Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Transportation United States

Kroger Will Use Autonomous Vehicles To Deliver Groceries (theverge.com) 110

Posted by BeauHD from the come-and-get-it dept.
Starting this fall, Kroger will partner with driverless car company Nuro to deliver groceries using its autonomous vehicles. The Verge reports: A pilot will be rolled out to a yet-to-be-announced city later this fall. To start out, Nuro will use a fleet of self-driving test vehicles with human safety drivers to make deliveries for Kroger's grocery stores. Customers can track and interact with the vehicles via a Nuro app or Kroger's pre-existing online delivery platform. But if Nuro's human test drivers don't get out to help you, don't be mad because in our driverless future, we all need to pitch in and unload our own groceries.

Nuro is still tweaking its user experience, but for now it will go something like this: customers can place an order through Kroger's online delivery portal or using Nuro's forthcoming app. Kroger workers will load the items into Nuro's temperature-controlled compartments, at which point the vehicle will drive autonomously to its destination. Customers can track the vehicle throughout the trip using the app, and once it arrives, will need to meet the vehicle at the curb or in their driveway -- in other words, no more door-to-door service. They can use either a PIN code or some other verification system to retrieve their delivery. Nuro was reportedly working on a facial recognition system, but has since tabled that.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Kroger Will Use Autonomous Vehicles To Deliver Groceries More

Kroger Will Use Autonomous Vehicles To Deliver Groceries

Comments Filter:
  • We still see stories about driverless not fully being there yet. I know this is them trying to compete with Amazon and get this out earlier, but it seems weird to be ready to go ahead and start sending driverless cars (with safety riders, I know) all around at people's orders.

    • Re:Driverless trust (Score:5, Insightful)

      by hazardPPP ( 4914555 ) on Friday June 29, 2018 @05:46AM (#56864314)

      but it seems weird to be ready to go ahead and start sending driverless cars (with safety riders, I know) all around at people's orders.

      It's even stranger that a driverless vehicle that is transporting only *things* would be tested with a safety driver...I think I've seen companies developing, from scratch, driverless delivery vehicles that are never intended to carry a human inside. This makes sense for a lot of reasons.

      Autonomous cars that transport people must satisfy two major safety requirements: 1) not kill or injure the people they are transporting and 2) not kill or injure other people on the road.

      With delivery vehicles, you only really have to worry about number 2). That should make the job significantly easier. You don't have to have some sort of AI "ethics" that has to judge whether to protect the people in the car or the people outside the car, it can always just "sacrifice itself". Drive over a bridge to avoid hitting a pedestrian? OK.

      Furthermore, cars that don't have to carry people are simpler to design structurally...they don't have to protect the passengers in case of a crash for example. These things can also be slower. Limit them to say 30 km/h, just schedule the deliveries properly, and you reduce a lot of potential for accidents. Etc.

      So testing things first with a safety driver seems pointless, i.e. it's basically development of the wrong type of vehicle.

      • Alright, I should've read TFA first...but hey, this is Slashdot. Nuro is the company developing the driverless, passengerless, never-intended-for-a-human delivery cars I was thinking about. Which makes it even stranger why they are doing a different class of self-driving vehicle with a safety driver first.

      • Safety (Score:3)

        by sjbe ( 173966 )

        With delivery vehicles, you only really have to worry about number 2). That should make the job significantly easier.

        The majority of failure modes where a car kills its occupants also apply to killing individuals outside the vehicle. This includes vehicle to vehicle collisions, loss of control (traction), failure to recognize obstacles, insufficient time to react, other driver's unpredictable actions, and more. While you are correct that it does take some failure modes off the table, most of them still remain in some form or fashion.

        You don't have to have some sort of AI "ethics" that has to judge whether to protect the people in the car or the people outside the car, it can always just "sacrifice itself".

        That presumes it has sufficient situational awareness to make that possible. There is n

        • A car with a very lightweight collapsible frame -- so collapsible that it'd allow any occupants to be killed easily, imagine a car that practically disintegrates on impact -- is also the car least likely to kill someone it hits. Typical Americans in their SUVs and pickups might hardly notice the bump from the 60 MPH collision. Even if such a driverless vehicle gets into significantly more accidents than human drivers, it could be considered safer if those accidents are much less likely to hurt anyone.

          • A car with a very lightweight collapsible frame -- so collapsible that it'd allow any occupants to be killed easily, imagine a car that practically disintegrates on impact -- is also the car least likely to kill someone it hits.

            That has precisely nothing to do with the problems of navigating any vehicle safely which is the primary issue in driverless cars. The question is how to develop a car that can safely navigate around humans without involving humans in the process. The crash worthiness of a vehicle is an almost entirely separate issue.

