> From an interview with Kurt Vonnegut in the November 1995 issue of Inc. Technology. Vonnegut was asked to discuss his feelings about living in an increasingly computerized world.
>> I work at home, and if I wanted to, I could have a computer right by my bed, and I'd never have to leave it. But I use a typewriter, and afterward I mark up the pages with a pencil. Then I call up this woman named Carol out in Woodstock and say, “Are you still doing typing?” Sure she is, and her husband is trying to track bluebirds out there and not having much luck, and so we chitchat back and forth, and I say, “Okay, I'll send you the pages.” Then I go down the steps and my wife calls, “Where are you going?” “Well,” I say, “I'm going to buy an envelope.” And she says, “You're not a poor man. Why don't you buy a thousand envelopes? They'll deliver them, and you can put them in the closet.” And I say, “Hush.” So I go to this newsstand across the street where they sell magazines and lottery tickets and stationery. I have to get in line because there are people buying candy and all that sort of thing, and I talk to them. The woman behind the counter has a jewel between her eyes, and when it's my turn, I ask her if there have been any big winners lately. I get my envelope and seal it up and go to the postal convenience center down the block at the corner of Forty-seventh Street and Second Avenue, where I'm secretly in love with the woman behind the counter. I keep absolutely poker-faced; I never let her know how I feel about her. One time I had my pocket picked in there and got to meet a cop and tell him about it. Anyway, I address the envelope to Carol in Woodstock. I stamp the envelope and mail it in a mailbox in front of the post office, and I go home. And I've had a hell of a good time. I tell you, we are here on Earth to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you any different.
In reality, this man of privilege bounds into the store on a cloud of positivity, only to be met by the sullen face behind the counter, 12 hours into a double shift on a day that she wasn't even supposed to be here. At the Postal Convenience Center, the object of his affection barely registers his presence because she is fears going home to her abusive boyfriend who is probably halfway in the bag already. When the letter arrives at Woodstock, Carol has to go through the painstaking trouble of scanning in his chicken scratch, and she'll spend the weekend fixing that which OCR cannot unearth.
The whimsy of Vonnegut betrays the truth that too many of us suffer from too little time in the day to create genuine, shareable moments with one another. Technology can help beat back that tide by simplifying the tedious, and little by little, we may find ourselves making time to be more present in our everyday lives.
> When did laundry and cooking and doing work at home cease to be a social function and instead move into the sphere of "work"?
Do you realize that you're basically implying that housewifes were chilling at home while their husbands were doing the real work? Home work has always been real work, but us men didn't really feel it before we had to do more of it due to gender equality.
housework is indeed real work, real labor. But post-industrialized societies have worked to strip joy from all chores. The idea of of a housewife is a good example of this — A woman alone in a house cooking for another person, cleaning a vast amount of things that endlessly collect dirt. So long as we don't reach the singularity there will be chores to do, mouths to feed and things to clean. Is it easier to spend all our waking hours devising "technologies" to "simplify" life or is it easier to re-evaluate what a simple life is and embrace that labor is a part of life.
Definitively devising technologies. I don't envy my great-grandparents lives in their pre-industrialized society. The idea that chores were generally a joyful activity sounds like rose-colored glasses to me. And the idea of the housewife is much, much older than industrialization.
And, now, we've traded that for an economic reality where having one person stay at home to mind the house/family/etc. is simply economically infeasible without significant compromises for most families (and one-income families, by extension, are pushed to make those compromises without option).
Don't confuse the two issues here – the ability to let one person stay home, in a traditional 2-parent household was a great thing. Expecting that to always be done and always be a woman was terrible and sexist.
But, now, are we really saying the "liberated housewives" are any more free? They're even more constrained by the need to earn a paycheck so that their families can remain at the same level as their parents or grandparents were able to achieve on one income. Yes, they're on closer (but not equal) footing with men, but I don't think I'd really say we've increased the freedom of anyone here.
Things that I am forced to do, I do not consider "free time", although for some reason anti-technologists like to consider at-home labor to be "free time", so they can make it look like pre-industrialization people had less work than we do today.
That said, with every passing year there is measurably less stuff that I have to waste time doing, mostly thanks to the power of the internet.
The question I'm trying to raise is why we consider all the little things necessary for living to be a "waste of time."
There's a sad irony in the image of first world citizen who can't waste time cooking so they consume large amounts highly processed ready-made food from places like trader joe's and sits down to watch Game of Thrones for three hours and browse pinterest.
