|
CubanMissile posted:Any evidence of this whatsoever? Well you see even though studies show the quality of service is better and overall cost of food is less under tip less restaurants, American consumers dine in expirience is greatly diminished from not being able to lord wages over their servents heads. gohmak fucked around with this message at 14:19 on Apr 16, 2017 |
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 14:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 15:50 |
|
|
gohmak posted:Well you see even though studies show the quality of service is better and overall cost of food is less under tip less restaurants, American consumers dine in expirience is greatly diminished from not being able to lord wages over their servents heads. this but unironically the key thing is to feel superior
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 15:11
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
BarbarianElephant posted:Videophones were a punchline for 80 years then suddenly we all have them without even noticing. (posting from my videophone.) AT&T launched their first videophone in the 60s. It was a commercial failure, as was their next attempt, and their next. Videophones didn't come out of nowhere - people just didn't want them enough to spend extra money on them, so it didn't take off until it was a literally free service available to everyone, that no one had to buy any special equipment for because regular phones were sold with the necessary features, infrastructure, and abilities right out of the box with no extra cost.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 15:31
|
|
|
This was the first time I encountered videophones and my impression was they sucked rear end: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCOsWAVllok
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 15:50
|
|
|
Jack2142 posted:Here is the thing you aren't spending less money, it just makes it look like your spending less money on the books, which in turn makes your financials look better and in turn increases your companies value. Realistically the first big trucking firm to automatize will probably benefit less than the second generation after the initial bugs are worked out, because they will spend less on repairs and teething costs. Making a massive capital outlay and then a bunch of extra maintenance costs is not going to make you look like you're spending less money on the books, my dude. Unless you're falsifying or otherwise keeping heavily misleading books, which you can just go ahead and do without buying anything self-driving. Like we can especially expect things like, early model self-driving trucks require a tighter maintenance schedule to ensure the sensors are in working order. We would be talking about first gen mass production products after all, without the time to get reliability and low costs worked out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
Carecat posted:It says it uses 25% less space and even if the maintenance and running cost is on par with an average worker you've probably got a better average efficiency, plus they run 21 hours a day 7 days a week at the same hourly rate. Even if the machines are more expensive to run per hour to do the same amount of work you might be hitting a lot of other costs other than just basic payroll like overtime, all the HR and management overhead, industrial relations, sick pay... 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
TheWetFish posted:Yes please! I'll cross post something I wrote elsewhere on the internet. This is text wall that deals with the gate delays terminals on the West Coast are experiencing, in the context of a project I'm working on. "Brandor posted:"The first issues is that many of the terminals on the west coast are smaller and were designed for smaller vessels. There tends to be a bunch of small unconnected terminals in the smaller ports. For example Seattle currently has T-18, T-30, and T-46 operating. Each can only handle loading one or two ships at a time and the gates each have problems if more than one vessel cuts on a given day. I've seen some small terminals have miles of trucks lined up blocking traffic. What I see at the gate towers is that a large portion of users (shippers, freight forwarders, and warehouses) waits until the last possible second to in-gate their cargo. Occasionally gates are only open on days when the carriers want to pay for the gate to be open. The shippers only can have the containers and flat racks out for a limited time before they get charges from the lines. So they wait as long as possible to get the equipment and then often struggle to get things loaded and back into the terminal before the gate cut. So a good portion of the cargo comes in on the day of the gate cut. Many of the problems above could be solved by strong state level run port authorities instead of private or leased terminals, and in areas with strong port authorities (eg. GPA in Garden City, GA) these things aren't as much of an issue. Garden City would regularly have seven vessels working simultaneously on a Saturday, without gate issues on cut days during the week. In-gating could pretty easily be automated almost completely. As I discuss above most of the clerk work I've seen successfully automated in various locations (I get around port wise). Most people who look and wonder why it hasn't become widespread tend to blame the unions. That's not real the problem. The real problem is the growing size of the container-ship lines and alliances. They really gently caress over terminals. They change which terminal they'll call in a given port regularly. The terminals have to get cutthroat with each other to keep or get line business. That's not an environment that terminals can invest in automation. If they spend the money a competitor will under cut them next contract round and they are hosed. Where the power imbalance isn't present (GPA I mentioned earlier is a good example) money can be spent on