• Carl's Jr (and Hardee's) CEO wants to open a restaurant staffed entirely by robots
    74 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Helix Snake;49954354]Who are you going to talk to when something fucks your order up?[/QUOTE] Don't complain if your food is fucked up, I heard that the robots put oil on your burger if you bring it back.
I'd like to think that they'd have SOME people who would function both as the people who maintain and check up on the robots and as the managers just so the customers can shout at somebody when their triple XXL lard burger doesn't have enough extra double baked bacon on it for their liking
Good, maybe then I won't have to deal with morons who can't put together a simple order next time I hit a fast food place. Besides, this is a inevitable change, surprised more haven't done it yet.
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;49955434]Gross, public touchscreens are disgusting[/QUOTE] public touchscreens would only be for people without phones i'm sure there'd be an app [editline]18th March 2016[/editline] the restaurant they mention in the article eatsa looks incredible, i can't wait till all fast food is similar
This would actually be pretty neat for people with social anxiety, like me. Ordering food makes me pretty nervous.
Here's to hoping that they pass the savings onto customers
The future is here! Soon I'll be able to get the robot girlfriend I've always dreamed of!
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;49957780]To beat anxiety, you challenge it, not cater to it. This may cause even less human interaction in the world, it makes anxiety worse[/QUOTE] What's next, to beat depression you gotta challenge it and act happy?
Less jobs for people. Good if you have a guaranteed base welfare provided to everyone regardless of employment, absolutely disastrous if people rely on having well paid jobs for their quality of life and health.
[QUOTE=rndgenerator;49957787]What's next, to beat depression you gotta challenge it and act happy?[/QUOTE] Well you actually do need to challenge depression...your point?
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;49957807]Less jobs for people. Good if you have a guaranteed base welfare provided to everyone regardless of employment, absolutely disastrous if people rely on having well paid jobs for their quality of life and health.[/QUOTE] I don't know if working at Carls Jr qualifies as being a well paid job.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49957876]I don't know if working at Carls Jr qualifies as being a well paid job.[/QUOTE] [quote=renegade]I thought the same thing, then I worked fast food. Managers and corporate expect WAAAY too much for minimum wage. They pay you minimum but work you as if you're getting paid 10 an hour. That's partly why I quit, bullshit pay. Upon retrospect, I see you weren't saying they deserve minimum wage, excuse me. I'm currently outside in 38f.[/quote] Less jobs => bigger competition for people trying to get jobs => employers can drop wages and people will still have to take it. Its not like this is the only job which is going to be replaced by robots. The Internet of Things is working towards replacing lots of engineering, technician and maintenance jobs; which are well paid (Lots of datacentres already have this where hardware issues are detected and fixed without any human intervention). At some point AI will be good enough to replace any intellectual and creative jobs. This is not a phenomenon isolated to poorly paid jobs. Companies drive to replace people with robots, making less jobs, while governments drive to make people further rely on jobs for quality of life and health. Then people short sightedly defend both. [sp] I'm all for automation but only with one of the following: (or both) 1) Increase in wages to balance out reduced hours - keynes predicted this in Economic possibilities for our Grandchildren back in 1930 (ie the grandchildren he referred to are us) suggesting automation would let us work a 15 hour week and still have disposable income enough to drive a strong economy. Sadly Reagan and Thatcher ruined this when they [URL="http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2012-05-02-ProdWages.arrow.jpg"]divorced [/URL]productivity and wages creating a trend of generally frozen wages while productivity skyrocketed. 2) A base level of welfare and income provided by the state regardless of situation or employment. So people can live in relative comfort, health and security. Unemployement would no longer be consider some shameful thing but a more common and acceptable situation where everyone acknowledges that computers/ai do the majority of the countries work. There would still be jobs - but not having a job wouldn't be something as socially and economically crippling as it is today. This is currently affordable already if taxes are paid properly and will become increasingly affordable as productivity increases.[/sp]
[QUOTE=Katska;49957335]This would actually be pretty neat for people with social anxiety, like me. Ordering food makes me pretty nervous.[/QUOTE] yeah sure make it worse go out and talk to people ffs also the article literally says it's because of minimum wages going up, which is a fuckin sucky reason i'm all for innovation but it'd be great if it wasn't completely fueled by greed
