Yea, that does sound like breaking problem. I have no clue how to begin solving that one.
I feel like there was an idea, not in this article, where people would scan items as they add them to their cart and then this walkout process was really just a redundant verification of walking out with the purchase. Still, that does sound like a lot of error prone noise.
I have nipples Greg, could you sue me?
I wonder if they just check the phone data. I assume most amazon customers have the app setup with location sharing. Not all, but most.
I see two reported major issues
First, they made the product manufacturers include them on their own dime. I get the logic, have that manufacturer include adding them in their assembly line process. But as stated, this was an extra expense for a couple of reasons and at times made the product unprofitable.
The solution, to start, seems to be either adding them via a walmart processing center, or have a funds process where sellers could get walmart to refund the cost and share it. I guess the third option would be to raise all prices at walmart to ensure the cost was bulit into the product.
Second problem, data load. Compared to 2006, i think we are much better at large datsets these days both from a space and processing power perspective. Datacenters in 2006 were often on-prem with upgrades to size having large and expensive lead times. AWS changed that and Amazon owns that, so i expect that bottle neck to be solvable.
Slavery sure is cheap. Good call out.
They are still contradictions. As we saw, there is collateral damage to hospitals and emergency resources when anti-vaccine folks hate science until they are on their death bed.
With that said, now we are doing better to the point that anti-vaccers aren't overloading hospitals and my argument becomes moot. But during a period of time once vaccines initially were available, anti-vaccine folks were definitely hurting other people.
I've started to see some of the hive mind downvote bridgade come here too. Heck someone downvoted your relatively neutral comment already, instead of taking the time to reply as to why they disagree. And those that do reply didn't actually read what you wrote and then put words and perspectives in your mouth.
A lot of reddit thinks in black and white scenarios where everything popularly decided can't have a extenuating circumstance. I am pretty sure most of reddit would argue with their own reflection. Maybe it's bots, maybe kids. It is definitely annoying and immature. It is hard to conversate in a thread when everyone is acting like a 5 year old not getting their lollipop.
Transitioning is One solution, and it is valid to be able to discuss other options. Your citations bring good discussion points, but shouldn't be used to ban people.
My point is about censorship and the race to the bottom thst it can and often brings.
But you don't know what they said or what the community was. You are missing my general point. Please don't support general fascism behavior, whether it is from the right or left.
On top of that, this isn't somebody's house. That isn't a good analogy.
You have some points, but "not well recieved" would be downvotes. I think banning is censorship and can be a fair complaint.
With that said, maybe the sub had posted rules that were violated. It isn't like OP couldn't create their own sub if that was the situation.
Banning people from communication spaces though should be a concerning behavior. It goes both ways.
Yea, i think your video surveillance case has a lot of value. With AI Algorithms these days and the postive feedback loop being clearly a purchase, it would be weird not to have this.