The Banana Trick and Other Acts of Self-Checkout Thievery (2018) • Hacker News Board

Re: The Banana Trick and Other Acts of Self-Checkout Thievery (2018)

#201

Post by SantalBlush » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 2:55 PM UTC

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #171

SantalBlush wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't shoplift, but I'm appalled at the double standards that are often applied to consumers and workers compared with large companies. Amazon is selling counterfeit products to unwitting shoppers across the United States. Large firms like this do not subject themselves to any code of ethics like we do; there is only the risk of getting penalized. Yet their business models are reliant on us acting ethically. It is…

>> Yet their business models are reliant on us acting ethically. The way I understand it, every structure in an organised society relies on people acting ethically, or in any case not going out of their way to harm each other without a very good reason. For example. If I go to the doctor I trust that she won't suggest treatments I don't need because she wants to take my money. That sort of thing. For me anyway at lea…

I've had multiple people try to explain to me why morals are necessary for society, as if I'm arguing against them. I'm not even advocating for shoplifting (though perhaps I could have phrased it better), but I think a lot of people may have intentionally misread my overall point.

We are in agreement that a common sense of morality is necessary for the proper functioning of society. My issue is precisely that powerful people in our society often do not share our sense of morality, they do not live by it, and they are not adequately punished for it. They use our system of ethics against us, and that is what I find frustrating.

Re: The Banana Trick and Other Acts of Self-Checkout Thievery (2018)

#202

Post by tomhoward » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 3:03 PM UTC

SantalBlush wrote: post #200

tomhoward wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your whole point hinges on the claim that Amazon routinely and deliberately acts fraudulently and is never held to account. But Amazon and companies like them are absolutely held accountable for legal breaches all the time. Here's just one recent example: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/blogs/business-blog/2017/05/... Companies are under constant scrutiny by various bodies and agents including regulators, consumer pr…

>It's a huge leap to argue that since some counterfeit goods have been sold via their platform, blatant theft from them or other companies is therefore justifiable, particularly when you don't mention that those counterfeit goods were sold by third parties, and that Amazon has a formal process to refund customers who have been sold counterfeit goods and to bar such sellers from their platform: https://sellercentral.a…

I regret getting involved in this discussion. It's not even relevant. Amazon wasn't mentioned in the article and nobody was talking about them until you brought them up. Nobody in this discussion was saying that big companies should be held to lower ethical standards than individuals. I accept you have an axe to grind about big company conduct and regulation, as do many people. That's fine. I'm done here.

Re: The Banana Trick and Other Acts of Self-Checkout Thievery (2018)

#203

Post by Shaanie » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 3:18 PM UTC

mkl wrote: post #176

_JamesA_ wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sams Club has a self-checkout phone app. Scan as you shop, tap to pay, and show the receipt at the door.

Wow, that takes customer tracking to a whole new level.

Doubt it's any different than membership cards.

Re: The Banana Trick and Other Acts of Self-Checkout Thievery (2018)

#204

Post by whenchamenia » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 3:37 PM UTC

dilap wrote: post #20

jedberg wrote: post #17

I must be a rube, because I've never stolen from one of those things. When it makes a mistake I call the attendant to correct it. Mainly because I support the idea of automation and want it to work well. Maybe it's just the reliability engineer in me that wants to call out the bugs and have them fixed. Or maybe it's the former security engineer in me who got paid to find the flaws in these systems and my ethics deman…

Not a rube, just honest. I'm really surprised and disappointed this is common.

I think there is a growning distinction between being honest in face to face dealings, and being honest with a machine built by people for the expressed sole purpose of profit.

Re: The Banana Trick and Other Acts of Self-Checkout Thievery (2018)

#205

Post by YeGoblynQueenne » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 3:58 PM UTC

SantalBlush wrote: post #201

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Yet their business models are reliant on us acting ethically. The way I understand it, every structure in an organised society relies on people acting ethically, or in any case not going out of their way to harm each other without a very good reason. For example. If I go to the doctor I trust that she won't suggest treatments I don't need because she wants to take my money. That sort of thing. For me anyway at lea…

I've had multiple people try to explain to me why morals are necessary for society, as if I'm arguing against them. I'm not even advocating for shoplifting (though perhaps I could have phrased it better), but I think a lot of people may have intentionally misread my overall point. We are in agreement that a common sense of morality is necessary for the proper functioning of society. My issue is precisely that powerfu…

I agree- I too think that financially or politically powerful people don't live by the same rules as the rest of us.

The answer of course is to band together and form units with more power than those people. Another benefit of living in a society, I guess.

Re: The Banana Trick and Other Acts of Self-Checkout Thievery (2018)

#206

Post by benjaminbrodie » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 4:04 PM UTC

tomhoward wrote: post #199

benjaminbrodie wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't life too short for spending several hours to make pasta lol lol

I said couple , not several ! My partner is of half-Italian background, and today was the first time she used the chitarra [1] she recently received as a gift from her family. So yep, making the dough, waiting for it to rise, making the sauce, then pushing the dough through the chitarra to make the spaghetti all takes a bit of time. It's not an every-day thing, but as a couple's thing to do on a quiet Sunday afternoo…

all I get to eat today is milk lol that's supposed to be used with coffee (kwa-fee lol lol) but I just drink it lol lol, not super ethical but life is too short lol. Hope you enjoy pasta with fine partner lol and enjoy life bruh

Re: The Banana Trick and Other Acts of Self-Checkout Thievery (2018)

#207

Post by mikeash » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 4:33 PM UTC

mamon wrote: post #158

mikeash wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if you use self checkout you’re avoiding waiting in a longer line for a cashier.