automation. The real answer is strong state (public) run port authorities that operate the gates and terminal yard . They don't get pushed around by the lines because they're the only game in town. They can invest for the long term and make the smart automation choices. gently caress one can ingate for Garden City in Macon four hours away. Moreover they can be sensitive to labor and keep some of the jobs that might otherwise simply disappear if a private terminal automated by making smart choices. It's too drat bad that only the deep red southern states seem to get that what are basically socialist structures work the best for efficiently run marine terminals. Now to be far they lucked right the gently caress into it (most of these state run port authorities have roots in WWII). But even the freedumist teapartiers on the GA coast love their socialized port authority because it's run that competently and the economic benefit is massively obvious.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2017 03:25
|
|
|
LanceHunter posted:I think they mean that until you can find a way to convey the sense of balance and acceleration through VR, it's gonna be very difficult to pull off effective remote driving for drone trucks. Or else you're gonna see a lot of this: Yo, calculating the horizontal velocity that will cause a truck to overturn like that is a known and solved problem btw. Even when it's in a complicated situation, wind blowing on the sail area, curved road, etc. One thing most often causes what happened there. Driving too goddamn fast. The other thing that causes it is improper securing inside the container.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
I hope the driver was okay. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2017 05:50
|
|
|
He died horribly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2017 05:54
|
|
|
This has probably been covered already, but the thing that really bugs me about automated trucks and cars and all that is what's gonna happen when accidents inevitably happen. As things stand drivers are held accountable if they suddenly just plough through a pedestrian or absolutely crumple some luckless car that got in their path, but an automated system, one that's an integral part of the economy with massive amounts of money invested in it, something that needs to be operational just so we can eat isn't gonna be accountable in the same way. Sure, people can sue or whatever, but the hit the driverless truck company would take would be so negligible they could literally just treat the occasional person getting run over as the cost of doing business, to the point where there might not even be an adequate financial incentive to properly safeguard against it. And with it being an integral part of the infrastructure necessary to do business in the first place, the PR hit the potentially monolithic and monopolistic company would take would be largely irrelevant to them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2017 05:56
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:This has probably been covered already, but the thing that really bugs me about automated trucks and cars and all that is what's gonna happen when accidents inevitably happen. As things stand drivers are held accountable if they suddenly just plough through a pedestrian or absolutely crumple some luckless car that got in their path, but an automated system, one that's an integral part of the economy with massive amounts of money invested in it, something that needs to be operational just so we can eat isn't gonna be accountable in the same way. Sure, people can sue or whatever, but the hit the driverless truck company would take would be so negligible they could literally just treat the occasional person getting run over as the cost of doing business, to the point where there might not even be an adequate financial incentive to properly safeguard against it. And with it being an integral part of the infrastructure necessary to do business in the first place, the PR hit the potentially monolithic and monopolistic company would take would be largely irrelevant to them. answer 1: nationalise it and throw tax money at the problem  answer 2: if it leads to less people getting over all it's better even if cartoon villain executives are involved
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2017 07:45
|
|
gohmak posted:Well you see even though studies show the quality of service is better and overall cost of food is less under tip less restaurants, American consumers dine in expirience is greatly diminished from not being able to lord wages over their servents heads. To be clear, I was referring to having a wait staff vs. having no or very limited FoH like how people ITT think automation in restaurants will happen (because APPS BRO). Tipping being a terrible loving holdover from the great depression and overall a completely garbage system is a different thing.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2017 09:05
|
|
|
What is the price volatility of the gates like? I imagine that a typical private sector solution would be sufficiently long term service agreements to ensure a secure return on investment. This can occasionally be an extraordinarily bad idea if prices change enough though, as such service agreements tend to have fixed prices. Australia's LNG situation is an example of it ending badly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2017 11:28
