this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2024
513 points (87.3% liked)

Technology

58303 readers
17 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 32 points 10 months ago (13 children)

Here in Finland handheld scanners have been getting added to more shops, you grab one, scan and bag as you go, and at the end you return the scanner and pay it all at once.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 10 months ago (11 children)

One of the regional grocery stores in my part of the US has these (if you have an account). Before I did online ordering with curbside pickup, this was how I shopped. I didn't understand why it wasn't more popular. It made checking out so quick. Every twenty or so trips I'd be randomly "audited," where some poor employee had to rifle through my bags to double check I wasn't stealing anything.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 10 months ago (9 children)

The chance to be randomly audited would put me off from ever using it again. Specially when you know that randomly = you look brown or immigrant most of times.

[–] flumph 7 points 10 months ago (2 children)

At Giant, I'm pretty sure it's decided by the system based on some algorithm, not the employee. The one time I was audited, we were in the store for a long time and had removed a few items from the cart after adding them.

The audit consisted of the employee scanning ten random items and confirming we had scanned them too.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

When I was using food stamps/EBT, I was audited every time I used the hand scanner at Stop and Shop. Luckily, I don't have to use food stamps anymore.

[–] flumph 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Well that's some bull. The software knows what items are covered and which aren't, so that's just assuming folks needing help are thieves.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

Yeah, luckily an Aldi opened down the street and I started shopping there. I don't need food stamps now but with the way prices are going...

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Ah, yes, yes. We're not racist, it's the system! It's an algorithm! I never heard that one before. It's also a sustym that randomly checks you at the airport.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It all depends on how truly random the system is. Each checkout (or ticket, or whatever) assigned a random number between 1 and 20, with 20 meaning audit? That's non-discriminatory. But it's also not tuned for the purpose of finding shoplifters (etc).

When you start adding criteria, they are often at least correlated with discrimination. Food stamps were mentioned elsewhere. Flight history to/from a list of hostile countries for airports. The list goes on. Technically not based on things like race, but it's a paper-thin distinction in some cases.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

How do you know there's not someone looking at se purity cameras triggering random audits?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Then that's not random by any definition of the word. It's targeted.

It's entirely possible, even likely, that management would keep claiming that it's random when it's not. But then we're not talking about any algorithms.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

That's the point I'm making.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)