Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Amazon Tests Its Cashierless Technology for Bigger Stores (wsj.com)

Posted by msmash on from the up-next dept.

Online giant tries to overcome challenges caused by retail spaces with higher ceilings, more products. From a report: Amazon.com is testing its cashierless checkout technology for bigger stores [alternative source] , according to people familiar with the matter. If successful, the strategy would further challenge brick-and-mortar retailers racing to make their businesses more convenient. The online retail giant is experimenting with the technology in Seattle in a larger space formatted like a big store, the people said. The systems track what shoppers pick from shelves and charges them automatically when they leave a store.

Although the technology functions well in its current small-store format, it is harder to use it in bigger spaces with higher ceilings and more products, one of the people said, meaning it could take time to roll out the systems at more larger stores. It is unclear whether Amazon intends to use the technology for Whole Foods, although that is the most likely application if executives can make it work, according to the people. Amazon has previously said it has no plans to add the technology to Whole Foods.

25 comments

  1. Executives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ha, ha, ha! “If executives can make it work”?!!!?? Executives??!!! Project Doom by definition already. My sides are hurting! Make it stop!

    1. Re:Executives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems like a narrow use case Amazon wants to test to see exactly what the problems might be. By now, you would think people are well aware that Amazon doesn't muck around will BS.

  2. May their isles all be shat upon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and their fire alarms all be pulled, Amen

    1. Re:May their isles all be shat upon by rossdee · · Score: 3, Informative

      Stores have aisles
      Seas have isles

  3. all we need now is a shopping bot by charliemerritt03 · · Score: 2

    Why have *people* involved, anywhere?
    We don't need "Merchants" any more than "Shoppers"
    "We" don't want people involved if we want ultimate in *efficiency* !!!

    1. Re:all we need now is a shopping bot by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Why have *people* involved, anywhere?
      We don't need "Merchants" any more than "Shoppers"

      That is their plan. They will have small local distribution centers with picking robots. You order the groceries on-line, and your order is delivered to your home by a self-driving-car 30 minutes later.

      There is nothing new about eliminating shoppers. Before 1880, there were no "shoppers". You went into the store, handed your list to the clerk, and then the clerk went into the storeroom and picked your order, wrapped it up, and processed the payment. Allowing the customer to actually see or touch the merchandise before they paid was unthinkable.

      So we will just be going back to the old way, except the picker will be a robot.

    2. Re:all we need now is a shopping bot by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      That's not really the case -- there were markets where food/food ingredients were accessible to customers.

    3. Re:all we need now is a shopping bot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why have *people* involved, anywhere? [...]

      To covertly put Viagra/Cialis in foodstuffs purchased by imaginary stalkers.

    4. Re:all we need now is a shopping bot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [...] Allowing the customer to actually see or touch the merchandise before they paid was unthinkable. [...]

      Are you sure you're not thinking of brothels?

    5. Re:all we need now is a shopping bot by Kjella · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's not really the case -- there were markets where food/food ingredients were accessible to customers.

      Indeed. And the clerk would bring items you were considering to buy / suggested products to the front desk for you to inspect too, customers weren't that in the dark. But it wasn't anything like today with shopping and check-out, even at the market you'd talk to the guy/gal behind the stand and tell what you want and they'd take payment then hand it over. The idea that we'd browse the shelves and pick goods ourselves is actually fairly new. Heck, here in Norway it's only 19 years ago since we allowed that for wine and liquor. When I started drinking you had to check the catalog, go to the counter and tell the clerk what you wanted and they'd bring it to the front desk, it sounds like something from 1899 instead of 1999 but that's how it was.

      I don't think I'd really miss it if you could do it asynchronously though, if I could just shop electronically and have the bags ready to go or delivered at the door it's fine. What made it antiquated at the store was that you'd say what you want then stand/sit around waiting for them to get back to you. It wasted your time while you were paying for somebody else's time to walk around and find it. Granted, they knew where pretty much everything was so it was fairly efficient, but really I don't spend much more time shopping at the grocery store than I'd do picking the items online.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    6. Re:all we need now is a shopping bot by turp182 · · Score: 1

      The movie Surrogates is just this.