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:This has probably been covered already, but the thing that really bugs me about automated trucks and cars and all that is what's gonna happen when accidents inevitably happen. As things stand drivers are held accountable if they suddenly just plough through a pedestrian or absolutely crumple some luckless car that got in their path, but an automated system, one that's an integral part of the economy with massive amounts of money invested in it, something that needs to be operational just so we can eat isn't gonna be accountable in the same way. Sure, people can sue or whatever, but the hit the driverless truck company would take would be so negligible they could literally just treat the occasional person getting run over as the cost of doing business, to the point where there might not even be an adequate financial incentive to properly safeguard against it. And with it being an integral part of the infrastructure necessary to do business in the first place, the PR hit the potentially monolithic and monopolistic company would take would be largely irrelevant to them. The public and media will put way more scrutiny on any incidents of killer robots and a lot of their customers will be big fleet firms like UPS/Fedex who have a very big interest in safety rates just for costs. Imagine if a automatic Fedex truck wipes out a family, Fedex would be all over the manufacturer just for PR.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2017 14:24
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:This has probably been covered already, but the thing that really bugs me about automated trucks and cars and all that is what's gonna happen when accidents inevitably happen. As things stand drivers are held accountable if they suddenly just plough through a pedestrian or absolutely crumple some luckless car that got in their path, but an automated system, one that's an integral part of the economy with massive amounts of money ed in it, something that needs to be operational just so we can eat isn't gonna be accountable in the same way. Sure, people can sue or whatever, but the hit the driverless truck company would take would be so negligible they could literally just treat the occasional person getting run over as the cost of doing business, to the point where there might not even be an adequate financial incentive to properly safeguard against it. And with it being an integral part of the infrastructure necessary to do business in the first place, the PR hit the potentially monolithic and monopolistic company would take would be largely irrelevant to them. The liability shifts to the trucking company and the company which made the system which are both huge targets. And the economics are largely in the hand of the insurers. There is no way it ends up economical to operate autonomous truck fleets that are noticeably less safe than human drivers. Jack2142 posted:You can capitalize your shiny automated systems as an asset on the books which makes your company more valuable on paper, while cutting payroll expenses. You don't know much about business or acounting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 00:11
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Yo, calculating the horizontal velocity that will cause a truck to overturn like that is a known and solved problem btw. Even when it's in a complicated situation, wind blowing on the sail area, curved road, etc. One thing most often causes what happened there. Driving too goddamn fast. Measuring the curvature of the road ahead (that is, far enough ahead that the truck has time to decelerate) is a bit more challenging, though it's still pretty close to being a solved problem. Carecat posted:The public and media will put way more scrutiny on any incidents of killer robots and a lot of their customers will be big fleet firms like UPS/Fedex who have a very big interest in safety rates just for costs. Imagine if a automatic Fedex truck wipes out a family, Fedex would be all over the manufacturer just for PR. Really now, just look at all the people expressing safety fears over self-driving cars despite the fact that Google's cars have a better safety record than the vast majority of human drivers. If any manufacturer develops a reputation for slacking off with safety, their competitors will eat them alive.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
Cockmaster posted:Really now, just look at all the people expressing safety fears over self-driving cars despite the fact that Google's cars have a better safety record than the vast majority of human drivers. If any manufacturer develops a reputation for slacking off with safety, their competitors will eat them alive. Why not just use autonomous driving technology to augment safety, while a human driver is still present and allowed to account for errors? The computer can handle the stuff that it's easy for a human to gently caress up, and the human can monitor and handle any situations the computer can't -- just like autopilots do on aircraft. Autonomous driving shouldn't be seen as an all-or-nothing proposition. The technology we have right now is good enough to represent a massive increase in safety if widely implemented -- we shouldn't wait until humans are no longer necessary at all to deploy it. I get that the idea of not having to pay drivers make a lot of capitalists wet, and the idea of having your car drive you home whilst you enjoy a martini in the back seat is also attractive, but we don't need to achieve either of those things in the short term to make computer-assisted driving a very useful technology that meaningfully improves safety.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:Do discuss why $15/hr sucks and basic income rules. Do not discuss why robots will never be able to do X or Y.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 01:28
|
|
|
I think it's relevant to discuss why self-driving cars are largely being driven by the goal of eliminating human labour, while discussing the implications and benefits of a higher minimum wage and/or basic income. We have money and human lives sitting on the table right now with existing technology, and people poo poo on it just because it can't put people entirely out of a job -- I think that speaks to the uphill battle we face in implementing measures to provide a basic standard of living in our society, because it shows the disdain for labour in general. These issues cannot be separated.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 01:42