[QUOTE=Matthew0505;49958031]Wouldn't there be less resistance to getting these things passed after half the voters lose their jobs to a robot.[/QUOTE] That's a process which will take years. In the mean time there will be a steady decrease in jobs, steady increase in poverty and a steady consolidation of wealth and power into the few. I'm not sure whats going to happen but such a move to increase wages or provide more social security will both be opposed by the people with money, and that money will buy the political influence to deny wage increase or social security. I suspect the whole demonising the poor for being poor thing/unemployed for being unemployed thing isn't going away any time soon either, with that attitude even the poor will oppose politicians who propose to help the poor.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;49958128]That's a process which will take years. In the mean time there will be a steady decrease in jobs, steady increase in poverty and a steady consolidation of wealth and power into the few. I'm not sure whats going to happen but such a move to increase wages or provide more social security will both be opposed by the people with money, and that money will buy the political influence to deny wage increase or social security. I suspect the whole demonising the poor for being poor thing/unemployed for being unemployed thing isn't going away any time soon either, with that attitude even the poor will oppose politicians who propose to help the poor.[/QUOTE] This is exactly what I'm afraid of with automation of the economy, once all the jobs are automated, what will people do to earn money to get the things they need to survive? Every time I ask this question around here, people always says "They will need somebody to repair the machines when they break down" or go on how some jobs can't be done by machines.
[QUOTE=Bbarnes005;49958286]This is exactly what I'm afraid of with automation of the economy, once all the jobs are automated, what will people do to earn money to get the things they need to survive?[/QUOTE] This was answer in like 10 other threads and probably twice in this thread. The tax burden gets shifted to corporations who utilize automation. Then something similar to a living wage is implemented. In the long run, people will likely have less kids, reducing population, lowering the current burden. I feel like once the baby boomer generation has died out, our "generation X" will probably contribute to reducing the number of people in the world.
[QUOTE=Matthew0505;49958172]That is until they're starving because no job or social security.[/QUOTE] You underestimate the power of the media and establishment. You overestimate the rationality of the voters. Threat of terrorism, communists and immigrants is much more emotionally appealing than "lets devise a taxation reform scheme for a more sustainable development of our bbla bla bla zzzzzz" Republicans on foodstamps in the US vote republican despite republicans referring to people on foodstamps as animals. [editline]18th March 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Bbarnes005;49958286]This is exactly what I'm afraid of with automation of the economy, once all the jobs are automated, what will people do to earn money to get the things they need to survive? Every time I ask this question around here, people always says "They will need somebody to repair the machines when they break down" or go on how some jobs can't be done by machines.[/QUOTE] They're ignorant. Those jobs are A) very few of them B) easily replaced by a machine If they come back and say "ah bu bu what about the machines to fix the machines to fix the machines" Feel free to ignore anything they say from that point onwards, knowing they are totally devoid of critical thought. Look up internet of things. Already used by google and amazon and being pushed heavily by a load of tech companies (ibm). Talk of it being rolled out into everything, cars, houses, factories, kitchens. Automatically detect the fault, locate the fault and fix the fault; then analyse the data to predict where faults are going to happen next and address breaking/wearing parts. I love tech advances but we need social and political advances to accommodate them.
CGPGrey Did an excellent video on the subject. [video=youtube;7Pq-S557XQU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7Pq-S557XQU[/video]
[QUOTE=Bbarnes005;49958286]This is exactly what I'm afraid of with automation of the economy, once all the jobs are automated, what will people do to earn money to get the things they need to survive? Every time I ask this question around here, people always says "They will need somebody to repair the machines when they break down" or go on how some jobs can't be done by machines.[/QUOTE] Like was mentioned above, the idea that work is a necessity to survival needs to be phased out. Already by today it's starting to become an outdated idea, because there is no need for everyone to work. This is clearly evidenced by the shortage of jobs that's hitting almost every western nation.