      --
      BlameBillCosby.com
    7. Re:all we need now is a shopping bot by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      However, sales boomed when they allowed customers to shop and browse, creating impulse buys as well as the scenarios like, "Oh right, I didn't think about that, I might need this new widget A to go with the gadget C I'm buying today".
      Larger carts increased sales numbers even more.
      Removing the ability to shop and browse would hurt retail sales, and thus, the overall economy: people buy less, so people stock less, so people manufacture less, so less people are needed, so less jobs.
      OTOH, people might consume a little less frivolously, but I think the net effect would be to depress the economy.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    8. Re:all we need now is a shopping bot by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      That is their plan. They will have small local distribution centers with picking robots. You order the groceries on-line, and your order is delivered to your home by a self-driving-car 30 minutes later.

      Walmart is already halfway there. At our local Wally World, we order all the stuff online, tell them when we want to pick it up, and get a notification when it's ready. You still have to drive to the store, but you pull around to the side, confirm payment, and the workers bring your stuff out to you, already bagged and ready to put in the car.

      There are still things I'd rather go into the store for - I'm kind of picky about meat and produce, so that's a separate trip to Publix.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
  4. Good! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I shop locally as much as I can; however, I can't stand this constant harassment to buy "protection plans".
    And with Publix, this harassment to "donate" to their charity du jour. There's a fucking line and they're chatting up the customer and then asking about donating to some ripoff charity (March of Dimes; F rating charity navigator.) or some other rip off.

    AND while I'm making sure that they aren't charging me more than listed, they want to chat me up! "How are doing?" Then the bag boy "How are you doing?"

    The trouble is, a LOT of people fall for that phony "connection" that the marketing people teach.

    1. Re: Good! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sound like a miserable sperglord.

    2. Re: Good! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously. Itâ(TM)s so dumb in this day and age to wait in line while things get rung up, in stores I know for a fact have me tagged by facial recognition when I go in, with super cheap near field devices and scale based systems that could track everything as I throw it in the cart. Keep that guy working there, he can chat me up as he shows me what Iâ(TM)m looking for, but when I check out All I want to do is be shown a list of items and prices, press confirm, and walk out.

    3. Re: Good! by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      Solution is to regulate facial recognition and imprison CEOs whose stores retain the data in the absence of a theft or a crime in the store itself. Not to further erode privacy by going cashless/cashierless.

  5. Holiday Inn Express Bill pines for the 1880s again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    " Allowing the customer to actually see or touch the merchandise before they paid was unthinkable." Actually no, it wasn't about that, it was considered the work of the poor/servants/women. Keep making shit up though!

    Blathering right along.

  6. Wholefoods sucks so bad now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The prices were never great, but now it is deliberate. I think Amazon is also deliberately making their discounts a pain in the ass. You have to generate a barcode and also use their credit card, otherwise you are losing 15% and the prices are at a minimum 15% more than the store next door (literally in my location). I would say they are planning to screw up Wholefoods so they can softball 'save' it with this wonderful new tech so they can pitch it to all other stores.

    Why wouldn't all the grocery stores by Amazon's POS system and become 'one' with them. 90% of grocery stores are still running AS/400 backends for fuck sakes.

  7. Think of the conjunction with Social Credit! by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    I wonder if in the future, you'll gain social credit if you show loyalty to multiple brands for an extended period of time...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Think of the conjunction with Social Credit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about, the first person to suggest social credit, and the first person to suggest that addition to it, get their families defenestrated and themselves shot.
      Same with everyone else in fact. Those ideas need to stop before they even begin to be implemented, and nobody will stop it lawfully.

    2. Re:Think of the conjunction with Social Credit! by gtall · · Score: 1

      Social credit? Hmmm....in the future, the major credit score mafia will keep social credit scores as well as money credit scores. There'll be several categories: Mindless Single Source Buying, Obsequious Flattery, Abnormal Social Attitudes, and Inappropriate Suggestions Towards the Emotionally Unstable. Entry to restaurants will be accepted as long as certain Social Credit minimum levels are met. Scores can be locked but you may experience decreased functioning or access to social gathering places. Social credit will also be stolen and misappropriated for impersonation.

    3. Re:Think of the conjunction with Social Credit! by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      The problem with your idea is the horse is way out of the gate. China is already full-bore implementing social credit, and though the U.S. is more patchwork about it a similar system, not really codified but arising naturally out of system interconnection, is underway.

      If you can't stop something the next best thing is to figure out where it might go and how to live within it.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    4. Re:Think of the conjunction with Social Credit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this almost sounds like a black mirror episode.

  8. Obsequious Flattery, by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    At first I read that as "Obsequious Flatulence", and I thought - you know, China probably does have sensors monitoring even that now.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley