69 pointsby rozumem7 hours ago31 comments
  • wodenokoto4 minutes ago
    I live in Dubai and in my experience the main reason why they want you to pay with QR is because the QR company pushes a service fee on guests and some times even a default tip (tipping is not common here, but I’m sure staff is underpaid because every service company that uses an app pushes you to leave a tip) that they can’t charge if you pay directly to the restaurant.

    Just ask the staff to bring the CC machine.

    As for the parking. Sure technology got in the way of the conversation. It also got in the way of a $100 fine. I’d say that’s a win, not a loss.

  • gorgoiler3 hours ago
    I’d not heard of this fallacy* but it makes perfect sense. Well executed human greeting is such a killer asset if you get it right. There’s a few million years of genetic programming inside us all that responds unreasonably positively to hospitality. If someone enters my home and is not drinking their desired beverage in under four minutes, I have brought shame on me and my family!

    I think we are all programmed to respond well to any courtesy, no matter how indirect. When a computer game level has a nice tutorial “level 0” then I feel good. When my dishwasher has color coded component to help me clean it, I feel good. When I click a text area containing an order number and it auto selects the number, I feel good. Great design is about the same kind of warm fuzzies as great hospitality. Maybe we should even call industrial design “passive hospitality”?

    *No apostrophe btw. It ought to be The Doorman Fallacy. If you want an apostrophe then call it The Hotel Manager’s Fallacy :)

  • EvanAnderson3 hours ago
    Aside re: restaurant technology:

    In a restaurant a year ago with "pay via your phone" service. Server gave us a receipt w/ a QR code. I scanned the code, copied the URL to my clipboard, and looked it over. There was a base64 blob on the URL. I decoded it (because Termux and I'm a nerd) and saw obvious parameters I could fuzz. I changed the check ID (incremented it), left the store ID alone, re-encoded it, and found I could access somebody else's check. Not a super exciting vulnerability (since all I could do was see what they ordered and pay their check) but I thought it was still pretty rotten that I could even do that.

    • alex43578an hour ago
      That’s such a benign vulnerability that it doesn’t even feel like one. Per your description, the worst thing an attacker can do is see the food ordered to a check number (in a public restaurant) and pay a bill that isn’t their own?

      On the flip side, some services go absolutely overboard trying to secure low-blast-radius things, or don’t properly scale security to the risk of an activity. I have a service provider that requires an absurd login flow for their website, continually trying to force passkeys, short session timeouts, etc; when the worst an unauthorized attacker could do is pay my bill (the horror!).

  • scoofy2 hours ago
    I cannot recommend Rory Sutherland's book Alchemy enough.

    It is up there with great book for me like Taleb's Incerto series when it comes to deeply interesting ideas I would not have noticed if they hadn't been pointed out to me.

    https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/26210508-alchemy (the subtitle of this book seems to be different in different countries)

    https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/series/INO/incerto/

  • hasteg27 minutes ago
    "On paper, it looks like a smart decision. Reduce paper, reduce staff, reduce operating costs. But what gets overlooked is the hit to the customer experience." As always.... this philosophy is basically killing any customer experiences these days. Hopefully some day profits will take enough of a hit to actually start resulting in more effort in the customer experience.
    • zeroonetwothree24 minutes ago
      As long as demand remains high they have no reason to change their course.
  • TheGRS5 hours ago
    If anything the prompt from your phone that your meter is expiring is a huge plus against forgetting about it and getting dinged with an outrageous parking ticket. I'd much rather go through the brief stress of that reminder than a ticket any day. A parking ticket will put me in a sour mood for the rest of the day easily.
    • varispeed3 hours ago
      Such feature is designed to catch people who might not pay attention. Innocent looking money grab.

      Some better parking apps simply let you start the meter and then stop when you get back to your car, so you don't have to worry you miss it and get a fine.

      • hoherd3 hours ago
        If you forget to pay when you get back to your car, are you charged the max? That's how it works with other systems like this that I've used.
  • mgkimsal44 minutes ago
    I've never been to a place where you order by QR code where somehow the bill is joined together in one order for the table. Everything I order on the phone I pay for before they bring the food.

