Flippy the Burger bot

[Gandalf]

Ooh, I forgot about this thread. I'd still like an explanation as to why Broomstick accused me of wanting to take people's choices away.

[TithonusSyndrome]

What you are blustering incoherently about is finding an alternative to capitalism.

You say that like it's a bad thing...

Not at all. I just have some sense of how immense an undertaking such a subject would be, and the sense in not attempting to address it here.

This is outside the scope of the current topic

And you dictate the limits of the current thread because.... oh, right, you don't.

I have precisely the exact same amount of personal fiat that you do, Miss Life-Experience-Trumps-All. The difference is, I don't invoke it spuriously and then revert to anything resembling your dowager shtick when nobody heeds your windy yarns.

Long story short; Broomstick is an illiterate retard who didn't take into account the fact that the whole reason this model of grocery delivery is being revisited in the first place is because automation makes the economics viable enough to reexamine

Re-examine? Certainly. Accept it as inherently superior, workable, or even viable in the real world is a different matter. Dismissal of history is stupid, and the mark of naive youth that is convinced that it knows better than everyone else and that experience doesn't matter.

And that's why your entire "rebuttal" consisted of gabbing about how this system was conducted in Ye Olde Days, and then extrapolating that particular incarnation of the model forward into the present to assert that it's no more workable now than then? "History" in the case of dilettantes like you is seldom ever anything other than a euphemism for the collective long-term melange of disorganized and informal nostrums gathered through availability heuristics. Unfortunately, it'll take more than your self-righteous fiat to convince anyone to convert to that methodology.

Classic "here's a statistically irrelevant exception to the rule" Broomstick. Pair it with some meandering anecdotes about the time in 1987 she bought a crepe from a farmer's market in Indiana and the package will be complete.

Bleargh, hate crepes. Also, hadn't been to Indiana in 1987 yet. OK, passing through on the way to and from Chicago, but not, you know, living there because I was still going through that larval phase when City Living Is the Future!!! and who would want to live in the suburbs or the hicks? Hey, I grew out of that narrow-minded view. Maybe you will, too.

Now Life ExperienceTM is telling Old Lady Broomstick where I live. Being old doesn't sound like much fun if it just leads to this recursive self-affirming mindset where being old gives you experience, experience gives you fiat, and fiat gives you the power of clairvoyance. Critical thought can't survive long in that brew.

Actually, I love myself just fine. But don't worry, child, when you grow up and get some actual life experience you'll understand what I'm talking about.

Life experience hasn't taught you that direct denial of a charge without specific evidence gives the appearance of having something to hide, so once again you have proven to be a miserable saleswoman of your most cherished cudgel.

Farmers' markets are a growing segment. Are they the dominant means of obtaining groceries? No - but they aren't going away, either. You are suffering from the delusion that there can be one and only one answer to any life problem. In reality, there are multiple solutions to "where do I get my food?" for most people in the industrial world.

Ho-hum, fiat experience strikes again. Nothing to see here.

It's still exists as an ad hominem attack.

Wrong again, dumb cow.

If you had confidence in your ability to debate you wouldn't feel the need to do that. It demonstrates a lack of confidence, and insecurity in your own position.

If you're too feeble and queasy to even address my arguments in the first place, the debate has moved into a place where questions of my "confidence" don't even emerge. Mutually exclusive insults, which do not form the premises upon which the prior arguments take place, are not ad hominems, no matter how convenient it may be for you to conflate the two out of desperation.

Broomstick; illiterate retard, twice proven.

Look! More ad hominem. And one obviously false as I am demonstrably quite literate. My arguments may or may not be wrong, but they are delivered in understandable English.

Then how else do we account for your inability to read and comprehend that my argument relied specifically on the specific proportion of modern-day urban crowding, as evidenced by your histrionic strawman in response to it?

Oh right, intellectual cowardice and fragility, the usual.

Listing nickel-and-dime non-arguments isn't debate. It's padding, which you resort to quite often.

So? I'm doing this for my own amusement, not to win points in a contest. And I like pursuing the minutiae in these sorts of discussions. If you don't like to do so then don't.