>There's a sad irony in the image of first world citizen who can't waste time cooking so they consume large amounts highly processed ready-made food from places like trader joe's and sits down to watch Game of Thrones for three hours and browse pinterest.
Alternatively, I don't waste time cooking and instead spend that time eating with friends at a restaurant and not having anyone burdened by the cleanup afterwards (well except for the staff paid to do so).
strictly speaking, the only thing that's necessary is for me to have food in my stomach. A lot of people enjoy cooking (and I have the luxury of being able to do so with close friends sometimes), but there's little point in romanticizing me heating some water and pouring in pasta in a bowl when I'm by myself. As others have said, a lot of people don't have the luxury of being able to make i.e. cooking and cleaning a social activity.
Beyond the whole socio-economic "guy/gal working 2 jobs" thing (Why do we think working 2 full-time jobs solely to survive is OK?!) , there's even the "person who doesn't really have many friends at the moment". I know some people who find themselves in such situations after moving to a different country for example.
As for things like cleaning, I think the meta-solution to that is to live in a small place and not own many things. Gives me more time to watch game of thrones (or browse HN ;))
I'll ask you a simple question - Do you have to work to eat and have a shelter? Well technologically we are advanced enough to feed 10 billion people and provide free shelter to everyone on earth. The amount India's prime minister spend on his campaign could educate every Indian child for free!
Due to a broken governance model that the world uses, we have poverty; technology is already advanced enough that most of us don't even need a job. Humanity is producing enough for everyone's need (but not greed, like gandhi said) but we haven't a fair distribution. Getting a job is our way of distribution of wealth.
Some argue that the washing machine was the greatest invention of the industrial revolution[1], because it freed up the time traditionally spent by half the worlds population to do more productive tasks, such as learn to read.
Female literacy levels is a good leading indicator of social and economic development[2].
Doing laundry and cooking is life maintainance, it isn't life. I'd rather spend more time driving a car than lubing and fixing it, and I'd rather spend more time doing shit that I want to do than doing annoying stuff that is just necessary to keep me going.
The research and development of VR headsets requires a vast system of consumption from the mines required for precious metals to the logistics systems required for transporting components to refining petroleum products used in the manufacturing of these products.
"The whimsy of Vonnegut betrays the truth that too many of us suffer from too little time in the day to create genuine, shareable moments with one another." - Is this an absolute truth? Maybe the point is that we should work towards having more of this whimsical time, instead of submitting to the unnatural bustle of modern life and pressing buttons for more fucking laundry detergent.
No existential truth is absolute. Vonnegut's position of privilege at the time of the writing certainly provided him with a better ability to revel in the finer things life has to offer. Not everyone in this world of ours is lucky enough to have this luxury.
I disagree that modern life is somehow unnatural or participating in it requires some form of submission. Providing for our needs in a more convenient fashion is one of the pillars of civilization.
So according to your logic, a person requires a level of success approximately on par with a Vonnegut to appreciate an errand to the post office? Anyone significantly less successful than him can't consider the possibility of a leisurely stroll?
I understand that not everyone in this world has the luxury of free time, but if one has the ability to shop on Amazon, making time away from work and the internet is almost definitely an option. It's thinking like that which will hurtle us towards an Idiocracy-like reality.
> The whimsy of Vonnegut betrays the truth that too many of us suffer from too little time in the day to create genuine, shareable moments with one another.
Except that so many of those genuine moments can't be created with any sort of precision. They happen exactly because they are outside of what was planned.
We suffer from a lack of time because we have too much crap planned or demanded of us. Abstracting away all the small things sounds wonderful, but it's exactly that pursuit of efficiency above all else that is killing us.
That's a neat quote. I read it in Harper's back in 1996 and it has really stuck with me.
I feel like it describes some of my days pretty well. But another part of me thinks he's writing from a very privileged position, and doesn't (want to) recognize it.
Indeed. The implication that everyone could be 'farting around' and still have an internet-using, nuclear-war-avoiding, space-traveling society is inaccurate. That's not to say everyone always has to do difficult work. But sometimes some people do and they should be celebrated for doing that hard part.
> Indeed. The implication that everyone could be 'farting around' and still have an internet-using, nuclear-war-avoiding, space-traveling society is inaccurate.
Quite the opposite I think. Our machines can 'already' work well enough to provide free food, shelter and education to every person on earth. Even still, we produce food for 10B people yet hunger is a problem.
