered package, what does Amazon do? I'm guessing that they just send another. However, I'd also guess that there's some trigger noting, "this person seems to have way more packages stolen than we'd expect". At that point, you can take action like requiring signatures or shipping to an Amazon locker. Similarly, Amazon will accept a certain amount of loss combined with the ability to note over time what is going on. The automated system may not be perfect, but presumably humans can review recordings. Ultimately, the only difference between current retail and this is the assumed intent. If someone walks out of a normal store without checking out an item, it's assumed that they intended to steal it. If someone walks out of an Amazon Go without paying, you assume they intended to pay and the system failed. However, if someone is putting their back to goods and picking them up from behind, that's pretty suspicious looking. It seems like Amazon's surveillance is meant to capture way more than typical retail and that should allow them to find bad actors easier, even if it requires a little human review.

794CD01 9y ago

>is it really shoplifting if their system fails to register the sale? Why wouldn't it be shoplifting here if it is at any other store? If the cashiers and loss prevention officers don't notice you walking out with merchandise in your pocket, is it somehow worse because their eyes and brains are made of flesh instead of plastic and metal?

dannyw 9y ago
Well, you don’t know what the system registers until you walk out and get an email receipt a couple of minutes later.
- prawn 9y ago
  And for a shopping list of more than a handful of items, even reviewing the receipt wouldn't necessarily mean you spot things that were missed.
- 794CD01 9y ago
  True. That sounds like a fine excuse for the accidental cases. When you are deliberately making an attempt to deceive the system, that is where it crosses the line.
dx034 9y ago
It's the same as if you give an item to the cashier and the cashier fails to scan it. I don't think that's shoplifting.
- 794CD01 9y ago
  If you are presenting your items to the system normally and they fail to register it, yes. If you are hiding the item in your jacket or cart to deliberately avoid the cashier's attention, that is shoplifting.

Johnny555 9y ago

The exploits will be endless Worse than a conventional store?

notatoad 9y ago
I challenge anybody who says this makes shoplifting easier to try and steal something from a traditional store. It's ridiculously easy. Stores only work right now because most people are honest. AI powered cameras watching you all the time is not going to make shoplifting easier.

hbosch 9y ago

Seems the scale of the store, the controlled supply of product, and the quality of tracking can essentially undermine most exploit vectors. Perhaps in a larger store, or perhaps with more crowds or variance in product... but as it stands, the Amazon Go store is about 1000 sq ft currently and it has been operating internally, daily, for over a year seeing hundreds of shoppers per day. I assume that if there was any issues they wouldn't be launching this publicly. I'm sure Amazon invites you to come and try to break the system, if you want. Edit: Other commenters state the sq ft of the store is closer to 1800, still very controllable.

mdasen 9y ago

I think there are ways Amazon could approach this. 1) They can have people review recordings for items that the system is less than sure of and charge the customer accordingly. 2) They could ban customers from the store if they determine that the customer seems to be attempting to subvert the system. Customers already steal things from stores. In this case, the fact that you have to tap-in makes it a lot less of an anonymous shopping experience which would likely deter people from trying to cheat the system. If people are trying to cheat the system, it seems relatively easy to ban them (compared to a conventional store). Amazon doesn't need to solve everything. Today, if you claim that you didn't receive a delivered package, what does Amazon do? I'm guessing that they just send another. However, I'd also guess that there's some trigger noting, "this person seems to have way more packages stolen than we'd expect". At that point, you can take action like requiring signatures or shipping to an Amazon locker. Similarly, Amazon will accept a certain amount of loss combined with the ability to note over time what is going on. The automated system may not be perfect, but presumably humans can review recordings. Ultimately, the only difference between current retail and this is the assumed intent. If someone walks out of a normal store without checking out an item, it's assumed that they intended to steal it. If someone walks out of an Amazon Go without paying, you assume they intended to pay and the system failed. However, if someone is putting their back to goods and picking them up from behind, that's pretty suspicious looking. It seems like Amazon's surveillance is meant to capture way more than typical retail and that should allow them to find bad actors easier, even if it requires a little human review.