      • You don't have to have some sort of AI "ethics"

        You don't need AI ethics anyway. Just have the car follow the rules of the road, and use appropriate speed for the visibility so that it will not cause an accident.

      • The issue is, what if it doesn't SEE the pedestrian? What if it drives off a bridge to avoid a pedestrian, hits a train, and derails it? It's still a 3000 lb hunk of steel moving at significant speed, regardless of what it's carrying.

      • Autonomous cars that transport people must satisfy two major safety requirements: 1) not kill or injure the people they are transporting and 2) not kill or injure other people on the road.

        You missed the Third Law: 3) An Autonomous Car must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

        • You missed the Third Law: 3) An Autonomous Car must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

          And the 0th law: An Autonomous Car must protect the profits of the owner corporation above everything.

          For example, if the lawsuit due to hitting some pedestrian is expected to cost less than the cost of not delivering the cargo, well, too bad for the pedestrian...

  • It will be interesting to watch (Score:5, Interesting)

    by TomGreenhaw ( 929233 ) on Friday June 29, 2018 @05:31AM (#56864268)
    I wonder how many failed deliveries they will have when people don't come outside to unload their own groceries.

    • The main issue will be with people who are ordering their groceries online because they have a disability or sickness which is preventing them from going out. Such people will need to switch to driverfull delivery stores (if some continue to exist), or hire custom services for it.

    • Re:It will be interesting to watch (Score:5, Funny)

      by religionofpeas ( 4511805 ) on Friday June 29, 2018 @08:38AM (#56864942)

      It will come with an ejector mechanism to dump all your groceries over the fence, or in your driveway. And then a legal fight with UPS will ensue because they've patented that mechanism.

    • Exactly this. I have used a grocery delivery service before. I did so because I was extremely busy, and didn't have room in my schedule to go to the grocery store. I'd get home, and there would be my groceries - including frozen items a milk, kept cold with dry ice. I didn't have time to set aside to help the delivery person unload them, but I didn't have to - that was part of the service. And the whole damned reason I used the service in the first place.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Octorian ( 14086 )

      Or because the car couldn't find the person's house.

      I've lost track of how many times I've had human delivery people (usually ones from gig-economy delivery jobs) who couldn't find my house. Then again, I've never lived in a hard-to-find place, and Google Maps never had trouble providing usable directions. So maybe, this will actually be an improvement.

  • Loader Robots (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mentil ( 1748130 ) on Friday June 29, 2018 @05:56AM (#56864352)

    People who are handicapped or otherwise unable to unload groceries may be unable to use this, although I expect there'll be an option to pay extra for a human to unload the groceries for you. Eventually there'll be an unloader robot inside the van, which can also load the van (rather than having a human load it). Endpoint tasks will be the killer app for robots, which are normally stuck in warehouses and factories; since if you have a human driver you might as well just pay that human to do the task at the endpoint, i.e. pay a professional to also drive there. Once we have fully-automated go-there-and-do-something systems, that can replace a huge swath of human jobs normally not considered for automation (plumbers etc.)

    • This presumes Kroger survives. It's now caught in the middle of wanting to be a cross between Walmart and Amazon, and they're not doing well at either.

      They're caught in the middle of a waning UX experience they botched, along with a curb-side service that's killing them with overhead. They're raised prices far, far beyond inflation, and their customers know it, and are seeking alternatives in droves.

      In my area, they're an accidental monopoly, and are milking it for all they're worth. Autonomous vehicles hav

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Nidi62 ( 1525137 )

        They're caught in the middle of a waning UX experience they botched, along with a curb-side service that's killing them with overhead. They're raised prices far, far beyond inflation, and their customers know it, and are seeking alternatives in droves.

        In my area I have a Publix, Kroger, Sprouts, and Sam's. I'll go to Sam's for bulk meat and the cheap gas, but in general Kroger beats all of them price wise. Although right now they are reorganizing my regular store so it's almost impossible to find anything there.

        • You're really lucky. The only competition in my area are boutique markets, a miserable food co-op, farmers markets, and yes, there's a Sam's + Walmart, but they're far away and also lacking any reasonable competitors. I drive to a major city periodically, nearby, and stock up. Around where I live, they've boosted prices 10-50%+ and lowered nothing, with bizarre supply chain mistakes, product shortages, and botched loss leaders.

          Wall Street has been punishing Kroger, and with good reason. I applaud them for w

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Nidi62 ( 1525137 )
            Now that I think about it, within about 5 miles of my house I have 3 Krogers, 3 Publix, Sam's, BJs, a new Costco opening up, 2 Aldis, Sproouts, Target, and 2 Walmarts (Target/Walmart I don't even consider "grocery stores"). And I am on the outskirts of a major metro area.