Concession accepted. I hope it was very, very, very amusing, and that you were in no way upset, humiliated or wounded. I'll be happy to hear you reassert these declarations of your mental state to me any time you feel the need to convince me further.

I guess if you don't know this, maybe you could benefit from some more life experience.

Certainly we can all benefit from more life experience. I'm working on my second half-century, how much time have you put in on the planet?

I'm four years old if it'll make you happy, I guess. Either way, I never see myself reaching any phase in my life where I abandon scholarship for private intuition limited by the routines and exigencies of life.

[Alyrium Denryle]

TithonusSyndrome, even if it is not a fallacy per se, substituting insults in place of an actual argument as you have just done is still bad argumentation. As is that deliberate misquote which, for someone skimming the discussion might not be plainly evident without attributing the modified text to yourself in some way.

Your behavior has been shitty, and your argument has thus far been shitty. You will cease.

[Ziggy Stardust]

I know I'm not a mod so this request doesn't hold much weight, but if Broomstick and Tithonus (and whoever else wants to be involved) want to continue this argument, could you do everybody else a little favor? Start from scratch. Instead of responding directly to the last person's post, just write a short little paragraph summary of what you are trying to argue, and go from there. At this point, I am having a hard time even figuring out what the hell the argument is, because all of the posts between you two have become long disjointed series of snide comments and insults that have strayed from whatever the original point was.

[TithonusSyndrome]

TithonusSyndrome, even if it is not a fallacy per se, substituting insults in place of an actual argument as you have just done is still bad argumentation.

I have categorically not done this. The exchange in question featured two arguments, followed by an insult. Broomstick, being a coward, is in fact the only person here to grievously misquote someone by shearing away my arguments and leaving only the insult to offer the dishonest impression that I "substituted insults for arguments."

I have gone on record as saying that this one thing will be broadly improved by having the industry move to a broadly online model.

Right, that's why Amazon would never open a brick-and-mortar store... oh wait...

"Oh wait", where are all the self-driving delivery cars in common use upon which this new model of grocery delivery is premised? "Oh wait", I guess Amazon couldn't have opened this location out of an interest in cashing in on a medium-term business opportunity and/or chance to build their grocery brand in anticipation of self-driving cars. "Oh, wait", this is just Broomstick's incipient dementia coming into bloom.

ARGUMENT 1: The model of grocery delivery under examination at present is not ready for widespread launch because the specific forms of automation necessary to make it go are not available for broad implementation, ergo it is not a fair comparison to suggest that Amazon has no faith in a model which they could not reasonably test for another couple of years yet.

ARGUMENT 2: Amazon may, for all we know, have launched their token brick-and-mortar location as part of a long term strategy focused on total automated grocery delivery, and it is premature conjecture to assume that they will sustain any portion of the existing model indefinitely.

If Broomstick finds these arguments inadequate in some way, it would be incumbent upon her to address them as per the forum rules. They are, however, arguments nonetheless, and the insult which followed them up independent of them was in no way proof of an inability to supply any. Quite the opposite.

As is that deliberate misquote which, for someone skimming the discussion might not be plainly evident without attributing the modified text to yourself in some way.

Your behavior has been shitty, and your argument has thus far been shitty. You will cease.

Frankly, I expect a much higher and more thorough standard of evaluation of conduct from moderation staff here, because this is the second time I've had to clarify that things didn't transpire according to the victim script of the dowager. I could get this degree of moderation from a third-rate subreddit, and this board really cannot afford to lag behind all the post Web 1.0 alternatives out there now.

[Thanas]

OK.

I am going to say this only once:

Referring to her as dowager while her husband is fighting for his life is fucking cruel and will stop. In light of the very heavy situation Broomstick is going through, this ends here. Broomstick will get as much time as she wants to respond to this.

And I will ban the next shithead who thinks being cruel to a member in distress is acceptable. You can make an argument without being needlessly cruel. And using the word dowager here is being needlessly cruel.

You guys all know Broomstick and I have had our differences. But this shit? It is unacceptable.

And if you disagree with my judgement call on this, take it to Dalton or Lagmonster.