If everyone was given free food, shelter and education, then everyone would fart around and get bored until some of them hackers gather to build a space-ship and others join in. Utopia? probably. But the real problem is broken distribution model which real means broken governance model.
I would not say it's clear that we can provide 'food' 'education' and 'shelter' for everyone. For starters, those are categories and say nothing about the quality of food, education, or shelter.
Secondly, are you sure all work can be done by currently-existing machines and people willing to do that work for fun? For example, maintenance on a broken sewage system. I think there's going to be some jobs that machines can't yet do, no one wants to do, and yet still need to be done.
>> One of capitalism's most durable myths is that it has reduced human toil. This myth is typically defended by a comparison of the modern forty-hour week with its seventy- or eighty-hour counterpart in the nineteenth century. The implicit -- but rarely articulated -- assumption is that the eighty-hour standard has prevailed for centuries. The comparison conjures up the dreary life of medieval peasants, toiling steadily from dawn to dusk. We are asked to imagine the journeyman artisan in a cold, damp garret, rising even before the sun, laboring by candlelight late into the night.
>> These images are backward projections of modern work patterns. And they are false. Before capitalism, most people did not work very long hours at all. The tempo of life was slow, even leisurely; the pace of work relaxed. Our ancestors may not have been rich, but they had an abundance of leisure. When capitalism raised their incomes, it also took away their time. Indeed, there is good reason to believe that working hours in the mid-nineteenth century constitute the most prodigious work effort in the entire history of humankind.
I don't see any discussion vis-a-vis the whole decades that we know spend not working, ie., childhood and retirement. My grandmothers haven't worked a single day (barring small chores) for the last 20+ years. I only started really working 23 years after I was born. I doubt any of this was true during the middle ages.
Congrats, you caught a transposed character in an HN comment. Sometimes, I don't care enough about these comments to exhaustivley spell check them. I guess I don't have the time. Maybe you should chekc your privilege.
I wouldn't worry too much about chekcing anything. You've possibly started a meme with "expressino". I shall be using it.
Oh, and it's also remarkably close to this [1], which I didn't know about until now, and now want to try. Thanks for your accidental character transposition. It has led to good things.
3. I loved walking and commuting on the T in Boston. I got time to watch or interact with people. Being present in the world is a form of productivity for anyone creating things for people.
I wish my errands were that eventful, but they just feel like chores. Give me a button to press away my chores and I'll spend my outgoing time at the pub with friends.
> I wish my errands were that eventful, but they just feel like chores.
Keep in mind the excerpt you just read was written by a professional writer. A good one at that. I can't quite put my finger on it, but it's got a quality where even if nobody told you it was written by a writer, you could just tell.
No flowery prose. Just simple description. But highlighting many little things and quirks that most people leave out of descriptions of events. Without those, his errand reads a bit like this: "I write on a typewriter. When I'm done I mark it up in pencil, then I ask a freelance typist if she's got time to do a clean manuscript for me. Then I have to go down to the newsstand to buy an envelope to send it off in. I like the roundabout way of doing it"
Not quite as fun is it?
edit: the style reminds me a lot of reading Gaiman's blogposts about his life
This is why Vonnegut is my favorite writer. I would read a 500 page novel about paint drying on a wall if he had written it. I'm sure every sentence would be entertaining.
There was an interview or podcast (some sort of video) with Ira Glass about this same idea. He describes a man waking up and getting coffee, the most mundane activities, with incredible suspense. You really have to appreciate that sort of ability. It's not even apparent until someone else points out how boring it would be if stated differently.
I also realized one day that certain errands were opportunities to go out that I welcomed. And of course when I don't use Amazon I can get something faster, too, but that's just a side benefit.
And the funny thing, as guy in the IT department, is people come to fart around (Vonnegut's sense, not literally) in our office and chat us up. I get the best of both worlds! Computer at my fingertips, and travel through novice conversationalism!
Here in Norway online shopping involves finding an online store that sells what you need (there's no site that sells everything, like Amazon, here), going through a cumbersome sign-up/payment process, paying a lot of money for the shipping costs, waiting several days and having to go to the post office unless the package is really small (or if you're willing to pay even more for premium shipping).
I really don't get why so many people here dislike the idea behind Dash Button. Buying essential shit isn't fun, it's a burden that needs to be done. I can't understand why removing the hassle of purchasing stuff like toilet paper and detergent is "dystopian consumer hell". Dystopian consumer hell is what we have here in Norway, where we need to physically go to the store and buy the same stuff over and over and over again.