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Why not just use autonomous driving technology to augment safety, while a human driver is still present and allowed to account for errors? The computer can handle the stuff that it's easy for a human to gently caress up, and the human can monitor and handle any situations the computer can't -- just like autopilots do on aircraft.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 14:37
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I think it's relevant to discuss why self-driving cars are largely being driven by the goal of eliminating human labour, while discussing the implications and benefits of a higher minimum wage and/or basic income. We have money and human lives sitting on the table right now with existing technology, and people poo poo on it just because it can't put people entirely out of a job -- I think that speaks to the uphill battle we face in implementing measures to provide a basic standard of living in our society, because it shows the disdain for labour in general. These issues cannot be separated. There's a number of people who tend to idealize or outright idolize technology, believing that it will eventually solve all problems. Sometimes people take that to extremes, believing that the only "problem" that humans need to solve is that we're not putting enough money toward inventing the magic super-AI that will instantly solve every other problem. The existence of a problem that cannot be solved solely by improved technology alone - and whose effects might even be excaerbated by technological development - presents difficulties for them because they tend to take it as a Luddite challenge to technology rather than a problem that needs to be solved as part of the implementation of technology. In general, people tend to focus heavily on technical issues and ignore non-technical issues, which is why we're having a lively discussion about automated trucking, despite the fact that tasks that are an order of magnitude less complicated (like driving trains) are still largely done by humans.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:which is why we're having a lively discussion about automated trucking, despite the fact that tasks that are an order of magnitude less complicated (like driving trains) are still largely done by humans.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Yo, calculating the horizontal velocity that will cause a truck to overturn like that is a known and solved problem btw. Even when it's in a complicated situation, wind blowing on the sail area, curved road, etc. One thing most often causes what happened there. Driving too goddamn fast. No joke whenever I see most posters here talk about automation it's really obvious they haven't a slightest idea where current tech even is at, never mind stuff coming up in the next 10 years.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
TROIKA CURES GREEK posted:No joke whenever I see most posters here talk about automation it's really obvious they haven't a slightest idea where current tech even is at, never mind stuff coming up in the next 10 years. you dont need a complicated sensor suite to determine the optimal speed at which to drive a truck. you just drive at the posted speed limit this is going to cause a lot of societal turbulence lol, at least in the south where most people regularly drive over the speed limit
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Why not just use autonomous driving technology to augment safety, while a human driver is still present and allowed to account for errors? The computer can handle the stuff that it's easy for a human to gently caress up, and the human can monitor and handle any situations the computer can't -- just like autopilots do on aircraft. This is quite literally why Air France Flight 447 went down. Like the exact reason google wants to avoid having both is because it turns out that's actually a really bad thing usually.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:you dont need a complicated sensor suite to determine the optimal speed at which to drive a truck. you just drive at the posted speed limit Oh I know it's just funny when completely clueless people bring something up as a problem and it's been solved for years. Calibanibal posted:mouth-breathing futurists have been saying self-driving cars are just around the corner for 50 years now, call me when they can navigate a parking lot lmao Like this guy. What's even more funny is parallel parking was one of the first autonomous features cars had lmbo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
TROIKA CURES GREEK posted:This is quite literally why Air France Flight 447 went down. Like the exact reason google wants to avoid having both is because it turns out that's actually a really bad thing usually. No, Airbus pilots not trained in alternate rule mode is what caused air France 447 to crash
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
the fact that the technology exists but it's still not in widespread use demonstrates some factor other than cost involved in why the technology hasn't changed things yet self ordering kiosks in fast food just aren't popular enough to be worth it yet and potentially never will be outside of specific examples. people like to bring up wawa but that's a regional thing, in the south/midwest quicktrip also has ordering kiosks for their little in store cafes but i've never seen anyone use them vs. just talking to the cashier self driving cars are going to have two significant problems at first, relatively low adoption rates because people don't trust the technology or don't want it ("i can drive better than a robot") and bad press which is going to happen after a few dozen people kill themselves and others through misuse of first gen "driver assist" technology its real easy to forget about the human side of the human/tool relationship