[Patroklos]

Is there rule about every of this boards thousands of posters being intimately familiar with every other posters real world personal details?

[mr friendly guy]

We do have a venting section where we can post about our real world problems.

[Ralin]

Is there rule about every of this boards thousands of posters being intimately familiar with every other posters real world personal details?

She, uh. Said "My husband is dying, stop calling me a word that means widow" after the first time. He kept doing it. Are you trying to be edgy or something?

[K. A. Pital]

Is there rule about every of this boards thousands of posters being intimately familiar with every other posters real world personal details?

There's no such rule, but this situation is understood from the thread alone (not to mention the other threads, which I think most long-standing members have read and participated in). Personal attacks that go beyond common insults and actually beyond human decency should not become the norm here.

If you have a different opinion on this, you can of course voice your opinion, but I don't think you'll find much understanding.

[Thanas]

Is there rule about every of this boards thousands of posters being intimately familiar with every other posters real world personal details?

Is there rule about every of this boards thousands of posters being intimately familiar with every other posters real world personal details?

She, uh. Said "My husband is dying, stop calling me a word that means widow" after the first time. He kept doing it. Are you trying to be edgy or something?

Any more questions?

[TithonusSyndrome]

*sigh* but I didn't, though, did I? I was quite clear about the context and the meaning of the phrase:

In contemporary use, "dowager" is commonly used as a shorthand to refer to supercillious and histronic older women, in the model of turn of the 20th century east coast socialites (Florence Foster Jenkins, etc) who would engage in generous performative pearl-clutching to supplement the paucity of their arguments which were typically based on little more than appeals to social convention. I guess if you don't know this, maybe you could benefit from some more life experience.

I don't read venting because I don't give a shit what any of you people are going through, and because I have a real-world support network for myself when things go wrong. I don't overshare with any group of internet strangers, and I feel sorry for anyone who needs to. While this might sound cold in some sense, it also means that I don't see anyone's personal misfortunes as an opportunity to kick them when they're down.

If moderation staff here still considers this some kind of grotesque stab at her husband's condition then fine, this is not the hill i want to die on, but my understanding of the situation was that my clarification had dispelled any and all notions that I was mocking her for the state of her husband. If and when this phrase arrives at your social circle, such as it may be considered, you'll have plenty of time to reconsider the dynamics of it then.

[Zaune]

You really are winning friends and influencing people in this thread, aren't you.

[Thanas]

I don't read venting because I don't give a shit what any of you people are going through, and because I have a real-world support network for myself when things go wrong. I don't overshare with any group of internet strangers, and I feel sorry for anyone who needs to. While this might sound cold in some sense, it also means that I don't see anyone's personal misfortunes as an opportunity to kick them when they're down.

If moderation staff here still considers this some kind of grotesque stab at her husband's condition then fine, this is not the hill i want to die on, but my understanding of the situation was that my clarification had dispelled any and all notions that I was mocking her for the state of her husband. If and when this phrase arrives at your social circle, such as it may be considered, you'll have plenty of time to reconsider the dynamics of it then.

Apparently your "social circle" has never taught you common courtesy.

I'll be blunt. I don't give a shit how you redefine a word. The mere term (because it can have more than one definition you know) can be hurtful. Especially with what she is going through. I don't give two cents for what kind of excuse or rationalization you come up with. Stop using the term.

The fact that I have to repeat this when any other functioning adult would have already understood this just means that you are either a pathetic lost soul who thinks he is the toughest guy in the room or going out of your way to appear even more sociopathic than usual. Quite frankly, you don't strike me as the dumb as rocks type, so this must mean you are trolling here.

In either case, STFU.

[Tribble]

Sooooo.... about the Flippy burger bot? Any updates?

Has anyone actually seen one of these in action?

