Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Target sets a limit on self-checkout items

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 40 posts

Re: Target sets a limit on self-checkout items

#11

Post by maximus-decimus »

3D39739091 wrote: post #5
ok_dad wrote: post #2

Anytime corpos blame theft there’s always another reason. I wonder what the real reason they’re doing this is; are the automated checkout companies increasing prices or perhaps they’re charging a percentage of the items that go through their machines? It’s never theft, just like a failing economy isn’t on the millennials, and you can’t personally save the environment through recycling and using less gas in your car.…

Bro, it really is that simple. Literally everyone (except apparently you) is stealing from these retailers. The shrink rate is an order of magnitude higher on self checkout compared to a cashier lane with a human.

> Literally everyone (except apparently you) is stealing from these retailers

I guess that's why I can't have nice things. What really bothers me is people who scam insurance and then boast to me about it as if I'm gonna tap them on the back for "sticking it to the man" when they're stealing money away from me by causing my insurance primes to increase but are too stupid to realize it.

Re: Target sets a limit on self-checkout items

#12

Post by diymaker »

3D39739091 wrote: post #5
ok_dad wrote: post #2

Anytime corpos blame theft there’s always another reason. I wonder what the real reason they’re doing this is; are the automated checkout companies increasing prices or perhaps they’re charging a percentage of the items that go through their machines? It’s never theft, just like a failing economy isn’t on the millennials, and you can’t personally save the environment through recycling and using less gas in your car.…

Bro, it really is that simple. Literally everyone (except apparently you) is stealing from these retailers. The shrink rate is an order of magnitude higher on self checkout compared to a cashier lane with a human.

The data does not back up this claim, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/29/briefing/shoplifting-data...

Re: Target sets a limit on self-checkout items

#13

Post by ok_dad »

3D39739091 wrote: post #5
ok_dad wrote: post #2

Anytime corpos blame theft there’s always another reason. I wonder what the real reason they’re doing this is; are the automated checkout companies increasing prices or perhaps they’re charging a percentage of the items that go through their machines? It’s never theft, just like a failing economy isn’t on the millennials, and you can’t personally save the environment through recycling and using less gas in your car.…

Bro, it really is that simple. Literally everyone (except apparently you) is stealing from these retailers. The shrink rate is an order of magnitude higher on self checkout compared to a cashier lane with a human.

What’s the evidence other than from corpo press releases? They haven’t shown numbers or evidence that’s the real reason, and you can’t trust a corpo to tell the whole truth.

Re: Target sets a limit on self-checkout items

#14

Post by gruez »

ok_dad wrote: post #10
gruez wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>are the automated checkout companies increasing prices How would this work? The items have price tags on shelves. You can't arbitrarily jack up prices without attracting consumer outrage and/or regulatory scrutiny. >perhaps they’re charging a percentage of the items that go through their machines That wouldn't affect the raw sales data, which is how "shrink" is determined (ie. goods you've bought - goods you've sold…

https://sfist.com/2023/12/22/sure-enough-shoplifting-was-not... Edit: this one from further down the thread too: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/29/briefing/shoplifting-data... For the first point, I usually assume the checkouts are run by third party vendors and charge a fee for the automated systems. I was saying that perhaps those third parties have started to raise prices for the operation of the checkout machine…

>Edit: this one from further down the thread too: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/29/briefing/shoplifting-data...

Your own source admits it's real, albeit limited to certain cities

"But the increase in shoplifting appears to be limited to a few cities, rather than being truly national. In most of the country, retail theft has been lower this year than it was a few years ago, according to police data. There are some exceptions, particularly New York City, where shoplifting has spiked. But outside New York, shoplifting incidents in major cities have fallen 7 percent since 2019, before the Covid pandemic."

That's hardly enough to support the claim it's "never shoplifting".

>https://sfist.com/2023/12/22/sure-enough-shoplifting-was-not...

The CNBC investigation this story was based on uses official crime statistics. Seems reasonable, until you realize that if officials aren't responding to crime reports (eg. lenient DAs), stores might not bother reporting, which makes it seem like crime is going down when it really isn't. You can see this in the nytimes article, which has both reported crime data as well as retailers' inventory ("shrink") data. The latter is obviously less susceptible to this effect, and we see that even though the reported crime rates were down 14% (45.1 -> 38.6), shrink was only down 3% (1.62 -> 1.57).