    A couple places near me have QR codes for seeing a menu, but you still place an order with a person. If I order via QR code, payment is tied to me as a person, not the group.

    Never (yet?) seen it any other way.

  • madroxan hour ago
    I've never heard of the Doorman Fallacy before. I like it.

    That said, not everything changes because some businessman wants to cut costs. Splitting bills has always been a pain, and while a lot of apps suck, at least it's consistent. I can't tell you how many times I got dirty looks from wait staff when asked to split a bill. In pretty much every story the author talks about I would rather fail forward than go backward.

  • godelski5 hours ago
    To clarify, the Doorman Fallacy is about the Doorman doing more than their job actually seems. The Doorman isn't just a greeter, but they are checking that the right people are coming in, they are going to report issues that patrons pass onto them, they check that the UPS guy is actually from UPS, they're the first to notice damage to the property, they call the police if they see a crime happening in the area, and so on. These are things that aren't obviously in their job but things the doorman will actually do.

    But I generally agree with the OP here. We have these "high tech" solutions that actually just complicate things. I'm upset that our community pushes for "good enough" and "no elegance". Everyone's definition of these things are different so they're just thought terminating cliches, not some beneficial insights. They're just mindless parroting.

    I think part of the problem is engineers aren't being engineers. For some reason engineers are focusing on the monetary value of the thing being built rather than the actual utility to the user. There needs to be a firewall between marketing and engineering. Engineers focus on utility (utility over value) while marketers focus on the inverse. The contention is a feature, not a bug. But now we don't implement single line solutions that solve annoyances that millions of people have because "what's the value?" People are just being killed by a million paper cuts. It's unbearable. We seem to have forgotten that one is the great beauties of computing is scale. This action might cost a customer 1 second, but if you have a million users that's sure a lot of seconds. Seconds they're using on your servers and devices. Those seconds add up, especially as it's not just one program that's adding an extra second, it is a hundred.

    We waste a lot of time and money because we don't look at the whole picture

  • devindotcom6 hours ago
    My favorite version of this is robotic and drone-based package delivery. In many ways it could be useful and add efficiency to a congested system. But then you find out just what it is that delivery people actually do, the variety of security systems, steps and walkways, exceptions to rules, and so on and realize that what drones and robots automate is not really "the job" at all.

    The last mile, in logistics, hospitality, retail or elsewhere is not just a mile, it's an interdependent series of several distances each with its own rules and restrictions. Tech-based solutions tend to solve an idealized, abstracted version of these and end up being only a very limited solution if they solve anything at all.

    • rootusrootus6 hours ago
      These folks have patted themselves on the back for devising a solution to the last mile without then realizing that the hardest part of all was the last 20 feet.

      They'll just ignore that problem, drop the package on my front lawn and then snap a picture for proof of delivery from 50 feet up before flying away. To be fair, at least one of the Chinese international carriers does that every time already -- pull into my driveway, open the window, chuck the package onto the lawn, and then drive away. At least Amazon still brings it to the front porch and 90% of the time even puts it in a spot where the rain does not reach.

  • rwmj6 hours ago
    What the article misses is that money is saved for the company by moving the work to the customer / end user.

    It's the same thing with sending parcels, where I must now sit on my computer at home filling in a complicated online form and printing out my own labels. This takes me like 30 minutes, but saves time and money for the Post Office (not for me!)

    There's no downside for the company here, especially when they are monopolies so we have no choice.

    • godelski4 hours ago

        > that money is saved for the company
      
      Sure, but you're not taking into account how much it costs the company.

      This is the definition of "penny wise, pound foolish". Nothing is really "free"

      Here's a good example: you know how every terminal begs for tips? And the percentage is increasing? (In San Jose I saw by middle number as 25%!!). It looks free, but guess what, I'm more likely to not come back and press "no tip" or enter a custom amount. The cost is the aggregation of these events but we just mindlessly set these values rather than testing. (Or just you know... caring about people and thinking about how you feel as a customer)

      There's biases too and biases accumulate. Piss off enough people and they never come back. They tell people not to go there. This happens even if another restaurant goes too far. People just get fed up with "eating out" rather than just eating at one restaurant. That exhaustion accumulates, especially in times like this where money is getting tighter for most people

      • Joker_vD3 hours ago
        > Nothing is really "free".