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:self ordering kiosks in fast food just aren't popular enough to be worth it yet and potentially never will be outside of specific examples. people like to bring up wawa but that's a regional thing, in the south/midwest quicktrip also has ordering kiosks for their little in store cafes but i've never seen anyone use them vs. just talking to the cashier You keep saying this, but McDonalds has completed their national rollout in Canada a little while ago, and people generally prefer them in my experience versus talking to the cashier. Locations that used to have 4 people on cash at lunch now have 1.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
Dr. Stab posted:You keep saying this, but McDonalds has completed their national rollout in Canada a little while ago, and people generally prefer them in my experience versus talking to the cashier. Locations that used to have 4 people on cash at lunch now have 1. well i hope that this third time mcdonalds experiments with self ordering kiosks it will take ig uess
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 18:22
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:well i hope that this third time mcdonalds experiments with self ordering kiosks it will take ig uess That's what I'm trying to say. It's happened already and has taken. There's no hoping about it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Dr. Stab posted:That's what I'm trying to say. It's happened already and has taken. There's no hoping about it. Meanwhile I pass one whenever I get to the subway station and literally no one seems to use the kiosk. Anecdata and all that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
Dr. Stab posted:That's what I'm trying to say. It's happened already and has taken. There's no hoping about it. ok cool since we're explaining our posts to each other now what i'm saying is that there's no guarantee the kiosks wont go away once the novelty wears off like they did the last few times mcdonalds tried this
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 18:33
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:well i hope that this third time mcdonalds experiments with self ordering kiosks it will take ig uess People are more accustomed to using touchscreens, ordering things from a computer, and paying without human interaction than they have been at any other period in human history. You keep saying that all of this has been tried before so it doesn't matter, but it sounds an awful lot like someone saying that touchscreen tablets existed in the 90s so obviously no one is going to want to use that technology in their phone now. Things are different now, even if conceptually similar technology has been around for a while. I'll say the same thing I say every time this topic comes up: I don't really know if it's going to take off or not, but I think dismissing it out of hand because we've had touchscreen self service kiosks in the past is silly. People were arguing a few years ago that self checkouts were dead because the technology was poo poo and they were being pulled left and right, but now pretty much every major brick and mortar store is bringing them back in force and/or chasing after something like Sam's Club's Scan & Go.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:well i hope that this third time mcdonalds experiments with self ordering kiosks it will take ig uess When was the last time they tried this and was it before Amazon started selling more than books/grocery stores adopting self checkout?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
Pets.com bombed horribly, therefore...
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:When was the last time they tried this and was it before Amazon started selling more than books/grocery stores adopting self checkout? the late 90's hilariously it even says in that article "customers are more familiar with computers now than they were ten years ago, the last time a major chain tried self ordering kiosks"... it's hard to advocate this position on a forum since forums by their nature self select for geeks with a positive view of technology use but there's tons and tons of people out there who prefer speaking to a person than pecking at a big screen after a year or two each franchise owner is going to make their own decision about whether to replace or repair the kiosk once it needs service, and if that cost is worth it boner confessor fucked around with this message at 18:52 on Apr 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
here's another mcdonalds experiment with kiosks from colorado in 2003 the technology is pretty much the same as it is now, just cheaper now. the hold up is consumer preference and as mentioned in my previous post, its real easy to say "well people use computers more now" because that's what they said last time, and the time before that. computer use keeps going up. doesn't mean we've crossed the critical ease-of-use threshold yet, or that we ever will
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 15:50 |
|
|
boner confessor posted:ok cool since we're explaining our posts to each other now what i'm saying is that there's no guarantee the kiosks wont go away once the novelty wears off like they did the last few times mcdonalds tried this Considering the existence of UberEats and the like, I wonder if the hold up is the lack of delivery. If someone's already at a restaurant, they might as well do it the easiest way and maybe they want the human element too. If you're touchpadding it from home, who cares? Uber wants to eventually have an automated on-call fleet so maybe the kitchen staff will just swipe their RFID card on the car's deposit slot to give it the food and then the customer will do the same with an auto-generated QR code on a smartphone screen to retrieve it outside at the curb or in their driveway. We'll probably achieve some sort of equilibrium.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 19:58
|
|