[FaxModem1]

Let's get this thread back to automation:

Quartz Media

The food robots are upon us—taking orders, flipping burgers, and posing questions
Farm to robot to table.
Farm to robot to table. (Reuters/China Stringer Network)
SHARE

WRITTEN BY

Chase Purdy
March 20, 2017
A boxy robot was spotted rolling down a San Francisco sidewalk on March 17, accompanied by two photographers as it completed a test drive. The two logos stickered to its side—Yelp and Eat24—leave little doubt of what the bot’s creators hope it will one day deliver.
Robots and interactive machines are cropping up all across food world. CaliBurger, a West Coast burger chain, has invested in a grill master robot named “Flippy.” A handful of restaurants in China have replaced their human waiters with mechanical ones. McDonald’s is testing out the use of touchscreen food-ordering kiosks.
Follow
Forrest @fcfowler
A locked food delivery robot driving by the homeless is peak San Francisco https://twitter.com/ryanlawler/status/8 ... 9709539328 …
7:01 PM - 17 Mar 2017
3 3 Retweets 5 5 likes
Still, some say it will be several years before the restaurant industry becomes inundated with the kinds of robots that replace human laborers. And when it does, the automation of foot service will occur in strategic locations, said University of Notre Dame IT professor Timothy Carone in a conversation with The Motley Fool.

“Whether a restaurant becomes partially or fully automated should depend on its customers and locations,” Carone said. “Fast-food franchises located anywhere are finding its customers value automation. Restaurants at airports or similar locations that provide a captive audience but no loyalty except for brand loyalty will find automation necessary and valued by customers—faster is better.”
The dining room floor hasn’t been so friendly to some robot servers. Some mechanical servers in China wound up getting scrapped after restaurant owners grew frustrated over spilled drinks and food. Meanwhile, technology publication Fallible discovered March 17 that McDonald’s India delivery app, McDelivery, was leaking the customer data of more than 2.2 million people. The data included names, email addressed, phone numbers, home addresses, and social media profile links, according to the site (the app is still leaking data).
Still, automation is something consumers crave, according to Andy Puzder, the CEO of CKE Restaurants and former US secretary of labor nominee. Puzder argued as much in March 2016 Wall Street Journal (paywall) op-ed, writing, “This is particularly so among millennials who already do so much on smartphones and tablets,” he wrote. “I’ve watched people—young and old—waiting in line to use the touch screens while employees stand idle at the counter.”
If that kind of future makes you cringe, speak now or forever hold your peace. You may not be able to whine to your local bartender much longer. That person might soon be replaced by a robot, too.

Here is a picture of one of those food delivery robots passing by homeless in San Francisco:

[The Romulan Republic]

Good bye, jobs.

Hello Basic Income or imminent social breakdown, take your pick.

[Zaune]

Or social breakdown and then UBI.

[The Romulan Republic]

Possibly, depending on the country. I think that much like support for single payer health care, its probably only going to take off in the US after its been tried and worked in most other western countries. Though that might be sooner than you think- its already been tried in some parts of Europe, and its starting to get serious political support in Canada too.

[Gandalf]

The right to exploit the societal lesser in the name of capitalism is the thing upon which America is built, so I wonder if people will just find a way to normalise their obsolescence.

[FaxModem1]

The Motley Fool gave their take on it back in 2016.

Will Robots Replace Fast-Food Workers?
Automation has become a buzzword, but the elimination of the need for living workers is not around the corner.

Daniel B. Kline (TMFDankline) Sep 1, 2016 at 7:41AM
Robotburger

ROBOTS MAY BECOME A REALITY IN FAST-FOOD RESTAURANTS. IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.

The robots in movies and science fiction books that rise up to take over the world generally are able to do so because we have placed them in charge of missiles, defense systems, and other military technology.

We never see a disgruntled, order-taking bot working at McDonald's (NYSE:MCD) or Domino's (NYSE:DPZ) cast off its virtual hairnet to gain sentience and overthrow its fast-food overlord. But fast food, along with shipping warehouses, has become a hotbed for robots and other automated technology.

McDonald's has been testing ordering kiosks, Domino's has numerous ways to place an order that do not involve talking with a human being, and Starbucks (NASDAQ:SBUX) has used technology to shift employees away from order taking to put them into production. It may not be a fantastic utopia where Rosie from The Jetsons does our laundry, but robot/automated technology has clearly infiltrated fast food.