        There are economies of scale though, plus expertise. That's why we normally buy clothes instead of spinning, cutting, and sewing textiles ourselves.

        • godelski2 hours ago

            > There are economies of scale though
          
          Which is explicitly what my comment is about
    • devindotcom6 hours ago
      Don't forget self check out at the grocery store. I don't mind personally (I find ways to make it worth my while..) but it's a version of the same thing. Shifting labor under the guise of convenience. Like all the other versions of this, the savings are absorbed by the company, not passed on to the consumer. It's rare that the opposite happens.
      • ralferoo6 hours ago
        My supermarket has the handheld scanners and they are a game changer. They fit handily into the trolley if you want and you just scan stuff as you go. If you want 8 of something, you can just tap the item and increase the quantity, none of the having to scan each one and add it carefully to the bagging area, etc... And best of all, at the end you just scan a self checkout screen (and they have special ones as well with no bagging area and no queue, but you can use the normal ones if the queue is shorter), so you scan the screen, click pay, click pay by card and hold your card on the machine. Done. Takes about 15 seconds all in, and the queues on those machines are basically non-existant as a result.

        Best of all is that you put your stuff directly into your bags as you're shopping so there's no frantic packing stage.

        Oh, and maybe Decathlon deserve a special mention here for their self-service checkouts. Every item has an RFID price tag usually sown into the care labels of their own-brand products. They don't have a self-scan machine, handheld or otherwise, you just drop everything you picked up into the box, it scans all the RFID tags and makes sure the weight is correct, and it's all done.

        • dbdoug2 hours ago
          > you just drop everything you picked up into the box, it scans all the RFID tags and makes sure the weight is correct, and it's all done.

          Well, not exactly. I saved a bundle of money inadvertently in a Decathlon in São Paulo. I read the instructions, but didn't understand the Portuguese completely. I dumped a ton of purchases into the bin, watched the screen scroll through the items, and paid the bill. When I got home I realized that I'd only been billed for about half the items. Next time I was there, I read the instructions more carefully and discovered that they said to put the items in the bin one by one

        • ValentineC5 hours ago
          > Oh, and maybe Decathlon deserve a special mention here for their self-service checkouts. Every item has an RFID price tag usually sown into the care labels of their own-brand products. They don't have a self-scan machine, handheld or otherwise, you just drop everything you picked up into the box, it scans all the RFID tags and makes sure the weight is correct, and it's all done.

          Uniqlo too. I guess it helps that they own their entire manufacturing and retail process.

          • 2 hours ago
            undefined
        • fmajid5 hours ago
          And usually they have a dedicated checkout aisle so you don’t have to wait for the Boomers in front of you to pay in pennies or whatever it is they do to snarl a queue up.
          • ChrisMarshallNY3 hours ago
            Eh. This "Boomer" uses his Apple Watch, usually. I tend to blow through in about five seconds. I usually have the stuff paid for, before the cashier stops ringing them up.

            I deliberately use the manned checkout, because I'm human, and I believe in helping out other humans. That seems to be a "quaint anachronism," these days, but it's the way this old fogey was raised.

            I know that someday, I won't have a choice (Home Depot only has cashiers for contractors, nowadays, so I'm forced to use the auto-checkout), but, where one is given, I take the human.

            Sometimes, I chuckle, as I go through fairly quickly, and see the long line, waiting for the auto-cashiers.

            It's obvious that the only benefit comes to the company. If you aren't just getting a candy bar, then the auto-cashier tends to be slower (mainly because I am a lot slower at that stuff, than the cashier).

      • orangecat6 hours ago
        Self checkout is absolutely more convenient if you're not buying a lot.

        (I find ways to make it worth my while..)

        If that means what it sounds like, congratulations on accelerating the descent to a low-trust society.

