> A few places have been switching to using those robots on wheels to run food to tables.

Is this not just a gimmick? You still need people on hand to take over if the robot has an issue, I don't see how it would reduce labour costs.

▲

DaSHacka 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Is this not just a gimmick? You still need people on hand to take over if the robot has an issue, I don't see how it would reduce labour costs.

"take over IF the robot has an issue" is exactly how it reduces labor costs.

2020: 10 waiters, waiting tables. You're on the hook for each of their salaries.

2030: 10 robots, one human waiter passively overseeing the cluster. You're on the hook for minor parts/occasional repair for the robots, and one person's salary.

Its not about a 100% staff elimination, but a large overhead reduction ensuring the few humans you're keeping around are more efficient overall for dollars generated in revenue versus the all-human staff before.

Plus, in certain cases, like kiosks replacing cashiers at fast food establishments, there's now one less qualification needed from employees (good social skills), increasing the pool of acceptable options you can hire where before some of those candidates would have been unsuitable for the job.

▲

preg_match 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Wait staff already makes two bucks an hour in the US. It’s basically as cheap as cheap labor gets. It will take a while, and very cheap robotics, to make robot waiters worth it financially.

▲

rightbyte 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

How about just handing out plates over the counter to the customers. But then again McDonalds have table service now so what do I know.

▲

SoftTalker 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You're on the hook for more than a supervisor. Depreciation, financing, or lease payments on the robots is a big one.

And what do the robots do? Wheel the food to the table, where the customers then need to reach for the plates and pass them around? Not a great experience. Or actually set the plate in front of each diner, without dumping it, like a human waiter does? Much more sophisticated and expensive robot.

	▲	danaris 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Indeed; it seems like the market niche for this would be relatively small. It's not fast food, because customers pick up their own food from the counter there. Ditto with fast casual. Fine dining restaurants would see huge drops in business if they tried to replace human wait staff with robots. (Unless they're already doing some kind of futuristic theming.) So you're targeting low-end table-service restaurants...to replace their below-minimum-wage wait staff (remember, tipped minimum wage is something like $2.30 federally) with robots that don't get tips, do require a hefty up-front investment and nontrivial maintenance costs, probably a subscription with the company that sells them, and are likely to have a lot of problems especially for the early adopters—things like dropping meals, crashing into tables, crashing into customers, running over toes, purses, and small children... This really seems like it's something that's going to work for a few gimmicks, but not in any widespread manner within the foreseeable future.

▲

Jtarii 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Okay so you go to a restaurant, who takes your order? The robot? Does it have a touchscreen like in mcdonalds were everyone has to spend 2 minutes awkwardly mashing the screen. Then the robot brings you the plates, then you have to put your own plates on the table, then how do you signal that you are ready to pay? Does every table have a button that you press to summon the robot again? Then you have to put your plates back on the robot?

Who the fuck would go to a restaurant like this.

▲

deepwoods 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The demand for food delivery in the places where the robots are viable is nearly infinite. My city has had them for two years and there are still just as many humans doing deliveries, they are just sharing the already-crowded sidewalks with robots.

I don't use them; not because of any moral objection, but because they can't come inside buildings. The whole point of food delivery is to avoid going outside. Most human couriers come directly to your unit. The food delivery companies have spoiled us too much, and we are not ready to return to a world where you have to put on shoes to get food. Oddly, the delivery robots are probably better suited to suburbia, where folks are used to answering the front door to pick up a food delivery. But the distances involved aren't viable until you have delivery Waymos that can move at highway speeds.

▲

qlte 5 hours ago | parent [-]

They're seemingly talking about a motorized platform inside a restaurant delivering to "the table" not those door to door delivery robots you drop food inside that drive on the sidewalk.

	▲	deepwoods 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Ah, I see. A Lazy Susan isn't exactly cutting-edge tech, but you can't argue with the results.

▲

shellfishgene 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It seems in China hotels commonly have robots deliver room service meals. I guess it makes sense, the building is not too hard to navigate for a robot, and it would take a worker 3+ minutes for each delivery. I thought it was maybe a gimmick, but it seems >30% of hotels have them now.

https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202609/10/WS6aa122a5e4b06d4a...