Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Sunday April 26 2020, @07:53PM   Printer-friendly
from the order-sniping dept.

Instacart has a problem with third-party apps letting shoppers pay for early access to orders – TechCrunch:

Kara Carmichael has been an Instacart shopper for years in Orlando, Fla. It's how she's been able to support her family, she told TechCrunch. But she says she has noticed an increase in third-party bot activity that has made shopping "nearly impossible."

Despite the high demand for Instacart amid the COVID-19 pandemic, shoppers like Carmichael are facing difficulties claiming orders within the shopper app. This is the result of what appears to be some sophisticated work by third-party apps like Ninja Hours, Sushopper and others.

"They grab the batches within a blink of an eye," Carmichael said. "I can barely see the amounts offered. Sometimes I may even just receive a notification because the batch has been taken before it was even registered in my app."

Ninja Hours appeared on the scene about a year ago in the Little Havana community in Miami, according to Logan B., an Instacart shopper with experience using Ninja Hours. Shoppers could pay Ninja Hours about $25 to $35 a week to get access to hours for the following week and in exchange, Ninja Hours would take over the shopper’s app to claim hours on their behalf. This was during a time when Instacart required shoppers to claim hours rather than on-demand orders.

[...] Logan says Instacart eventually caught on to Ninja Hours, which forced the service to shut down. Ninja Hours then became Hours For You, which emerged in the fall, Logan says. Hours For You then folded into Sushopper earlier this year.

[...] Other shoppers didn't seem to notice this was going on, Logan says, because Sushopper would claim the orders before they would even appear on the apps. But now that Sushopper has shut down, there's a new service — one that is not quite as fast.

[...] This increase in bot activity comes at a time when Instacart is ramping up its hiring of full-service shoppers. Just yesterday, Instacart announced it's adding 250,000 more shoppers to meet demand. That came after Instacart announced last month its plans to hire another 300,000 shoppers.

The increased number of full-service shoppers coupled with third-party bots quickly claiming orders, it's no wonder why some shoppers are feeling frustrated. Behind the scenes, Instacart is working to ban unauthorized third parties from accepting batches. In the meantime, the company is recommending shoppers not engage with those services.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday April 26 2020, @07:58PM (1 child)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday April 26 2020, @07:58PM (#987344) Journal

    Give genuine shoppers a login, a password, or a dangly-doodly fob, to identify as shoppers. No fob, no job. And, those bots? Valid targets for US 'hacking' laws. Someone goes to a lot of trouble to circumvent the terms of service and whatnot, they are 'hacking' the system.

    What do the bots do then? Offer out the shopping jobs at a 20% discount? That really blows for honest working people.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by edIII on Sunday April 26 2020, @11:35PM

    by edIII (791) on Sunday April 26 2020, @11:35PM (#987397)

    No. Partially.

    The credentials and physical two-factor to restrict it to a single authorized entity? Sure, why not. Obviously, the barrier to entry to becoming a shopper is now the fob cost. That's the price for the security and authentication though. Like Uber, I would want to know and be able to routine use the same shopper. If I used these services that would be nice.

    TOS is never ever going to be a valid target for any criminal laws. A TOS is a civil contract, and it's insane to bring in law enforcement to what may be a unilateral interpretation of a behavior as a breach. The word breach of contact is used instead of crime for a reason. I don't care how people violate a TOS, or how many people are violating a TOS, it should always remain a civil complaint in civil court. It's a very fucking scary slippery slope to allow contracts written by business to have criminal consequences for breach by consumers. If we're going that way, is it reciprocal? Can I have an execufuck dragged from his bed at 5:30am by aggressive local police that shoot his dog? All because his company breached the TOS, and didn't provide me my legally mandated services in the agreed upon way? Sounds like a bad idea, which sounds just as bad in reverse.

    Beyond TOS there is criminal law. If a TOS if violated with behavior that harms another consumer, or is intended to defraud (which is questionable here), those actions are probably handled by other existing law. In other words, we don't need to make Sheriffs out each and every TOS.

    Also, there is a question as to whether or not these services should allowed to exist in the first place. Granted, these bot services are clearly creating a bad situation. However, they are properly acting on behalf of somebody else. There is a great amount of interoperability between tech services companies happening on a daily basis. It's the very foundation of Zapier's business plan in fact.

    Assistants, Lawyers, Shills, Proxies, Butlers, etc. all exist to operate on behalf of another person, either as individuals or agencies. I think this is a good thing, and entire businesses exist to service clients of other service providing companies. If I have an account with a company, and it has an API, and a user interface, I absolutely want to be able to delegate responsibilities to others. Who wants to wait in the lines for the DMV when you can pay somebody $40 to not go to the DMV?

    This is a very shitty situation where the abusers are hurting workers and consumers at the same time. However, ultimately the problem is a civil one. Which is why your first suggestion is the most viable and correct one. Make it impossible for anyone to act by proxy, and that's impossible if you're always making sure that a single pre-authorized entity is being serviced.

    --
    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.