        • saulpw5 hours ago
          Blaming this individual for 'accelerating the descent' is like blaming a hobo for catching a ride on a runaway train going downhill. The ensuing trainwreck is already inevitable, at least you can get part of a ride out of it!
          • senordevnyc2 hours ago
            The trainwreck is only "inevitable" (which, incidentally, it isn't, but put that aside for now) because of individuals making choices that benefit them personally at the expense of the common good.
            • saulpwan hour ago
              I agree with everything you're saying, except it's a handful of individuals. The top .000001% are responsible for 90% of the acceleration of the train. You can hardly blame someone for not paying for a tomato.
              • senordevnyc40 minutes ago
                I don’t believe there’s any evidence whatsoever for that, and I refuse to adopt that kind of loser mindset, where the agency of 99.999999% of people don’t matter at all to how our culture and civilization develops.
          • margalabargala5 hours ago
            The trainwreck isn't inevitable, though it's caused by mass theft, or in your analogy too many hobos on the train.
            • jordwest2 hours ago
              It's not at all caused by the train company hiking their fees while neglecting maintenance to increase profit margins to railway shareholders
      • mhb6 hours ago
        > the savings are absorbed by the company, not passed on to the consumer

        How do you come to this conclusion without a deep dive into a supermarket's finances?

        • milesvp2 hours ago
          You don’t need a deep dive to see supermarket consolidation that keeps happening year after year. When there is less competition to drive down prices, it is very safe to say to assume that consumers will get less and less surplus for any change a grocery makes.
      • _jackdk_2 hours ago
        I used to get paid to scan groceries. I have no intention of doing it for the same companies for free.
      • satvikpendem5 hours ago
        I love self checkout, let me scan what I want, not stand in a line with people who seemingly don't know what they're doing or don't have cash or their credit card declines etc.
      • 6 hours ago
        undefined
      • gib4445 hours ago
        > Like all the other versions of this, the savings are absorbed by the company, not passed on to the consumer.

        Grocery stores (at least here in the UK) are notoriously low margin and have been for a long time. I think this is the one sector where savings are indeed passed on to the customer.

        • fmajid5 hours ago
          Tesco (largest U.K. supermarket chain) has a razor-thin 2.23% profit margin.
    • cyclotron3k3 hours ago
      > What the article misses is that money is saved for the company by moving the work to the customer / end user.

      It doesn't miss it. The whole framing of the article is the Dooman Fallacy - an organisation trying to save money by shifting [apparently] menial work to the customer ends up losing more than they save.

    • epolanski5 hours ago
      I never make the mistake to go to places with qr codes twice in my life.

      I can live with giant tablets in fast foods, but there's no chance I go to qr code restaurants ever.

      As the article points out, it's super inconvenient and absolutely breaks the mood for the night and cheapens and ruins the experience.

      Even worse one of my favourite steak houses has removed phone booking and implemented a super slow and inconvenient form.

      Another place that will never get my money again.

      • fmajid5 hours ago
        No web form can ever be worse than doing stuff over the phone like we’re still in the 19th Century.

        I had a Korean colleague who remarked how backward the US is, you have to do everything over the phone, and you lose signal in elevators.

        • gwern3 hours ago
          > No web form can ever be worse than doing stuff over the phone like we’re still in the 19th Century.

          Yes, it can. Last year I challenged a Zoomer to try to order from the local ramen place for pickup. They were in and out in well under a minute, including looking up the phone number on Google Maps, whereas Uber Eats would still be loading... and scrolling... Sorry, updating, please stay tuned... Would you like to sign up for Uber Unlimited? ... [do I need to keep doing the gag] ... selecting... wait where did the list go... wait did the one selection take ... ordering ... you have rewards! ... confirmation ... etc They were shocked how much better the experience was. As compared to [paste number, wait 10s] 'Hello?' 'X Ramen, how can I help you?' 'I'd like A ramen and B ramen and C to go, please, name, Alice and Bob.' 'OK. Goodbye.' Even counting the register swipe on pickup to pay, it's night and day. And that is how a web form can be way worse than doing stuff over the phone, because a web form can just get worse and worse and worse - and they do.

    • DanHulton3 hours ago
      > What the article misses is that money is saved for the company by moving the work to the customer / end user.

