Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

BallardRex t1_iu6ikxe wrote

We both know that “full automation” doesn’t mean that skilled maintenance and programming jobs are gone, and we know that the people serving coffee and hauling packages aren’t going to be getting them.


chaiguy t1_iu6v12i wrote

A robot can pour a perfect cup of coffee, but it can’t stop a junkie from shooting up in the store, or chase a schizophrenic person having an episode out, or clean up a spilled frapuchino. It definitely can’t soothe an irate Karen hurling expletives at it, and it damn sure can’t get the manager.


BallardRex t1_iu6v9hf wrote

Dude… they’re baristas, not bouncers. What hellscape do you live in?


ASoundLogic t1_iu7o2jp wrote

It will be the same as self checkout is today. You will have the one or two people that are around to manage issues like that while there exists a plethora of self-checkout lanes. Having to pay one person versus seven is still a lot of savings.


c0d3s1ing3r t1_iu808s5 wrote

The robot doesn't care about Karen and the bathroom/storefront has been removed.

If Starbucks maintains a dining area for the sake of the "experience" then cameras will monitor customer behavior like Amazon's cashier-less stores already do, and will either alert the police or a Starbucks private security task force (tm) to gun them down on the spot. Either that or customers will naturally be required to have some sort of Starbucks rewards membership in order to access the dining area at all and they'll simply let them ruin the dining area before charging the costs of repairs to them.

People are horrible but some of them give you money, so only allow the ones they give you money to enter the establishment in the first place, or else at least establish their identity that they won't try anything.


chaiguy t1_iu98qko wrote

I mean, they already have a robot cafe at SFO and it isn't doing well, that's all I'm saying. Like Starbucks could literally start firing people tomorrow and replacing them with robots, the technology exists. You have to ask why they're not doing that. It's because all the reasons I mentioned, but also because at this point in time, there's no cost savings in doing so. Humans are cheaper than robots.

Yeah, they have ATMs attached to banks, people sleep in the ATM area, they have sex in them, they use them as shooting galleries, it's a problem (after-hours). And they still have real live people working at banks.


blkknighter t1_iudk8vy wrote

It’s not doing well because of brand recognition. Everyone knows Starbucks, they know they’re usually order, and they want to use their punch card/app for points and free drinks


chaiguy t1_iudzcjy wrote

Of course that’s part of it. You’d think they’d get at least some business from sheer novelty but I make multiple trips through SFO and I’ve never ever seen a single customer.