Only in the beginning, when self checkout stations are being introduced and most of the customers go to cashiers, out of habit. Thing is: even a person that does self-checkout quite often is still much slower than a cashier, who has 100x more practice. Also, when anything goes wrong with self-checkout you typically need to wait for someone to get to you and fix the issue - cashiers typically are able to fix their err…

Then go to a cashier. If your store doesn’t have any, go to a different store that does.

Re: The Banana Trick and Other Acts of Self-Checkout Thievery (2018)

#208

Post by mindslight » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 4:42 PM UTC

xauronx wrote: post #145

mindslight wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alternatively, it's revealing a deeper truth that had been obscured by a long chain of seemingly logical justifications. Corporations tend to abuse abstractions until they break, and self-checkout is basically at that breaking point. Comedy is especially good at deflating bullshit like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxINJzqzn4w I for one could never stand the things for their slow and obtuse programming. I can…

So you admit openly to stealing, just to put it plainly. You chose to shop somewhere, you chose to use a self checkout, you knew there was an error, and proceeded to leave with things you didn’t pay for. No matter how you justify it to yourself, you’re a thief. If you can justify that you can justify stealing from your employer (hey I’ve been under paid for a while, taking this unsecured device is like making up for…

So yes, 15 years ago I got a few items for free. I didn't act to get around their system - their system was just straight up broken, moving items to the have-paid-for-them area without counting them. I don't think it is a customer's job debug a store's system and manually move items back from the have-paid area. You're trying to push a paradigm wherein the store can shirk hiring even a single person to oversee their side of the transaction, yet make the customer responsible for applying diligence for both sides. Give me a break.

I guarantee you the store doesn't analyze their situation in such inflexible absolutist terms, because they could literally never do anything ("can't just put stuff on the shelves, someone might pocket something!!"). Rather they look at cost/benefit. The cost they incurred there was part of the development of the machines, which seemingly has paid off for them by now given that the machines are still around. That is how they chose to handle their half of the responsibility, end of story.

I myself only brought up the detail to make that point that even with the machine's obtuseness leading to missed items, the frustration of it grinding of my gears was still greater! Place the item here, place the item there. no, you did something wrong, go back. no, go back. okay now I am finally ready to take your money. bills first, sorted by serial number! And every time I have tried the machines in the following years, I find that same obtuseness. If you can't take the judgment of valuing my personal convenience over wasting my effort to get free stuff as an indication that I am not a thief, it only demonstrates how useless your paradigm is.

So get off your high horse. Maybe next you can write some grandstanding general comment about the countless other occurrences where something was wrong on a receipt but people didn't go back afterwards because the error was in their favor. Or I can even give you some fodder - I also defraud the stores by changing out my surveillance nym every few months. Meanwhile you can continue missing the forest for the trees and letting slide the emergent-complexity abuses caused by the wholly logical implications of absolutist morals and laws.

I bet you're one of those people that actually waits in a line to exit the store, so that the security guard can recheck your receipt and give you a gold star. How many are you up to now?

Re: The Banana Trick and Other Acts of Self-Checkout Thievery (2018)

#209

Post by sippeangelo » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 6:06 PM UTC

nzjrs wrote: post #182

Animats wrote: post #134

The machine learning solution: * LaneHawk - identifies items in bottom of car [1] * Everseen - watches object move through a checkout [2] and reports if they are not scanned. In use at Walmart and "5 of the 10 top retailers" now. * StopLift - also watches checkouts. Recently purchased by NCR. This problem is on its way to being solved. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYd7CcInZ28 [2] https://www.theverge.com/2019/…

False positives and the human reaction to being accused of theft will kill these. Honestly a sticker that says "automated theft detection system in operation" will be more effective

Works about as well as you'd expect: http://vm.tiktok.com/RWpGfb/

Re: The Banana Trick and Other Acts of Self-Checkout Thievery (2018)

#210

Post by mindslight » Sun, Jul 28, 2019, 7:09 PM UTC

tempguy9999 wrote: post #175

kalleboo wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are making you pick up the swiss cheese and take it to the till (automated or not). Are they charging you to move items around the store? Until the Piggly Wiggly supermarket introduced the self-serve concept in 1916, you would go up to a counter and tell a clerk what food items you wanted, and they would get them for you. So your analogy really is the 1920's version of the self-checkout!

I didn't know this, thanks! However it reminds me of something similar that happened ~25 years ago in a UK town where I lived. We had a long power cut that went on for many days. The supermarkets shut at first because, why not. As things went on they had customers to serve so they had to sell, I remember that tesco set up a table at the store entrance with the shop manager and a few assistants. You told them what you…

For quite some time, stores did retain the ability to run offline carbon-copy based credit card transactions. I've definitely seen this occur more recently than one would imagine, at least within the past decade.

I don't know if this is still a thing, as cards are no longer coming with the raised characters required to take an imprint. But perhaps the imprint is no longer necessary, and simply writing the information suffices.

There are (obviously) more avenues for fraud without online verification, but the techniques of fraudsters are no longer optimized for running physical cards either.

The more significant thing that we've lost is a cashier/manager being able to exercise some level of intelligent oversight to judge whether a transaction is likely to be fraudulent. But then again, perhaps a store being cleaned out of its entire inventory of eg Tide because of a long term power outage isn't that big of a deal either.