      What? No, you're making the Doorman fallacy here, explicitly.

      The company THINKS they're saving money by pushing the work to the customer/end user, but there's more to wait staff than just taking orders and payment - they provide the ability to smooth over any difficulties experienced during the meal, they signal status, etc, which would theoretically allow the restaurant to charge more than if they force customers to do all this work themselves.

      Not to mention, if I had an experience this miserable at a restaurant, I wouldn't be back, which is a direct loss in revenue.

      Restaurants aren't monopolies, except in really extreme cases.

      • senordevnyc2 hours ago
        Someone giving a pretty basic idea a catchy name like the doorman fallacy doesn't mean that any replacement of humans with automation is a net loss for the company. Lots of automation can be very profitable, even if some positive things are lost in the bargain.

        Incidentally, the vast, vast majority of residential buildings don't have doormen, and wouldn't be more profitable by the addition of one.

    • jen206 hours ago
      I don’t know which country you’re in (and don’t disagree with you) but even if the estimate of 30 minutes to shipping labels were accurate, that would still be a net win where I am in Texas - the line at the post office is regularly longer than that.
      • xboxnolifes6 hours ago
        Because staffing can/has be/been reduced since they made it possible for people to print their own labels. They aren't interested in making the queues faster.
        • mhb5 hours ago
          Uh, the queues at the post office have never exactly been fast.
    • darth_avocado6 hours ago
      > that money is saved for the company by moving the work to the customer / end user.

      And somehow things are more expensive than ever. Self checkouts, order at the counter, bussing your own table, assembling your own furniture, filling out your or your pet’s medical history at a hospital, shipping labels (you mentioned this) and so much more. It’s a form of free labor that somehow society is okay with.

      • mhb5 hours ago
        > It’s a form of free labor that somehow society is okay with.

        It's very popular to say this in some places, but wouldn't you expect that the money that businesses are saving when they do this is passed along to the customer in lower prices? Since they're competing with other businesses?

        • darth_avocado5 hours ago
          When your grocery store gets a self checkout, do you see your grocery bills go down? What ends up happening is that the grocery store makes more profit, the other stores notice and they too get rid of self checkouts. Your grocery bill remains the same, you are more inconvenienced but all of their profits go up.
      • sublinear3 hours ago
        When I hear arguments like this I feel compelled to point out that the people running these businesses live in the same world as you.

        I don't know how old you are or if you remember, but the examples you gave used to be the most common sources of complaints, delays, refunds, etc. when the employee would do a shitty job (fairly often). The world of the past really was objectively worse.

        • darth_avocado2 hours ago
          Ahh yes, having someone to wait tables at a restaurant, someone to scan and bag groceries, someone to take your medical history, having furniture already assembled etc. was really objectively worse.
  • thewillowcat6 hours ago
    I would love to pay and manage parking from my phone if the apps actually worked intuitively, but they rarely do. It was easier when all I had to do was have a roll of quarters in my car.
  • irjustin3 hours ago
    I am on the other end of the spectrum.

    I enjoy QR ordering. I dislike talking to people. Upselling me is not a thing. I can take as long as I want. I don't have to flag/bother someone. No one screws it up except me. I see exactly what's on my bill.

    • chowells2 hours ago
      You're describing an interaction with a good server at a good business. (Off of peak hours, if you can take hours and they don'thave anything to say about it.) What do QR codes add except for technical issues?

      I honestly cannot recall the last time a server tried to upsell me with even as much as a "do you want a dessert?". But... I suppose that's selection bias. I only go to restaurants that don't require servers to do that BS. They don't want to do it either, you know?