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;49957780]To beat anxiety, you challenge it, not cater to it. This may cause even less human interaction in the world, it makes anxiety worse [editline]18th March 2016[/editline] Many people use cashiers to practice speaking and getting over anxiety, they're oddly important It's what I did and what I recommend to others. Just a simple "so have yall been busy today?" Can be an easy conversation starter while you wait for food[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Eric95;49958088]yeah sure make it worse go out and talk to people ffs also the article literally says it's because of minimum wages going up, which is a fuckin sucky reason i'm all for innovation but it'd be great if it wasn't completely fueled by greed[/QUOTE] Probably could've worded that more unambiguously. I'm not trying to cut out human interaction from my life, dudes. I just thought it'd be neat if every once in a while I went to a fast food joint and, surprise, I don't have to stress myself out over ordering food today. I'm definitely not at the point where talking to people is going to reduce me to a small puddle, and I don't think I would be even if the entire service industry became automated. I've never thought about using cashiers as practice, though. I suppose that's something for me to think about. And yeah, on the point about this only being a thing because of greed, I agree that the dude's reasoning is messed up. I actually considered adding a "Regardless of if this is ultimately going to be a good or bad thing, ..." to the front of my post to suggest that I was trying to find a positive to this despite any other implications, but I thought it was unnecessary and that that was already implied.
[QUOTE=Starpluck;49954346]While this is a neat idea that I would be interested in seeing it due the unprecedented futuristic innovation associated with it, this guys motives and logic is pure shit.[/QUOTE] But that kinda does make sense. Lets say the minimum wage was $15 an hour.(so double ours) How does a brand new small business afford that? Sure for this big multi-million/billion companies they easily could. Even a franchise owner has to pay their own employees, I can buy a McDonalds but it ends up being on me. So what if you are just starting out, how do you afford it if YOU are the new business owner just starting out? I can see the minimum wage increase actually hurting start up business, but being a god send for those who work in major companies. But at the same time, those big companies in reality would just fire as many people as they can get away with to save more money. Lets say Kellogs raises it to $15 an hour, I highly doubt they would keep their products at the same price we pay now, same goes for a lot of companies. They would make the difference up somewhere and id probably start with the products themselves. If the lowest paid are getting more money, then these companies would easily start raising prices under the guise "Well they have more money to pay it!" Not to say we shouldnt increase our minimum wage, we should, its pretty bad right now, but just given an example of how it could actually hurt.
[QUOTE=Eric95;49958088]yeah sure make it worse go out and talk to people ffs also the article literally says it's because of minimum wages going up, which is a fuckin sucky reason i'm all for innovation but it'd be great if it wasn't completely fueled by greed[/QUOTE] How is it a "sucky reason"? It makes perfect sense. If your employees aren't generating enough revenue to pay them 15 an hour, then you dont. This is basic economics.
Based on my experience with the average customer in food service, I can see a lot of cases where the customer orders incorrectly and blames it on the machine. "Dumb computers screwing up my order" and so forth.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;49960044]But that kinda does make sense. Lets say the minimum wage was $15 an hour.(so double ours) How does a brand new small business afford that? Sure for this big multi-million/billion companies they easily could. Even a franchise owner has to pay their own employees, I can buy a McDonalds but it ends up being on me. So what if you are just starting out, how do you afford it if YOU are the new business owner just starting out? I can see the minimum wage increase actually hurting start up business, but being a god send for those who work in major companies. But at the same time, those big companies in reality would just fire as many people as they can get away with to save more money. Lets say Kellogs raises it to $15 an hour, I highly doubt they would keep their products at the same price we pay now, same goes for a lot of companies. They would make the difference up somewhere and id probably start with the products themselves. If the lowest paid are getting more money, then these companies would easily start raising prices under the guise "Well they have more money to pay it!" Not to say we shouldnt increase our minimum wage, we should, its pretty bad right now, but just given an example of how it could actually hurt.[/QUOTE] Everyone else's wage would be increased, so everyone will continue to be able to afford the things they have in the past. And it'd be a gradual increase -- the minimum wage hasn't increased with inflation in ages. You cannot sustain a life on minimum wage. [editline]19th March 2016[/editline] + it'd be a gradual change
yeah do this and get rid of waiters just give me food ffs
