4 ms·

It’s wasteful if you assume it could be automated, but helping customers find things is just “service” most of the time.

by anp 6y ago

robbrown451 6y ago
Yes when using the word "waste" I am comparing it to being automated, which it most certainly can. Just as we might consider it a waste to have an elevator operator, when that task has been automated for nearly a century. At one time it was just accepted as a cost of running a tall building.
- salawat 6y ago
  You're still missing the point. There is a point where the systemic rigidity enforced to make automation feasible is far more expensive than the value it actually produces by existing. I.e. In order to replace those store employees, you have to build all your buildings the same way, stock them in a certain way, hire maintainers to input tracking data, hire auditors to ensure customers aren't tampering with the store.... So on and so forth. It'd be a great way to protest though. Every customer goes out of their way to disorganize the store until they hire locals.
  - robbrown451 6y ago
    I don't think I'm missing any point. Of course the economics has to justify it. And they will. Everything you say could be applied to just about everything that has been automated in the past. I mean, it sounds like someone arguing "but librarians can do this or that that Google can't do." And yet, most of the time, when we need information, we can find it a whole lot more quickly than going to a library and asking someone for help getting us what we need. In this case, there will still be store employees if the system fails to identify what a customer wants. But that will be the exception, and asking for help finding things will be like, today, someone asking for directions at a gas station. Most of the time, you can just say "where are the birthday candles?" to your phone and it will tell you, and it will have been far less effort for both the store and the customer vs. having to go find and employee. (and yes, I'm counting development time, entry time, and all that, averaged out) For a typical Safeway or Home Depot or Target, there are already tons of benefits to keeping track of their inventory and where it goes on shelves. It's already almost certainly in a database somewhere. They need this so they don't have to spend so much time training employees, for one thing. I guess all I can say is, come back in 5 years. I'd bet big money you will see this, whether in Google maps or in the various apps by retailers. (I mean, even 10 years ago their was an app that did this on some level: https://mashable.com/2010/11/22/aisle411/ https://mashable.com/2010/11/22/aisle411/ )
    - lonelappde 6y ago
      Home Depot, IKEA, and Microcenter already have apps/websites to tell you which shelf has your product.
      - robbrown451 6y ago
        Yes. It seems like a fairly obvious idea and I have no doubt it will become more and more widespread and built into general purpose apps (such as maps)

It’s wasteful if you assume it could be automated, but helping customers find things is just “service” most of the time.

by anp 6y ago

It’s wasteful if you assume it could be automated, but helping customers find things is just “service” most of the time.

robbrown451 6y ago

Yes when using the word "waste" I am comparing it to being automated, which it most certainly can. Just as we might consider it a waste to have an elevator operator, when that task has been automated for nearly a century. At one time it was just accepted as a cost of running a tall building.

salawat 6y ago
You're still missing the point. There is a point where the systemic rigidity enforced to make automation feasible is far more expensive than the value it actually produces by existing. I.e. In order to replace those store employees, you have to build all your buildings the same way, stock them in a certain way, hire maintainers to input tracking data, hire auditors to ensure customers aren't tampering with the store.... So on and so forth. It'd be a great way to protest though. Every customer goes out of their way to disorganize the store until they hire locals.
- robbrown451 6y ago
  I don't think I'm missing any point. Of course the economics has to justify it. And they will. Everything you say could be applied to just about everything that has been automated in the past. I mean, it sounds like someone arguing "but librarians can do this or that that Google can't do." And yet, most of the time, when we need information, we can find it a whole lot more quickly than going to a library and asking someone for help getting us what we need. In this case, there will still be store employees if the system fails to identify what a customer wants. But that will be the exception, and asking for help finding things will be like, today, someone asking for directions at a gas station. Most of the time, you can just say "where are the birthday candles?" to your phone and it will tell you, and it will have been far less effort for both the store and the customer vs. having to go find and employee. (and yes, I'm counting development time, entry time, and all that, averaged out) For a typical Safeway or Home Depot or Target, there are already tons of benefits to keeping track of their inventory and where it goes on shelves. It's already almost certainly in a database somewhere. They need this so they don't have to spend so much time training employees, for one thing. I guess all I can say is, come back in 5 years. I'd bet big money you will see this, whether in Google maps or in the various apps by retailers. (I mean, even 10 years ago their was an app that did this on some level: https://mashable.com/2010/11/22/aisle411/ https://mashable.com/2010/11/22/aisle411/ )
  - lonelappde 6y ago
    Home Depot, IKEA, and Microcenter already have apps/websites to tell you which shelf has your product.
    - robbrown451 6y ago
      Yes. It seems like a fairly obvious idea and I have no doubt it will become more and more widespread and built into general purpose apps (such as maps)