      • wdrw2 hours ago
        I would not be at all comfortable, with a human server, making them wait while changing my selection multiple times (no I want it with the ginger sauce... no, without... no actually the sesame sauce... no actually I don't even want that dish, I'll take the other one), googling 10 different unusual ingredients while I make these changes, etc. And especially if I'm part of a larger party that shares food, or with kids, makes it all the more complicated. I just... am not ok with the social cost of it, even if a "good server" would be ok with it. (And who says you'll get a "good" one?). Whereas with digital ordering it's literally just zero-cost button clicks. And zero chance of error. I really don't see how it's even comparable, digital ordering is such a step forward. (Obviously not in all settings, like fancy dining, but for the mainstream).
        • Kirby642 hours ago
          > I would not be at all comfortable, with a human server, making them wait while changing my selection multiple times (no I want it with the ginger sauce... no, without... no actually the sesame sauce... no actually I don't even want that dish, I'll take the other one), googling 10 different unusual ingredients while I make these changes, etc.

          You would have to do all of this anyways if you ordered via an app. It’s also not zero cost, especially if you’re having to look up ingredients. A good server could explain what ingredients are without you have to look them up, as well.

          I agree that it can be convenient in that you don’t have to wait for a server to show up to put an order in, but the issues of indecision while ordering are all something you can do before that interaction…

      • irjustin2 hours ago
        I won't fall for it. Been down that road and I'm not going back.
  • gwbas1c6 hours ago
    When a restaurant pushes me to a QR code I now outright say that I find them "insulting."

    Granted, where I live e-menus generally haven't taken off in sit-down restaurants, so it's very easy to push back on nonsense like this.

    • aaulia3 hours ago
      At first I thought you meant QR for payment, which is weird because most people (at least in SEA, where I lived) consider less friction and more convenient than cash or cards.

      But it turns out you meant QR for menu, yes, hate them. Flipping through the menu is better experience overall. Opening menu on a phone is a chore, not to mention most menu web/app is crap. Lots of them are just link to pdf on google drive.

    • joezydeco6 hours ago
      I enjoy the codes. It skips that whole dance we do in the US of waiting for the server to return - twice! - to pick up payment and then drop off the card and receipts. I can sit there as long as I want, pay once, then walk out. And the card has never left my hand.

      What's more nonsense is the author of the article trying to split a check 6 ways and stressing over the fact two people shared a dessert. Sack up, split it roughly or better yet don't split it at all. Good friends return the favor sooner or later. Unless you're a cheapskate.

  • cactacea6 hours ago
    > But when 6 people simultaneously tried to pay their share of the bill, chaos ensued.

    I'm guessing the author has never worked as a server themselves... Is there any part of the world you can have a six top with individual checks when you didn't tell them up front to split the bill? As an American this just seems obvious to me but maybe the expectation is different in Dubai.

    • Jtsummers5 hours ago
      > Is there any part of the world you can have a six top with individual checks when you didn't tell them up front to split the bill?

      Most restaurant point of sales systems in the US handle that pretty well. They put down what seat an item was ordered from, and it covers everything except shared items like appetizers. That's been pretty common for a couple decades, and not just at chains, also at local places (if they had a POS system and weren't doing it with paper still, but good servers know how to notate that well, too).

      • LeifCarrotson5 hours ago
        "They" being the waiter or waitress, of course. Good ones can navigate complex bill splitting arrangements and even better can manage awkward interactions like one person quietly paying for another's dessert or covering an appetizer for the table, know the menu not only by memory but also can recommend dishes that the guest may prefer, and generally make the dining and ordering and paying experience better.

        Bad restaurants think they can replace those skills with a QR code on the table optimized for the lowest common denominator.

    • hoherd3 hours ago
      Before electronic POS systems accounted for this, we'd just split the bill evenly. I didn't like that solution either though because it rewarded people who ordered expensive food or lots of food, and that was never me. I even quit going to lunch with big groups of coworkers because of that.
    • cobbzilla6 hours ago
      I’ve seen rare places where the server has a handheld and every single item is always individually charged. Then they can keep things separate or combine it however you want.

      But, I’ve seen that maybe twice in my entire life. Once might have been in Vegas. Everywhere else is as you say; it’s just not a reasonable post-meal request.