I think it's ridiculous just because it clearly involved a lot of effort to solve a problem that doesn't really need solving. The choice isn't between a button and the massive hassle you describe. The choice is between a button and ordering the product on your smartphone in ten seconds, or picking up the product at the grocery store the next time you're there.
How often do you need laundry detergent? Every two weeks? If this button saves you ten seconds each time, that's a total of 4.3 minutes per year saved. And that assumes you buy the stuff one at a time instead of getting a bunch at once.
Amazon as a whole is great because you can use it for so much stuff. Saving time on a rare purchase is almost pointless, but saving time on all your rare purchases put together can be significant. But this button thingy is inherently single-product.
This is basically the ordering-side equivalent of when you buy three small items from Amazon and they get shipped to you in three separate gigantic boxes filled with vast amounts of padding. Maybe it makes sense when you see the big picture, but I can't help but scream "why??"
This button isn't about saving time, it's about preventing the instances of not having something when you need it. The moment when you realize you need more of something is typically when you're using it. If you can literally just hit a button to order more, that's a significant change from having to do something else to order more.
The increased switching cost isn't by force, though. Customers are less likely to switch because of convenience -- you're paying for the conveniene which, I think, means that Amazon is providing a service that consumers want.
I never care. I don't comparison shop. I always tick the "Prime only" button, even if it costs me extra. It's one of the nice luxuries of earning enough money that prices for consumables generally does not matter.
I don't know what the things I used in the dinner I just prepared costs. I only know roughly how much my weekly grocery bill comes to (it's all delivered - the order is auto-populated by Ocado's algorithms, so if I don't do anything I get a reasonable default set of products based on what I usually buy). And I like it that way.
Exactly. The ability to just tap some buttons on your phone and have an item show up doorstep is magical. The dash button is just another step in that direction. Its ultimate in convenience for people who want it.
No, that's easily solved: you can set the product the button purchases (obviously), and the day after the API is made available a zillion little intercept-button-push-then-scrap-n-compare projects will pop-up on HN that find you the lowest priced product just in time when you push the button.
It said in the video that you can choose what the button puchases. So, you can switch as much as you want. It may be a barrier to using something other than amazon, but you could make time to check to see if there are better deals and then switch the API call.
Some people seem to be missing the point and I don't blame you because brands are given a lot of protagonism in their announcement.
But I think the presence of renowned/popular brands in their announcement is just marketing collateral as part of a bit more complex marketing strategy that involved partnerships, and that might be confusing for anyone if deeper thought is not involved.
IMHO the essence of this product is neither about enforcing brand loyalty nor saving time.
1- Brand loyalty benefits well established brands, yes, so amazon probably got big companies on board by offering brand placement on their marketing material among other benefits.
2- Saving time (and cognitive flow/energy) benefits consumers, yes. There is some risk to follow brand reputation instead of product quality, agree, but that is a manageable risk, so amazon can potentially get consumers on board.
The essence and reason of why this product/service came to be, answers to one question only; 'How does amazon benefit?' and it is brilliant.
From my POV this little button is not just a way to introduce an enhanced experience to an existing and growing consumer behavior[1] that would result in greater sales for amazon; more than a product they introduced a service/platform[2] that can be seamlessly integrated to new home appliances, so amazon is effectively expanding its presence into a diverse and conveniently positioned custom/customizable 'points of sale' inside people's homes, making itself more and more ubiquitous as time goes by and more companies and individual innovators adopt their new service/platform, and their investment to accomplish this was little compared to the alternative of investing in manufacturing their own home appliances, but that's not brilliant, that's only natural and expected from a company like amazon.
It also places amazon's brand on not all but many people's minds as a high-tech high-quality home appliances brand by association to the actual home appliances brands, and amazon is not really manufacturing that kind of hardware (...yet), that's the brilliant part (an opportunity that they may or may never exploit, either because non-compete agreements or because it wouldn't make sense for their business plans or because Jeff Bezos decides not to because reasons, an opportunity nonetheless).
Precisely. Everybody here is talking about the button, but for Amazon this is about selling zillions of these buttons to product manufactures and achieving lock-in.
Its about the API and what new purchasing flows will be created by eager startups, resulting in new MRR for Amazon.
My problem is with some items that I buy only twice a month, like bath soap or mayonnaise. I notice that it's about get empty (or it's already empty :() and I put them in my mental to-buy list. If I'm lucky I'll remember them the next time that I go to the supermarket. And probably also the following time and a few more times until I realize that I got a lot of it and I remove the item from the list. So I don't have to buy them for a few weeks...