      • Kroger owns dozens of differently branded store chains that are doing different things, and continues to make billions of dollars a year profit. Being the third largest retailer in the world and seeing a minor decrease in how fast the buckets of metaphorical gold come pouring in is not a dire situation.

      • What's a "Kroger"? The last time there was a Kroger store in my area, they had to tear it down after a dinosaur damaged it.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Octorian ( 14086 )

          Its a name my in-laws spout 20 times whenever talking about any sort of grocery shopping activities. I'm starting to think its the only store they've ever heard of in the past decade.
          (Of course they don't live in the same state as me, so I've never seen one.)

          • But you’ve probably shopped at one of their stores; they own a lot of different marques. Last time I checked, they had integrated their loyalty programs across all their stores, so you can use your phone number registered with King Soopers to shop at Ralphs or Harris Teeter, should you choose. It’s a big company.

    • Once we have fully-automated go-there-and-do-something systems, that can replace a huge swath of human jobs normally not considered for automation (plumbers etc.)

      Being a plumber is probably multiple orders of magnitude more difficult than being a delivery driver, even if you count putting groceries away in the kitchen.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mentil ( 1748130 )

        A plumberbot that can do 100% of what a human plumber can, I agree completely. However, a plumberbot that can only unclog drains could put half the plumbers in a city out of business.

    • Plumbers, at least those that work in non-factory built structures (i.e. those not mass-produced and standardized) may just be the ones to hold their jobs longer than anyone else, other than tort attorneys and politicians.

  • Starting this fall, Kroger will partner with driverless car company Nuro to deliver groceries using its autonomous vehicles.

    Anyone want to take the bet that this is nothing more than a me-too promotional stunt by a company feeling threatened by Amazon combined with a startup with no revenue trying to make themselves seem bigger than they are? How exactly is Kroger going to make money doing this since groceries are not exactly a high margin business to begin with and now they have to split profits with another company on the delivery? And hands up if you have ever actually heard of this partner company Nuro before this articl

    • hands up if you have ever actually heard of this partner company Nuro before this article

      I've never heard of "Kroger" before this article either. What's your point?

  • Autonomous horse (Score:3, Interesting)

    by GerryHattrick ( 1037764 ) on Friday June 29, 2018 @06:08AM (#56864378)
    When I was young, the smartly-uniformed milkman delivered all sorts of things up and down the garden path, and while he was doing that the bored horse moved the milk-float (some yards behind it) to align with the next house that had regular orders. People forget what was possible in a less techno-mad world.

    • When I was young, the smartly-uniformed milkman delivered all sorts of things up and down the garden path, and while he was doing that the bored horse moved the milk-float (some yards behind it) to align with the next house that had regular orders. People forget what was possible in a less techno-mad world.

      What I don't get is what is the point of having an autonomous vehicle if it has to have a human chaperone? Why doens't the human just drive the vehicle?

      • So the paid employees have to both drive and deliver the groceries? You want to overwork them to death or what?

      • You can hire people with fewer skills to do that job. You might take it for granted that not everyone knows how to drive or necessarily came from somewhere where most of the population owns automobiles. If Europe hopes to integrate their growing immigrant population, they're going to need for those people to have jobs and to be out in society.

        Some of those people are very low skill and a lack of language proficiency may remove other job opportunities as well. This type of job almost seems like a perfect

        • You can hire people with fewer skills to do that job. You might take it for granted that not everyone knows how to drive or necessarily came from somewhere where most of the population owns automobiles. If Europe hopes to integrate their growing immigrant population, they're going to need for those people to have jobs and to be out in society. Some of those people are very low skill and a lack of language proficiency may remove other job opportunities as well. This type of job almost seems like a perfect match for someone who lacks most vocational skills and doesn't yet have a strong grasp of the local language. It might not seem like much to you or I, but it's something.

          This person will have to take over at a moment's notice, likely in a hazardous situation. I'd think they would need to know how to drive.

      • They need the human to put the blame on when the technology fails.

    • When I was young, the smartly-uniformed milkman delivered all sorts of things up and down the garden path, and while he was doing that the bored horse moved the milk-float (some yards behind it) to align with the next house that had regular orders.

      "When you were young"? Since milk delivery by horse hasn't happened since the 1940s I think you are making shit up or you are the only 80 year old on this site.

      People forget what was possible in a less techno-mad world.

      Just because they had cruder technology doesn't mean they were less enthusiastic about what they had.

      • "When you were young"? Since milk delivery by horse hasn't happened since the 1940s I think you are making shit up or you are the only 80 year old on this site.

        Yes, because everybody in the whole world moved from horses to electric milk carts at exactly the same time you did.