      • cactacea5 hours ago
        Yeah there's a Pho place in Seattle I'd go to lunch at (iykyk) where we'd regularly have 20 people at a table and pay individually. But they didn't even use the check for that, they'd just ask what you had and ring that in as they went around the table with the handheld. Literally the only place I've ever seen that even offered to split a check at a table with more than 3-4 people.
    • chunky19945 hours ago
      Yes, this is quite standard outside the US. In Canada, Mexico, Europe, Asia etc. this is more the standard practice than the opposite.
    • satvikpendem5 hours ago
      It's because we are Americans yes. When I was in Europe the server would give us the handheld payment device and we select which items we ordered and then they'd charge us. The author seems to not have this, the waiter should've gone through themselves. It was simply the wrong technology, not that technology was at fault.
      • fsckboy5 hours ago
        the wrong technology was at fault.
    • arrrg3 hours ago
      In Germany (where this happens frequently and many people expect to be able to pay separately – I don’t like it and we generally don’t handle it that way with friends, but when I’m in the restaurant with coworkers even I wouldn’t dare to stray from orthodoxy) the payment systems seem to be set up for it and enable this in a relatively frictionless way. I remember it being more complicated for everyone involved.

      Basically, waiters have a list with all the items in front of them and you tell them what you had and they pick them. They can then just initiate a normal payment process and leave the rest of the table as is.

      More time consuming and finicky than just someone paying everything all at once, sure, but a well worn and designed user journey you seemingly don’t have to torture those devices into making possible.

      In fact, I will often be extremely apologetic when saying I want to split the bill but have noticed no eye rolls or complaints from waiters. It’s just smooth sailing. I do honestly think that was different when waiters had to do math and cross out things on bills and stuff (which I distinctly remember from my childhood/youth in the 2000s).

    • ginko5 hours ago
      >Is there any part of the world you can have a six top with individual checks when you didn't tell them up front to split the bill?

      Not uncommon here in Norway. I had payday beers with well over ten people where there was a shared tab with people paying for their stuff as they leave.

    • PufPufPuf5 hours ago
      Europe. You just walk to the register and point out the items you want to pay for. I've never seen a place where paying for a group of 6 separately would be a problem, it's the default and expected.
      • cwnyth4 hours ago
        Europe is a continent. In all the countries I've been to in Europe, the service was indistinguishable from that in the US, where the bill is brought to the table and paid there. Can you be more specific as to what country's restaurants do people normally walk up to a register after eating?
  • beej71an hour ago
    When I order from the app and my robot delivers the food and I pay with my QR code, what's the customary tip?
  • paxys3 hours ago
    The real fallacy is your assumption that the business doesn’t expect the hit in customer experience. In reality they have thought about the consequence and made the conscious decision to not care.
    • dylan6042 hours ago
      Alamo Draft House recently-ish lost the plot. They were famous for being very anti-phone. They have now switched their food/drink service to on your device which means you have to use your phone during the movie which is precisely why I preferred to go there. You also report someone using their phone by using your phone. They even acknowledge this with a "we recognize the irony" slide during their "this is a phone free environment" segment.
  • drpotato2 hours ago
    > Is digital nomad

    > Lives in Dubai

    > Complains about businesses increasing profits

    Ok, anyway…

  • ivan8885 hours ago
    Going to "modernized" restaurants is just a drag. I don't want to touch your tablet or scan your code. I much prefer the restaurants which only accept cash
  • senordevnyc6 hours ago
    I get the QR code menu thing, that’s a solid example imo (though there ARE benefits to QR code menus), but the people hassling with their phones to extend their parking, or paying for their portion of the meal via QR code doesn’t sound at all like the doorman fallacy, just a shitty UI.

    Without tech, these people would not have been notified that their parking would expire in the first place, and would have all had to leave the restaurant to extend their parking. Is that really better?

    And splitting the bill among six people is an age old hassle that definitely has gotten better with tech at places who have a good UI for handling it.

    • AndrewDucker6 hours ago
      Agreed.

      Generally, with QR menus I'm used to paying when we order. No need for secondary processes or worrying about something not being paid for.

