this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2025
161 points (98.2% liked)

News

36943 readers
1625 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 41 points 3 months ago (1 children)

This was worth the read. I'd like to point out that's it's for shoppers ordering from the SAME store location. Different store locations have different operating costs and often different pricing, but this is from the same physical store. The following quote is also interesting:

So Instacart’s varied pricing is allegedly part of an experiment that randomly assigns shoppers to different pricing groups, but brands whose goods are available on Instacart can use the company’s data-driven pricing platform to serve different prices based on different demographic data. For the end user, that likely feels like a distinction without a difference, as they are ultimately seeing different prices based on conditions that are outside of their control.

[–] Gullible@sh.itjust.works 12 points 3 months ago

They have multiple programs currently going through which they alter prices to maintain affordability of essentials? Feels a lot like “pride and accomplishment”

[–] Hatshepsut@lemmy.world 29 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

More Perfect Union did a video with Consumer Reports about this study

Bonus Lina Khan at the end.

Fuck these companies. As a consumer I feel more and more like someone existing merely to be bled dry by all these greedy mfers.

[–] RustyShackleford@piefed.social 11 points 3 months ago

We always were being kept alive to be bled dry. We’re unsurprisingly, in an even shittier version of the Matrix.

[–] Flaqueman@sh.itjust.works 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Here we go... Another company to boycott. The good news is that it's a US company so it's already on the no-go list.

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

They are helping a host of stores implement this. So best look up the list and boycott all of those too.

[–] Flaqueman@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago

Well... Daah!

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

It's price discrimination. Lots of companies do it, generally based on marketing analytics they apply to their users.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

It's also the death of even the pretense of the American dream. Think about it. All pricing goes algorithmic, for all goods and services. Every company figures out the absolute maximum you can pay and charges accordingly.

What does this do in aggregate? It means that every raise you will ever get during your career is now immediately consumed by rising prices. This produces an economy where there is literally no point at all to advancing your career, gaining new skills, or bettering yourself. Why go to college or trade school, if the extra money you earn is just going to be consumed by companies charging your more for the same products? Why should anyone do anything but simply find the most tolerable minimum wage job they can, and simply work it until they die of old age? If all pricing is algorithmic, anything you do to improve your personal financial situation will be immediately hoovered up by the big conglomerates.

[–] W3dd1e@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 months ago

That’s why Walmart is switching to digital pricing so they can change prices on the fly.

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world -5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

There can be good reason to offer different prices to different people. New customer discounts, student/senior discounts, etc. The problems arise when the nature of the reason they got a discount, or even the very fact that they did get a discount are hidden. Because then there's nothing stopping them from more predatory pricing just because they think they can get you to pay more, or whatever other reason they have. It's not illegal, but it's incredibly unethical and really should be illegal.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

New customer discounts, student/senior discounts, etc. The problems arise when the nature of the reason they got a discount, or even the very fact that they did get a discount are hidden.

I'd argue even these arbitrary discounts are bad from a public policy perspective. What you're describing is a hodgepodge of marketing and PR, intended to cultivate a loyal customer base with an eye towards maximizing revenue in the future once your client list is fully captured.

The better questions to be asking are "how much resources does it make to create Product X" and "what material benefit does the client receive from consuming Product X"? A high price is justified when a product is difficult to produce and highly beneficial to consume, on the grounds that the higher price subsidizes capital investment that bring production costs down long term.

But what Instacart is doing isn't adding value to a product or pricing in cost of production. The website is instead trying to maximize the marginal profit on the purchaser. It's the AI-equivalent of you asking "How much is that product?" and the vendor replying "It costs as much money as you have in your wallet."

There's no incentive to improve efficiency or maximize throughput in this model. It is entirely a zero-sum game of taking the client for as much cash as the vendor can possibly extract per transaction.

It’s not illegal, but it’s incredibly unethical and really should be illegal.

Funny you should say that because Price Gouging laws are absolutely a thing on the books. And overcharging an individual customer relative to the median historical price is a textbook violation. The question isn't whether these actions are illegal, but whether any state AG will press criminal charges.

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I'm not in a position to reply in full to your comment. But I did want to point out that I'm pretty sure that price gouging laws only restrict predatory price increases on essential goods during officially declared states of emergency. Otherwise there's no restriction at all

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

price gouging laws only restrict predatory price increases on essential goods during officially declared states of emergency

I mean, maybe there's something in the fine print I'm unaware of. But do you think this Instacart model turns off for a neighborhood hit by a hurricane or wildfire or flood?

I don't see AGs offices zealously enforcing laws at even this scale, so its something of a moot point. If your DOJ is owned and operated by crooks, they won't be going after their friends and co-conspirators anyway. And Instacart is fully in bed with the Silicon Valley crowd, which have been successfully paying off politicians left, right, and center since the Clinton Administration.