They have these in my local Walgreens and I hate them. I think the drink coolers were stocked for maybe a week after they were installed. Since then it’s been 50/50 if the product the screen is showing is actually behind the door. I don’t think the store employees are able to keep on top of stocking without being able to see what’s in the case.
Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”
81–90 of 397 posts
Re: Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”
#82A boring dystopia indeed. One day someone will be hunched over on a sidewalk, dying of thirst, and a patrolling Nestle®-branded drone senses (using state-of-the-art machine learning "customer needs" technology) his predicament. The drone hovers there projecting a holo-ad about Nestles hot product "Nectar of Life" which is just water from the region's last remaining aquifer cut with brackish water from the coast. The…
Shades of both Philip K Dick and Frank Herbert here. This is one of the best SF short stories I've read for a while.
Re: Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”
#83I hope that these things don't periodically switch from showing the actual products & prices to showing a full-screen ad for something. A movie theater near me does that with their screen-based menus. Very annoying to be trying to decide what you want and suddenly have the menu vanish. It's a bit sad to think how wasteful these are. Not just the waste produced by producing the screens and powering them all day, but t…
> cameras > I'm guessing it's eye tracking for market research
It's possible the whole display is specifically for market research. Play with product placement and see what increases sales for the most profitable items.
Re: Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”
#84I do not blame cooler screen for selling this technology to anyone. But I want everyone to consider how much it takes to bring about a technology like this to a grocery store. If this is any of the big chain groceries, the manager doesn't even have the authority to put a sticker on the glass door. This was vetted by hundreds of people and none of them thought... glass? Business class tickets were purchased, hotels we…
> Edit: What bothers me the most about this, is that it will actually work. Any surface where eyes may fall on, will be replaced with an ad. Until someone finds out every screen has the same default password. And a few supermarkets are forced to shut them down because what was displayed was way, way worse than ads...
Not looking forward to goatse when I get a hankering for microwave pizza.
Re: Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”
#85Everyone here who’s worked for some moderately large corporation knows exactly why this was done: it’s a flashy pet project for some “labs” team in an otherwise boring retailer and maybe they’ll recoup some of the cost in ads, minus whatever they lose for it being an awful idea. Some charismatic product manager sold it to execs as “being the future of connected retail” or some other BS. In a few months they’ll be rem…
Doesn't every new innovation (produced by a corporation), good or bad, generally come from the experimental arm of said corporation (e.g, R&D division)? You have teams dedicating to maintaining the core business, and you have teams exploring areas along the fringe of your TAM. HN's comments following Bitcoin's launch have made me acutely aware of how hostile we can be towards new ideas.
Bitcoin came from an independent researcher. That's the polar opposite of a corporate research arm.
I'd guess that most innovation comes from startups and smaller companies that get acquired, or iterative product development that aligns with a company's primary focus (iPod, Office, Ford's electric pickup) and not from dedicated experimentation organisations.
Corporations are poorly setup to benefit from innovation anyway. The funding model doesn't encourage the right incentives, and true innovation becomes political. A classic example is Kodak's early invention of the digital camera, which was a threat to the companies cash cow.
Re: Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”
#86I do not blame cooler screen for selling this technology to anyone. But I want everyone to consider how much it takes to bring about a technology like this to a grocery store. If this is any of the big chain groceries, the manager doesn't even have the authority to put a sticker on the glass door. This was vetted by hundreds of people and none of them thought... glass? Business class tickets were purchased, hotels we…
> Edit: What bothers me the most about this, is that it will actually work. Any surface where eyes may fall on, will be replaced with an ad. Until someone finds out every screen has the same default password. And a few supermarkets are forced to shut them down because what was displayed was way, way worse than ads...
yeah and now that everything is cloud connected and controlled by a corporate office far removed from the actual stores. I cant wait until thee freezer isle of some national chain starts displaying goatsx on every door some holiday weekend and its hours before it fixed.
Re: Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't every new innovation (produced by a corporation), good or bad, generally come from the experimental arm of said corporation (e.g, R&D division)? You have teams dedicating to maintaining the core business, and you have teams exploring areas along the fringe of your TAM. HN's comments following Bitcoin's launch have made me acutely aware of how hostile we can be towards new ideas.
Bitcoin came from an independent researcher. That's the polar opposite of a corporate research arm. I'd guess that most innovation comes from startups and smaller companies that get acquired, or iterative product development that aligns with a company's primary focus (iPod, Office, Ford's electric pickup) and not from dedicated experimentation organisations. Corporations are poorly setup to benefit from innovation an…
[deleted]
Re: Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't every new innovation (produced by a corporation), good or bad, generally come from the experimental arm of said corporation (e.g, R&D division)? You have teams dedicating to maintaining the core business, and you have teams exploring areas along the fringe of your TAM. HN's comments following Bitcoin's launch have made me acutely aware of how hostile we can be towards new ideas.
Bitcoin came from an independent researcher. That's the polar opposite of a corporate research arm. I'd guess that most innovation comes from startups and smaller companies that get acquired, or iterative product development that aligns with a company's primary focus (iPod, Office, Ford's electric pickup) and not from dedicated experimentation organisations. Corporations are poorly setup to benefit from innovation an…
[deleted]
Re: Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”
#89This is obviously a comically idiotic idea, but ... hmm ... If someone had taken this and put it in a museum as an art installation, I would love it. Thinking about it like that ... it tickles something in my brain. Using those absolutely huge, gorgeous screens, using our most sophisticated technology ... just to display a flat, bland, skeuomorphic representation of a completely mundane part of the human experience:…
There is an art installation in Las Vegas[0] which is basically a grocery store from an alternate, mildly dystopian, dimension. This would fit in perfectly there.
0: https://www.travelandleisure.com/culture-design/visual-arts/...
Re: Sorry, we replaced that old technology, “see-through glass”
#90This concept could actually be nice to present a pretty interface for products wrapped in plain, cheap packages (or no packages at all and served to customers in reusable containers).