  • This will never happen. There will always be a human "backup" driver. Autonomous driving is a joke. You can get 90% there, but the 10% probably never will be doable.
    • This actually might be a viable use case in the near term.

      They will only support delivery on well understood pretested routes when weather conditions are safe. The ethical and legal challenges on accident avoidance are easy - you alway sacrifice the groceries. Making unnecessary emergency stops isn't an issue without passengers so the system can play it safe.

      I think it's a great idea to perfect the technology with no risk to passengers.

    • The only solution is to avoid the problem of self-driving cars on roads designed for humans.

      That's why we need to upgrade all the cities and towns on the planet to include standardized delivery tubes for shipping goods and monorails for moving people around. Hey, it worked in Futurama!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AHuxley ( 892839 )
      Think of getting agenda the different UK tax rates.
      No road tax, congestion charge. The cost of power.
      An autonomous van arrives and the robot arm places the shopping in your forecourt.
      • Think about being coherent.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AHuxley ( 892839 )
          Think about mapping the road to every new customer using a human with video the first time. That would avoid all the direction trouble. Then the computer knows for all later delivery requests. From a central location with the goods, down a set of roads, down a lane to a home. The powerful robot arm would be very careful with the bags.
          A human could even watch over the van placing the bags CCTV style. Guide the arm into the van and ensure the bag was the correct one and the area around the van was clear
    • Never is an absolute, Use absolutes and you are almost certainly wrong. In this case, it makes you sound like someone scoffing at the Wright brothers. That last ten percent will come along sooner or later, probably sooner, but that won't be the end of it either. It will keep getting even better so long as there is any economic incentive for it to do so.

  • Until 20 years ago, a horse-drawn cart carrying fresh produce from a nearby village would come into town about twice a week, people new the old guy and waited for him... so I guess the business model is sound.

    • Houses used to have "Milk Chutes" where delivery men had a safe place to leave dairy deliveries. I wonder if they will make a comeback?

    • Is he new or is he an old guy? Make up your mind!

    • How on earth is the past making a comeback as a result of this?

      In the UK we've had deliveries from supermarkets via internet shopping for ages now. I'm pretty sure I remember using Tesco in about 2004 or so and it wasn't new then. I found this article from 1998 indicating it was being tested then, and in some cases rolled out nationwide:

      https://www.independent.co.uk/... [independent.co.uk]

  • Until we solve the mystery of how biological brains produce the phenomenon of self-awareness and true cognition, none of these so-called 'deep learning algorithms' will ever be able to function on the level of a human brain because they are fundamentally incapable of 'thinking' at all; your dog or cat is smarter than these so-called 'self driving cars'. Therefore all such vehicles will ultimately fail at being practical and/or will pose constant safety hazards to human life.
    • Plenty of stuff is dumber than a cat and still quite useful. E.g. a programmable thermostat. A car is a little harder than a thermostat, but still far less than a dog.

    • all such vehicles will ultimately fail at being practical and/or will pose constant safety hazards to human life.

      All human-driven vehicles already pose constant safety hazards to human life.

      • I really don't give a fuck, that's no different than it's already been, and some simple reforms will fix that problem: bring back driver ed/driver training in highschools, revamp DMV knowledge/skills testing of license applicants, re-test drivers more often, revoke the licenses of chronically bad drivers. No need for dystopian futures where souless machines that can't even think and don't know the fundamental difference between a living being and an inanimate object dispassionately kill us, and then there's

    • Something cannot be *fundamentally* impossible *until* a certain event, unless you have a very strange definition of "fundamentally"

      • Please go be pedantic and nit-picky somewhere else, I have no interest in enabling your obsessive-compulsiveness.

        • It's not nit picky. It's a demonstration of your pervasive sloppy thinking.

          Even if we remove the word 'fundamentally' it makes no sense. Human brains developed from non-thinking species by a bunch of small random changes that slightly improved survival, without anybody being there to understand the mystery of biological brains.

          • Careful; you put your pseudo-intellectual nose too far in the air, you might suffer oxygen deprivation. xD

            Human brains capable of self-awareness and cognition developed over millions of years, and you really think that in just a few years we're going to develop machines comparable to that? LOL, not sure if you're as much of an arrogant ass as you sound, or if you're just a fool and are indulging in 'magical thinking'.
  • " . . . in our driverless future, we all need to pitch in and unload our own groceries." At least until Mr. Roboto, some future Asimo, is ready to take over that little chore. Of course, he's probably going to expect a tip. Come to that, this delivery cart might want one, too.

  • Now with more “web” and “van”. I remember seeing those Webvan vans everywhere in the Bay Area. Might actually work this time since it’s not a company that has to build the full logistic infrastructure from the ground up.

Slashdot Top Deals

The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility. And vice versa.

Close