The two above combined makes the exculpatory evidence for "it's never theft" to be pretty weak.

Re: Target sets a limit on self-checkout items

#16

Post by gruez »

test6554 wrote: post #9

I think this is a positive step. Most of the time when online discussion about self-checkout theft would come up, there would be an uncomfortably larg number of people justifying their theft as "payment for doing a cashier's job". Basically "if you don't want me to steal, then hire someone to watch me". Also it was inconvenient when I had about 30 items and a kid in the cart to do self-checkout.

>there would be an uncomfortably larg number of people justifying their theft as "payment for doing a cashier's job".

I realize you probably don't hold this position, but legality aside, that argument falls flat on its face when you consider the value of your time vs the value of items you're stealing. Self-checking out groceries takes maybe 3 minutes for a full cart? Suppose the store would have otherwise needed to hire a cashier earning $20/hr. Let's double that to account for other expenses like payroll taxes and insurance. $40/hr for 3 minutes works out to $2. That entitles you to a free candy bar, not ringing up a pack of steaks as bananas.

>Basically "if you don't want me to steal, then hire someone to watch me".

At the risk of being called a "corpo bootlicker" or whatever, this is basically along the same lines as "if you don't want me to grope you, don't dress provocatively".

Re: Target sets a limit on self-checkout items

#17

Post by vdqtp3 »

gruez wrote: post #16
test6554 wrote: post #9

I think this is a positive step. Most of the time when online discussion about self-checkout theft would come up, there would be an uncomfortably larg number of people justifying their theft as "payment for doing a cashier's job". Basically "if you don't want me to steal, then hire someone to watch me". Also it was inconvenient when I had about 30 items and a kid in the cart to do self-checkout.

>there would be an uncomfortably larg number of people justifying their theft as "payment for doing a cashier's job". I realize you probably don't hold this position, but legality aside, that argument falls flat on its face when you consider the value of your time vs the value of items you're stealing. Self-checking out groceries takes maybe 3 minutes for a full cart? Suppose the store would have otherwise needed to…

You're absolutely right, the excuse is unacceptable.

Also unacceptable is requiring customers to do the job of an employee.

The two are not mutually exclusive.

Re: Target sets a limit on self-checkout items

#18

Post by edgineer »

vdqtp3 wrote: post #17
gruez wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>there would be an uncomfortably larg number of people justifying their theft as "payment for doing a cashier's job". I realize you probably don't hold this position, but legality aside, that argument falls flat on its face when you consider the value of your time vs the value of items you're stealing. Self-checking out groceries takes maybe 3 minutes for a full cart? Suppose the store would have otherwise needed to…

You're absolutely right, the excuse is unacceptable. Also unacceptable is requiring customers to do the job of an employee. The two are not mutually exclusive.

I've never seen a Target store require people to self checkout.

Re: Target sets a limit on self-checkout items

#19

Post by MichaelRo »

I perceive the checkout kiosks as "the fast lane". Which gets invalidated if people with a full cart block them. Plus, the probability of something going wrong and them needing assistance is about 25% per item, with many items it's a sure thing they will need assistance and block the queue for a long time.

Re: Target sets a limit on self-checkout items

#20

Post by gruez »

vdqtp3 wrote: post #17
gruez wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>there would be an uncomfortably larg number of people justifying their theft as "payment for doing a cashier's job". I realize you probably don't hold this position, but legality aside, that argument falls flat on its face when you consider the value of your time vs the value of items you're stealing. Self-checking out groceries takes maybe 3 minutes for a full cart? Suppose the store would have otherwise needed to…

You're absolutely right, the excuse is unacceptable. Also unacceptable is requiring customers to do the job of an employee. The two are not mutually exclusive.

>Also unacceptable is requiring customers to do the job of an employee.

That's entirely subjective though. Around a century ago, Piggly Wiggly introduced the supermarket shopping experience as we know it today (ie. the shopper was responsible for picking items off the shelves, rather than having a clerk do it). I'm sure back then you could make the same argument that "unacceptable is requiring customers to do the job of an employee".

Post reply on HN