3 ms·

and what's wrong with that? the client is asking for an ML solution. or, more basic, a stock person still has to stock the shelves, so they can scan as they sto

and what's wrong with that? the client is asking for an ML solution. or, more basic, a stock person still has to stock the shelves, so they can scan as they stock. or customers themselves can report inventory locations. just tell the customer a random (at first) location for pasta. when you sense they've gotten there, prompt them whether it was there or not. amortized over time, this is an immeasurable fraction of customers that would have to do the inventory work. i get it, you're trying to give an example of an impossible request, of which there are many, but this just isn't one of those.

whateveracct 7y ago
What you're describing would be a nonstarter in retail in my experience. They care too much about customer experience to amortize the cost of a bad experience. Typically, step 1 is capturing data via added company process about the thing you're gonna automate. A lot more boring than what you describe.
- jiveturkey 7y ago
  no, that's exactly what i described. a paid existing employee collecting location data while stocking. i actually do think that customer-finding is a good approach, but it's up to the client to decide isn't it. the comment i'm replying to was about impossible requests by clueless clients, not about bad but possible implementations. even if the idea is in fact bad, which again i dispute, it's always good to give a client an alternative that stinks, so that the idea you want them to accept seems "obviously" good. i forget what this technique is called. EDIT: after an hour of searching, I believe it's called a "duck". based on the legend of Battle Chess, but of course the technique has existed long, long before Battle Chess.
Klinky 7y ago
That sounds incredibly customer hostile. "Let's send you to the wrong location and waste your time, oh and while you're there, do our job for us!"
MattGaiser 7y ago
>just tell the customer a random (at first) location for pasta. when you sense they've gotten there, prompt them whether it was there or not. Pissing off an enormous number of customers in the process. You will run out of customers at the store willing to use such a useless app before the thing learns where the pasta is. Your stock person idea makes sense if they keep the shelves stable, but "gut feeling" organizations tells me that things can shift around over time.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- jiveturkey 7y ago
  enormous??? once you've located an item (say a low single digits of customers per item), the next <uncountable> number of customers now get to use that data. the number of annoyed customers will be in the "epsilon" fraction -- uncountably low. and you can give an incentive to customers. give them a 10% discount on their total order when they checkout, if they've reported the correct location of an item. don't tell them about it until they checkout, to avoid gaming. there's many more ideas here, i don't need to iterate through them all. i'm impressed by the lack of creativity on this subject. > things can shift around over time. not just that, but products come and go. it should be obvious that this is an ongoing task when stocking, not a one time inventory location task.
justinmeiners 7y ago
> the client is asking for an ML solution In other words, nobody has an idea how it will work. ML doesn't generate essential data for you, or solve problems which you cannot reasonably describe a solution for.

whateveracct 7y ago

What you're describing would be a nonstarter in retail in my experience. They care too much about customer experience to amortize the cost of a bad experience. Typically, step 1 is capturing data via added company process about the thing you're gonna automate. A lot more boring than what you describe.

jiveturkey 7y ago
no, that's exactly what i described. a paid existing employee collecting location data while stocking. i actually do think that customer-finding is a good approach, but it's up to the client to decide isn't it. the comment i'm replying to was about impossible requests by clueless clients, not about bad but possible implementations. even if the idea is in fact bad, which again i dispute, it's always good to give a client an alternative that stinks, so that the idea you want them to accept seems "obviously" good. i forget what this technique is called. EDIT: after an hour of searching, I believe it's called a "duck". based on the legend of Battle Chess, but of course the technique has existed long, long before Battle Chess.

Klinky 7y ago

That sounds incredibly customer hostile. "Let's send you to the wrong location and waste your time, oh and while you're there, do our job for us!"

MattGaiser 7y ago

>just tell the customer a random (at first) location for pasta. when you sense they've gotten there, prompt them whether it was there or not. Pissing off an enormous number of customers in the process. You will run out of customers at the store willing to use such a useless app before the thing learns where the pasta is. Your stock person idea makes sense if they keep the shelves stable, but "gut feeling" organizations tells me that things can shift around over time.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
jiveturkey 7y ago
enormous??? once you've located an item (say a low single digits of customers per item), the next <uncountable> number of customers now get to use that data. the number of annoyed customers will be in the "epsilon" fraction -- uncountably low. and you can give an incentive to customers. give them a 10% discount on their total order when they checkout, if they've reported the correct location of an item. don't tell them about it until they checkout, to avoid gaming. there's many more ideas here, i don't need to iterate through them all. i'm impressed by the lack of creativity on this subject. > things can shift around over time. not just that, but products come and go. it should be obvious that this is an ongoing task when stocking, not a one time inventory location task.

justinmeiners 7y ago

> the client is asking for an ML solution In other words, nobody has an idea how it will work. ML doesn't generate essential data for you, or solve problems which you cannot reasonably describe a solution for.