    • fmobus6 hours ago
      A popular solution in my country, at least for less formal restaurants and bars (and even nightclubs) is for each customer to have their own tab, which gets marked by waiters and stays with the customer. In those places, it's also the norm that you pay your tab at the cashier prior to leaving, and waiters don't have to handle with money.
  • quantified6 hours ago
    We underestimate how valuable and useful the "technology" of a human really is.
  • raldi6 hours ago
    To me this sounds more like the Icarus Fallacy: "The lesson of isn't don't fly close to the sun, it's make better fucking wings."
  • senordevnyc2 hours ago
    The more I think about it, the more dumb the premise of this "fallacy" sounds.

    I lived in a doorman building in NYC for almost a decade. It's great!

    It's also really expensive to have your building entrance staffed 24/7, which is why the vast majority of buildings do not have a doorman, and you'll pay quite a bit more for one that does. It's a luxury.

    And literally anyone who has ever lived in a doorman building knows that approximately 2% of the value is that they can open the door for you. No one who is deciding whether to employ doormen is making their decision based on whether there's a cheaper way to open the door.

    There might be a fallacy here beyond "sometimes automation isn't worth it", but doormen are a terrible example of it, given that probably 99.999% of buildings do not have doormen, and wouldn't be better off financially if they did.

    • zeroonetwothree18 minutes ago
      Isn’t it a hotel in the original version? Doormen for nicer hotels seem very common
  • _3u105 hours ago
    Why I prefer Asuncion to Dubai in a nutshell.

    Chauffeur / Valet > parking apps

    Maids > dishwashers, laundry, roomba, cooking

    Fixers > everything else

  • ambicapter5 hours ago
    Soul-less money-oriented behavior in Dubai? Color me shocked.
  • simianwords6 hours ago
    People have now clung on to doorman's fallacy as a way to justify keeping outdated jobs around.

    There should be a new fallacy named for this phenomenon otherwise we would have people justifying having travel agents jobs and translator jobs being protected.

    • zeroonetwothree18 minutes ago
      Have you ever used a travel agent?
    • 3-cheese-sundae5 hours ago
      I am curious to hear why you believe those roles don't provide any value.
      • senordevnyc2 hours ago
        lol, they didn't say that!

        A job can provide lots of value and still be worth automating overall. There's a reason almost no buildings have doorman, the only places where you can't pump your gas are because there's a legal prohibition, and essentially no elevator operators exist anymore.

    • epolanski5 hours ago
      I absolutely love waiters in any decent restaurant.

      You can ask they waiter what's good on the menu, or what's the restaurant specialty or just what was delivered in the day and thus fresh, and it's a completely different experience.

  • redsocksfan455 hours ago
    [dead]
  • Ozzie-D2 hours ago
    [flagged]
  • debo_3 hours ago
    > This past Saturday, six of us had an impromptu brunch after our morning yoga class.

    The jokes just write themselves.

  • jcoletti6 hours ago
    I agree, but multiple people can scan a QR code simultaneously.
    • mhb5 hours ago
      Or the place could go to the extraordinary expense of putting multiple cards on the table with the codes.
    • cyclotron3k2 hours ago
      This article doesn't land for me. The author complains about having to scan the code in sequence, but overlooks the fact that a waiter/waitress/till can only serve one person at time. And as you say, multiple people can scan a QR code, _and_ it would be trivial to print more.

      Maybe I missed the point, but the aside about parking metres seems irrelevant. Just makes me think this is an anti-technology rant.

      And again, the gripe about splitting up the bill. Not only is that a problem with existing systems, it's a problem that is solved by QR codes (if implemented correctly).

    • mcphage6 hours ago
      > multiple people can scan a QR code simultaneously

      If it's large enough, and posted in a place where people sitting around a table can all see it clearly.

      • jcoletti6 hours ago
        I'm just always surprised when people place their entire phone over the code, thinking it needs to fill the screen, when they scan pretty well from a couple feet away.
  • MelonUsk6 hours ago
    You’re the demo version of the ultimate tech:

    You create worlds in your sleep, anything magically appears in front of you - it’s called imagination

    The only limit is:

    We cannot recall the whole NYC and our imagination is a single-player experience

    You cannot invite your buddy for a tea party in your mind

    The ultimate tech is the ethical sim multiverse (think BCI Airpods + growing multiversal Web) to have multiversal memories, imagination and dreams

    And you are a walking demo version of it