Ok, this article is kind of all over the place and seems to miss several things worth mentioning.
1) It's pretty obvious that the responsibilities of the robots right now are just in a proof of concept phase. I can pretty much guarantee they will be used for additional tasks once the test period ends and some software bugs get worked out. Tasks like (as the article mentions) price checking, stock checking, misplaced item identification, etc. that take up a lot of employee time.
2) Customers concerned about privacy because the robots have cameras seem kind of out of touch. Ever been to Walmart and looked up? There are cameras everywhere, recording all the time and I haven't seen anyone complain that it's creepy they're being watched (and recorded) by people in a security office. The only difference with the robots is that they're more noticeable, so people are suddenly aware that they're being recorded.
3) The article mentions organized labor, employee opposition to the robots, and profits, but doesn't actually connect the dots. Here's the thing about capitalism and automation: the more you raise salaries and improve working conditions, the more incentive there is for companies to automate jobs. That's basic cost-benefit analysis and margin-based thinking. If automating a job costs X and human workers currently make Y, but want Y to be greater than X, guess what? Those jobs aren't going to last very long.
#3 is missed by too many people. We need to start seriously considering what a "post-work" economy might look like, and we need to start drumming up the political will for the massive income redistribution that will be necessary.
I mean, employment is at an all timr low. People have been predicting a post-work economy for over a hundred years at this point. There’s not and never will be a post-work economy.
We've been moving towards it for about as long as people have been predicting it. It's been happening in fits and starts, but it's been happening. I suspect that the rise of the "gig economy" is due in part to the fact that there is so much less necessary manpower required to keep society running. So the only work left is to cater to the desires of the rich and/or lazy.
I think your second point is interesting, in completely practical terms I have to agree with you, you're already being recorded. Still, passive surveillance from a security camera feels very different from a robot with perceived agency actively following you around.
I dunno. In some aisles at Walmart, they make it really obvious that you're being recorded. The camera detects you and a ring of lights around it turns on. Greater theft deterrent, I guess.
The goal is to get you to look towards the source of the noise...which happens to be a lens aimed at your face. Now they have a clear photo of potential shoplifters.
1) It's pretty obvious that the responsibilities of the robots right now are just in a proof of concept phase. I can pretty much guarantee they will be used for additional tasks once the test period ends and some software bugs get worked out. Tasks like (as the article mentions) price checking, stock checking, misplaced item identification, etc. that take up a lot of employee time.
2) Customers concerned about privacy because the robots have cameras seem kind of out of touch. Ever been to Walmart and looked up? There are cameras everywhere, recording all the time and I haven't seen anyone complain that it's creepy they're being watched (and recorded) by people in a security office. The only difference with the robots is that they're more noticeable, so people are suddenly aware that they're being recorded.
3) The article mentions organized labor, employee opposition to the robots, and profits, but doesn't actually connect the dots. Here's the thing about capitalism and automation: the more you raise salaries and improve working conditions, the more incentive there is for companies to automate jobs. That's basic cost-benefit analysis and margin-based thinking. If automating a job costs X and human workers currently make Y, but want Y to be greater than X, guess what? Those jobs aren't going to last very long.