• Kazumara@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    Sounds like low trust society issues to be honest. I only see those systems expanding in Switzerland, and they never use annoying scales or complain about unexpected items, because there aren’t even any sensors for that.

    • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      10 months ago

      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.

      • MirthfulAlembic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        10 months ago

        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.

        • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          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.

          • FlumPHP@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            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.

            • raynethackery@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              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.

              • FlumPHP@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                10 months ago

                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.

                • raynethackery@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  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…

            • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              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.

              • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                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.

                • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

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

                  • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    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.

        • Frosty@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          We used to have this (scan-as-you-shop) at Wegman’s in the northeast US, but at some point they decided to withdraw the program to re-think on it.

      • hulemy@ani.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        We have both happen, sometimes combined or scan with phone. I’ve seen some of the American systems, with sensors and weights and speakers (with some voice lines), those are creepy to me.

    • beeb@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Can confirm. The only deterrent is the potential for an random bag check by an employee but that never happened to me in years of using self checkout. Some shops have a worker over watching a dozen of stations to help out or just identify suspicious behavior but it’s very unintrusive.

      • Buttons@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        10 months ago

        I’ve been a checker and have monitored self-checkouts. We get no training or instructions to watch for suspicious behavior. It’s not the job of a checker / cashier to confront people for suspicious behavior, we don’t get paid enough to do so, or to even care.

        • beeb@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Thanks for the clarification! My assumptions were wrong ^^ although I saw once a lady who tried to leave without paying, but the worker noticed and they spent a good 5 minutes convincing her to put in cash into the machine, which apparently she had but had to look for in her bag for a looong time.

    • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      Over here it’s a mix, some chains use the scales + sensors, some use simple scan machines. I absolutely hate the scale + sensors, some of them are almost completely unusable and the attendants have to keep running around fixing errors or resetting the ones where people just give up mid-cart and go to a manned checkout.

    • crazyCat@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      For sure, I use self checkout at at least 5 different places in China and they all work fantastically, including a Walmart.

    • moitoi@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I avoid places where self checkout isn’t available. And, it’s not just me. I stopped counting how many time the cashier is jobless and the self checkout area is full.