Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Sunday March 19 2017, @03:07PM   Printer-friendly
from the where-is-the-restroom? dept.

As a kid, I always wanted to be on the TV show "Supermarket Sweep."

In the middle of a Lowe's store in 2017, my dream almost came true. The home improvement retailer is rolling out an augmented-reality app that tells you the fastest way to find items on your list.

It's powered by Google's Tango, an indoor-mapping technology using special cameras to sense depth in 3D space. Measure objects, map a room and see virtual objects in the real world with augmented reality.

With a phone in one hand and a shopping cart in the other, I'm rushing around the aisles pulling items off the shelf. On screen I see a yellow line overlaid on the camera image, navigating me to the next item on my list. There's an aisle and shelf number in case I get really confused, as well as an estimate step counter that tells me how far I have to go.


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This discussion has been archived.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: 3, Interesting) by Nerdfest on Sunday March 19 2017, @05:22PM (6 children)

    by Nerdfest (80) on Sunday March 19 2017, @05:22PM (#481205)

    Here's the thing with Google, I think. They do things for people that people want, and they do it at no monetary cost. In the process of doing this, and to help them perform these services, they acquire a lot of very detailed information about people, basically trading your private information for free servicves. For the most part, they perform these services very well. They have and amazing record of security and privacy, probably unrivaled by pretty anybody. The danger is that they start using that information *against* people, but I think for the time being, they're pretty good. I certainly understand the potential for abuse, but I think if they want to protect their reputation, they need to keep up the decent behaviour. Their long-term profit depends on keeping private information private.

    That said, after seeing how far Microsoft has pushed abusive behaviour with their Windows "telemetry" without a huge outcry, mayby I'm wrong and Google will realize they can step pretty far into the realm of "Evil" and still make money long term. Really, I'm think Microsoft will be punished in the market long term though.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 19 2017, @06:02PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 19 2017, @06:02PM (#481211)

    > The danger is that they start using that information *against* people, but I think for the time being, they're pretty good

    Many years ago it was shown that the prices of items listed on google's price-comparison system were higher than the average of a representative sampling that excluded those merchants (google's price comparison system is a paid advertising platform). That doesn't seem to have hurt that part of their business.

    • (Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Sunday March 19 2017, @06:12PM (2 children)

      by Nerdfest (80) on Sunday March 19 2017, @06:12PM (#481214)

      That's not using people's personal inmformation against them. That's basically the same as searching for the best price on Amazon and finding that a local bricks and mortar retailer has it cheaper .... which actually happens a surprising amount. Hasn't hurt Google? If it was a better, more valuable service, perhaps Amazon wouldn't own online retail sales.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 19 2017, @07:34PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 19 2017, @07:34PM (#481236)

        I think you are splitting hairs.
        Google is using their position of convenience and trustedness to exploit people by providing a service that advertises that it will help them.
        And despite exploiting that trust, they aren't paying a price for it.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 20 2017, @01:58PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 20 2017, @01:58PM (#481492)

        Have you heard of dynamic pricing and "finding your customer's price point"? If I know what that is, I can ride the price I'm offering you as close to the highest number of dollars you'll pay for the item; and then I do the same for another customer.
        THIS is how this is used against you.

  • (Score: 2) by VLM on Sunday March 19 2017, @08:55PM

    by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Sunday March 19 2017, @08:55PM (#481250)

    they acquire a lot of very detailed information about people

    Yet they cancel some of their most information dense sources like Reader, which is just weird.

    I find it fun trolling to ask the more google-paranoid people I know how google intends to profit off normal users doing normal things when they couldn't even get Reader to pay for itself of all things.

    Much as I'd like to think of a random 5K of telemetry as being as precious as my bodily fluids, even google stealing my telemetry or precious bodily fluids still doesn't have a wide enough marketplace for them to sell it at a profit.

    Just because a business model sounds scary to someone a bit paranoid, does not mean the marketplace is under any obligation to implement it and make it profitable even at billion dollar google scale.... I mean they could sell this and they could sell that but they can't even make a profit off what appears to be even more valuable stuff.

    Unless its all a google disinformation campaign. "Project Grassy Knoll". Hmm. Hold on while I wrap some tinfoil on me head.

  • (Score: 2) by krishnoid on Sunday March 19 2017, @08:59PM

    by krishnoid (1156) on Sunday March 19 2017, @08:59PM (#481251)

    I completely agree with the first paragraph -- except the last sentence. I'd really like to know if they're buying cocoa futures [bbc.co.uk].