[quote]Puzder has been an outspoken advocate against raising the minimum wage, writing two op-eds for The Wall Street Journal on how a higher minimum wage would lead to reduced employment opportunities.[/quote] Meanwhile the prices of everything keeps going up, and up, and up, and up. Paying dick all is going to reduce employment opportunities, as in, no one will want to slave away at your business for peanuts
[QUOTE=Map in a box;49964148]Everyone else's wage would be increased, so everyone will continue to be able to afford the things they have in the past. And it'd be a gradual increase -- the minimum wage hasn't increased with inflation in ages. You cannot sustain a life on minimum wage. [editline]19th March 2016[/editline] + it'd be a gradual change[/QUOTE] Dude what. If everyone elses wage increased as well then my point is even stronger. HOW does a new business afford that? If $15 was the minimum, how? Where is this money all coming from? How would it stay exactly the same at that point if everythings getting raised? If companies had to pay $15 minimum, they would jack up prices of everything to match % wise what they were already getting before the increase so ultimately nothing would change. Since when would companies NOT do something like that? The entire point of business is to make as much profit as possible, which they would. So ultimately if they matched the prices for $15 to be the same % of profit from when they were getting paid $7.50, it would be exactly the same as it is now. I know my examples a bit extreme since im going straight from $7.50 to $15 as if it would happen in a day, but still, even with a gradual increase getting to that point id still see it playing out the same way. It needs to change obviously, but I am worried when it hits its peak it will be an issue for new businesses who wont be able to afford enough employees, and established ones will just raise prices. Also what makes you say everyone elses wages would increase? Unless im mistaken, they wouldnt need to do that for any legal reason, only minimum wage. They wouldnt need to raise someone getting paid $16 an hour for any reason, unless, like I said im completely mistaken. The said, increasing to about $10-11 I think could be the real sweet spot.
[QUOTE=Starpluck;49954346]While this is a neat idea that I would be interested in seeing it due the unprecedented futuristic innovation associated with it, this guys motives and logic is pure shit.[/QUOTE] That is true though, when you raise minimum wage, people will loose their jobs as companies will do so to cut costs. I'm not saying min wage is bad, but that's basic economics right there.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;49966010]Dude what. If everyone elses wage increased as well then my point is even stronger. HOW does a new business afford that? If $15 was the minimum, how? Where is this money all coming from? How would it stay exactly the same at that point if everythings getting raised? If companies had to pay $15 minimum, they would jack up prices of everything to match % wise what they were already getting before the increase so ultimately nothing would change. Since when would companies NOT do something like that? The entire point of business is to make as much profit as possible, which they would. So ultimately if they matched the prices for $15 to be the same % of profit from when they were getting paid $7.50, it would be exactly the same as it is now. I know my examples a bit extreme since im going straight from $7.50 to $15 as if it would happen in a day, but still, even with a gradual increase getting to that point id still see it playing out the same way. It needs to change obviously, but I am worried when it hits its peak it will be an issue for new businesses who wont be able to afford enough employees, and established ones will just raise prices. Also what makes you say everyone elses wages would increase? Unless im mistaken, they wouldnt need to do that for any legal reason, only minimum wage. They wouldnt need to raise someone getting paid $16 an hour for any reason, unless, like I said im completely mistaken. The said, increasing to about $10-11 I think could be the real sweet spot.[/QUOTE] No, I meant everyone elses minimum wage would be increased, not everyones wages. A gradual over the course of 5-10 years wouldn't be met with much actual resistance. It'll definitely come with some natural inflation as a result to accommodate but will be nowhere as bad as it is now. Companies wouldn't jack up all their prices to accomodate, that'd be pretty dumb on their part because it would destroy nationwide inflation levels.
[QUOTE=Map in a box;49966128]No, I meant everyone elses minimum wage would be increased, not everyones wages. A gradual over the course of 5-10 years wouldn't be met with much actual resistance. It'll definitely come with some natural inflation as a result to accommodate but will be nowhere as bad as it is now. Companies wouldn't jack up all their prices to accomodate, that'd be pretty dumb on their part because it would destroy nationwide inflation levels.[/QUOTE] They would, though. Most inferior good producing companies have minimum wage employees almost exclusively, so their production costs will go up, so their revenue will go down.... and now, with all the poor people that buy their products having more money, they will be able to increase the price and have demand normalize to where it was previously instead of going down
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.