Are robot fast-food workers coming?
It's not a question of whether automation will come; it's one of whether it will make stores more efficient or allow them to get rid of human workers. Starbucks, for example, has used automation to allow it to move workers into making drinks rather than taking orders, but it has not yet cut its workforce in any meaningful way.

CollegeRecruiter.com's Steven Rothberg, whose company works to find jobs for students and college graduates, believes that fast-food robots are coming, but he does not think they will supplant traditional workers.

"Many of the students and some of the recent grads who use our site are employed by fast food restaurants," he said to The Motley Fool in an email. "There's no doubt that automation will continue to impact the number and types of jobs in fast food restaurants but I don't buy the argument that digital ordering, kiosks, tablets, and other methods will replace human workers in fast food restaurants. Just look at banks. Have ATM's reduced the need for human tellers? Absolutely. But have ATM's come close to eliminating the need for human tellers? Absolutely not."

Robot Food Getty
IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.

Timothy Carone a teaching professor in the Department of IT, Analytics, and Operations at the University of Notre Dame's Mendoza College of Business, believes that automation will happen in restaurants, but not quickly or necessarily to the detriment of flesh-and-blood workers. The professor, who wrote the forthcoming book Future Automation -- Changes to Lives and to Businesses, does believe that the path toward robot workers (or at least automated workflow) will be a slow one.

"Automated services in restaurants has started and will continue for many years even while many restaurants maintain their level of manual service," he wrote in an email to The Motley Fool. "Some fast food companies will be all-in and others are taking a wait-and-see attitude. It will take years for fast food franchises to recognize a return on their automation investment though at some point an automated operation will be much cheaper than a manual operation."

Carone said that the idea that restaurants are automating due to labor costs is only partially true.

"Automation would occur at much lower labor costs than exist today or in the future but automation costs money," he said, noting that the expense will lower over time. "Whether a restaurant becomes partially or fully automated should depend on its customers and locations. Fast-food franchises located anywhere are finding its customers value automation. Restaurants at airports or similar locations that provide a captive audience but no loyalty except for brand loyalty will find automation necessary and valued by customers -- faster is better."

It's already happening
Donald Mazzela, a board member of the non-profit National Robotics Education Foundation, said his group has been looking at the issue of robots in restaurants for three years, noting that robotic interaction is being taught in culinary and hospitality courses throughout the world.

"In our latest study, we estimate average fast food establishment will switch 1.2 workers from counter service to other tasks as remote order taking, delivery by robotic applications grow," he wrote.

He expects the tipping point will be by 2020 and pointed out that ATMs have lessened the needed for bank tellers. The industry, he explained, needs time to educate customers, but that will happen, he said, because the benefits are simply too strong. He cited machines counting change, sensors, and other tools making inventory more precise and the ability to relay orders directly to the prep area as a way to decrease waste.

It's going to be a gradual change, but it's going to happen, Mazzela wrote.

Robot Corner Getty
IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.

A change is coming and Fred Goff, CEO of Jobcase, a social media platform helping workers without college degrees find meaningful jobs, believes workers should embrace it. He told The Motley Fool that robots will perform some jobs typically done by humans, but that will also create opportunity for flesh-and-blood workers.

"Concerns about technology displacing jobs has been a constant Luddite theme throughout the Information Revolution, and in fact since the Industrial Revolution," he wrote. Goff explained in his email that in a broad sense technology tends to create more opportunity than it displaces.

"It is not to be feared, but it must be managed," he wrote. "The challenge -- and opportunity -- for workers is for people to take control of their own work-life and navigate the positive impacts (easier access to education/training, new job creation, etc.) so that they aren't overwhelmed by the negative impacts of technological progress. Keep open to change and keep moving forward."

What does this mean for business?
Robots or automated workers come with benefits -- they don't show up late, don't steal, and never ask for raises -- but they also have a downside. So far, companies like Starbucks have balanced automating with maintaining a human touch. A robot/app may take your order, but a person makes it and hands it to you.

As that balance is lost and human interaction disappears, chains need to be worried about losing a personal connection with their customers, which could remove a reason people come back. This technology is inevitable, but it does not necessarily mean soulless eateries staffed by automatons.

