▲ 424 ▼ Walmart Running Into Trouble as Its Super-Expensive Robots Can’t Handle the Realities of Warehouse Work: It's an automation "arms race." (futurism.com) submitted 6 days ago by eicker@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world 93 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] EatMyPixelDust@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 5 days ago (6 children) Complexity is expensive. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] RumRunningDevil@lemmy.zip 1 point 5 days ago (5 children) Expensive isn't really an issue though is it? If I can guarantee you quadruple your revenue by doubling your expense, you'd take the deal no? That's basically what these things do. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] VAK@lemmy.world 1 point 5 days ago (4 children) To be a bit more precise, is it about throughput or lead time? Because for throughput I imagine you can just have more workers, but for quicker shipping you need to do pick and pack in less time, rather than do a lot of them in a given time. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] RumRunningDevil@lemmy.zip 2 points 5 days ago (3 children) Throughput primarily, the bottleneck is still shipping. These systems do allow for picking/packing faster as well but from a logistics standpoint if you want more output you just need more trucks. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] VAK@lemmy.world 1 point 5 days ago (2 children) How does it help in getting more revenue then? Demand wouldn't change, right? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] RumRunningDevil@lemmy.zip 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Businesses tend to bank on demand for products being functionally infinite over the long term. Because of this it tends to be a safe bet that you'll make more money the quicker, and cheaper, you can get products on shelves. This has held pretty true thus far, though personally I have to wonder if there's an upper limit. Human's have to have a upper tolerance for buying junk right? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] VAK@lemmy.world 1 point 4 days ago In this scenario, as you said it's not making the delivery quicker, is it right to assume that it's making it cheaper? Is the cost of warehousing lower with robots? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] RumRunningDevil@lemmy.zip 1 point 5 days ago (5 children) Expensive isn't really an issue though is it? If I can guarantee you quadruple your revenue by doubling your expense, you'd take the deal no? That's basically what these things do. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] VAK@lemmy.world 1 point 5 days ago (4 children) To be a bit more precise, is it about throughput or lead time? Because for throughput I imagine you can just have more workers, but for quicker shipping you need to do pick and pack in less time, rather than do a lot of them in a given time. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] RumRunningDevil@lemmy.zip 2 points 5 days ago (3 children) Throughput primarily, the bottleneck is still shipping. These systems do allow for picking/packing faster as well but from a logistics standpoint if you want more output you just need more trucks. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] VAK@lemmy.world 1 point 5 days ago (2 children) How does it help in getting more revenue then? Demand wouldn't change, right? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] RumRunningDevil@lemmy.zip 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Businesses tend to bank on demand for products being functionally infinite over the long term. Because of this it tends to be a safe bet that you'll make more money the quicker, and cheaper, you can get products on shelves. This has held pretty true thus far, though personally I have to wonder if there's an upper limit. Human's have to have a upper tolerance for buying junk right? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] VAK@lemmy.world 1 point 4 days ago In this scenario, as you said it's not making the delivery quicker, is it right to assume that it's making it cheaper? Is the cost of warehousing lower with robots? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] VAK@lemmy.world 1 point 5 days ago (4 children) To be a bit more precise, is it about throughput or lead time? Because for throughput I imagine you can just have more workers, but for quicker shipping you need to do pick and pack in less time, rather than do a lot of them in a given time. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] RumRunningDevil@lemmy.zip 2 points 5 days ago (3 children) Throughput primarily, the bottleneck is still shipping. These systems do allow for picking/packing faster as well but from a logistics standpoint if you want more output you just need more trucks. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] VAK@lemmy.world 1 point 5 days ago (2 children) How does it help in getting more revenue then? Demand wouldn't change, right? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] RumRunningDevil@lemmy.zip 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Businesses tend to bank on demand for products being functionally infinite over the long term. Because of this it tends to be a safe bet that you'll make more money the quicker, and cheaper, you can get products on shelves. This has held pretty true thus far, though personally I have to wonder if there's an upper limit. Human's have to have a upper tolerance for buying junk right? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] VAK@lemmy.world 1 point 4 days ago In this scenario, as you said it's not making the delivery quicker, is it right to assume that it's making it cheaper? Is the cost of warehousing lower with robots? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] RumRunningDevil@lemmy.zip 2 points 5 days ago (3 children) Throughput primarily, the bottleneck is still shipping. These systems do allow for picking/packing faster as well but from a logistics standpoint if you want more output you just need more trucks. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] VAK@lemmy.world 1 point 5 days ago (2 children) How does it help in getting more revenue then? Demand wouldn't change, right? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] RumRunningDevil@lemmy.zip 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Businesses tend to bank on demand for products being functionally infinite over the long term. Because of this it tends to be a safe bet that you'll make more money the quicker, and cheaper, you can get products on shelves. This has held pretty true thus far, though personally I have to wonder if there's an upper limit. Human's have to have a upper tolerance for buying junk right? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] VAK@lemmy.world 1 point 4 days ago In this scenario, as you said it's not making the delivery quicker, is it right to assume that it's making it cheaper? Is the cost of warehousing lower with robots? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] VAK@lemmy.world 1 point 5 days ago (2 children) How does it help in getting more revenue then? Demand wouldn't change, right? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] RumRunningDevil@lemmy.zip 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Businesses tend to bank on demand for products being functionally infinite over the long term. Because of this it tends to be a safe bet that you'll make more money the quicker, and cheaper, you can get products on shelves. This has held pretty true thus far, though personally I have to wonder if there's an upper limit. Human's have to have a upper tolerance for buying junk right? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] VAK@lemmy.world 1 point 4 days ago In this scenario, as you said it's not making the delivery quicker, is it right to assume that it's making it cheaper? Is the cost of warehousing lower with robots? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] RumRunningDevil@lemmy.zip 1 point 5 days ago (1 child) Businesses tend to bank on demand for products being functionally infinite over the long term. Because of this it tends to be a safe bet that you'll make more money the quicker, and cheaper, you can get products on shelves. This has held pretty true thus far, though personally I have to wonder if there's an upper limit. Human's have to have a upper tolerance for buying junk right? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] VAK@lemmy.world 1 point 4 days ago In this scenario, as you said it's not making the delivery quicker, is it right to assume that it's making it cheaper? Is the cost of warehousing lower with robots? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] VAK@lemmy.world 1 point 4 days ago In this scenario, as you said it's not making the delivery quicker, is it right to assume that it's making it cheaper? Is the cost of warehousing lower with robots? permalink fedilink source parent