A lot of businesses are using the line, "ATMs didn't stop tellers from being needed at banks." Is that applicable, or are they missing something?

[Gandalf]

Tellers continued to exist, but not everywhere at the same rate. Lots of banks pulled suburban branches and just kept an ATM in the shopping area.

Today at my bank, it costs money to withdraw or deposit money through a teller, as opposed to an ATM. So you're paying for the experience of dealing with a human as opposed to a machine. I wager we'll see a greater drop in teller numbers as the baby boomers die off and a generation more comfortable with automation becomes the focus of customer interface.

[FaxModem1]

In other automation news, Uber is suspending their testing of driverless cars in Arizona, due to a crash with one: NBC News

Self-driving Uber crashes in Tempe
12 News , KPNX 3:55 PM. MST March 25, 2017

TEMPE, Ariz. - A self-driving Uber SUV crashed in Tempe Friday evening.

According to Tempe police, it was headed south on McClintock Drive when another vehicle turned left in front of the Uber at Don Carlos Drive.

They crashed and the Uber rolled onto its side.

Tempe police said nobody was injured in the crash and that a person was behind the wheel of the Uber. Police aren't sure if the person was in control of the car when it crashed.

Uber has suspended its pilot program for driverless cars in Arizona pending investigation into the incident, according to Reuters and the Associated Press.

"We are continuing to look into this incident and can confirm we had no backseat passengers in the vehicle," a spokesperson for Uber said.

So, they're definitely going through some growing pains.

[Bedlam]

A lot of businesses are using the line, "ATMs didn't stop tellers from being needed at banks." Is that applicable, or are they missing something?

Certainly over here banks are repeatedly slashing their number of branches. The normal argument being that most people are doing their transactions on line although there is a certain chicken and egg situation with that, are people only using the internet because the nearest bank is now 20 miles away or would they still have used it if it was a 10 minute walk away. The bank itself is generally happier with internet transactions as they're generally cheaper for them.

There's an argument that this could lead to more miselling issues down the line but I'd think that again the banks are more likely to be able to defend an online system, unless you record entire conversation with a seller its very hard to defend against 'but I wasn't told' where as on line you can always confirm the exact amount of information provided, you have no evidence anyone read it of course but that's always the case.

Just to rant on a similar topic the number of people who have no understanding of what things like basic life cover actually do. I hear variations on 'I didn't die so I should get all my money back' dozens of times a day. There's no fault of exactly how pay outs would work if life cover was like that of the principle of shared risk *mumble* *grumble* *groan*

[Ace Pace]

In other automation news, Uber is suspending their testing of driverless cars in Arizona, due to a crash with one: NBC News

Self-driving Uber crashes in Tempe
12 News , KPNX 3:55 PM. MST March 25, 2017

TEMPE, Ariz. - A self-driving Uber SUV crashed in Tempe Friday evening.

According to Tempe police, it was headed south on McClintock Drive when another vehicle turned left in front of the Uber at Don Carlos Drive.

They crashed and the Uber rolled onto its side.

Tempe police said nobody was injured in the crash and that a person was behind the wheel of the Uber. Police aren't sure if the person was in control of the car when it crashed.

Uber has suspended its pilot program for driverless cars in Arizona pending investigation into the incident, according to Reuters and the Associated Press.

"We are continuing to look into this incident and can confirm we had no backseat passengers in the vehicle," a spokesperson for Uber said.

So, they're definitely going through some growing pains.

Key point being the following paragraph in another article.

Key sentence-paragraph: "A Tempe police spokesperson told Bloomberg that the Uber was not at fault in the accident and was hit by another car which failed to yield."

So lets not get ahead of ourselves. Automatic cars will get into accidents, at far less rates than human drivers. Once technical issues are worked out (half a decade?), the only question for how fast they'll replace humans is how fast human acceptance will be, not technical issues.

When looking at automotive changes, stop trying to see it as a 1 to 1 replacement but see it as changes in how cars are used. If 10 truck drivers are replaced with 3 that lead a convoy of trucks in shifts, that's still human drivers but far less of them.