I really like that it ignores the repeated pushes.
> Unless you elect otherwise, Dash Button responds only to your first press until your order is delivered.
I switched to buying things of this nature in bulk. You're more prone to ordering more of something if you realize you're down to the last 3 out of 10. That gives you 3 more tries to make sure you order it.
Your point is my solution doesn't work for you because it would require you to purchase three of everything you would ever purchase? What an odd way to live your life.
I do something similar except that I use an app (AnyList) rather than keeping a mental list. Better yet the app is shared with my fiance. Whichever of us is next in the store (usually me) can be sure to get everything.
Another good use case is that I can head to the store as soon as I realize we're out of something, and by the time I get there, the list has everything else that she thought of.
Actually, it's about a vendor making sure you buy their brand (again) when you need to fill up instead of going to the store and looking at the 50 choices in the detergent aisle one more time.
This. The primary purpose is to avoid the pain of not having what you need, and the arguments and bad mood that follows, simply because you didn't add something to a list or thought you would remember to buy but didn't
Never mind the time saving, what's the real time cost? How long does the battery last? How do you know when it fails? How exploitable is it? How do I do security updates?
Pressing a button is milliseconds, and can be done as a complete afterthought, while still doing your current task. Taking out your phone, navigating to a website and placing an order means you have to stop what you are doing, and do something else.
When the time to complete tasks changes by an order of magnitude - even going from seconds down to milliseconds - our behavior tends to change. We easily accept this notion with developer related tasks such as compiling and testing. I don't see a difference here.
Imagine if developers only built and tested once or twice a month.
Now I come out with a new product where the entire pitch is, that build-and-compile you do once or twice a month now takes one second instead of ten! Oh, and it only works for one project. If you work on multiple projects, buy multiple products.
Would this be worthwhile? I don't see it.
Developer tasks like compiling and testing benefit from small efficiency gains because we do them constantly. Or the efficiency gains allow us to move from a model where we do them rarely to a model where we do them constantly. Neither one applies here. You won't buy detergent any more frequently with this button, and it's not something you do often.
I won't buy detergent more frequently, but because it's easier, I'm more likely to be in a situation where I actually have it where I need it. If I could buy either at the moment I realize I'm about to run out, I would. Instead, I have to remember when I'm out at the grocery store, and I often forget, and then end up having to make a special trip the next day just to pick up that one thing.
It's not just about time saved. I tend to forget things I don't do often, so I automate them, even though setting up the automation might take more time than it will save me. As soon as the automation is set up, I no longer need to worry about it, and next time I can just push the button.
Phones are annoying, and the UI of most apps is user-hostile. Here are the equivalent steps you have to do to accomplish the same thing as this button does:
- Wipe your hands from moisture/whatever you had on them.
- Find your phone in your pocket.
- Orient it.
- Unlock it.
- Exit whatever app you left running in the foreground.
- Open the app drawer.
- Find the ordering app.
- Click through several layers of UI to get to the right product.
And only now you're in the same position as after just pressing a button. This is a significant cognitive load. When I realize I need to order something, I want to order it, not navigate through countless steps. Having to do more than two actions is too much.
Exactly, a cellphone app can get the job done but it is a great cognitive deviation from whatever task you had at hand at the moment you realize you ran out of something(1). So amazon's dash button is not an innovation on getting something done, but get it done faster and more conveniently, and that alone makes sense for an enterprise whose profit depends greatly from understanding consumer behavior. So I agree with TeMPOraL, it is not ridiculous at all.
And there's a bigger picture outside of comparing the convenience between using this little button as opposed to mobile apps, but that's off topic for this branch of the conversation, if you're interested IMHO & my brief reasoning, read this other brach[2] (also because DRY).
The product is designed for the future, not for the past. In the past, people were always going to the grocery store, so you could grab what you need "when you're there".
I live in silicon valley where all these new delivery services are being tested, and I almost never go to the store. Google Shopping Express delivers non-perishable groceries to my home within 24 hours, Instacart delivers fresh groceries within 2 hours, and Amazon delivers everything else I need within 2 days. I really want to sign up for Amazon Fresh because they deliver perishables and everything else same day, but it's a little pricey.
I hate going to the store now (especially since our local market isn't very nice - I love a good market). For me it is a big chore. I work from home so I'm rarely even "driving by" the market.
Amazon, google, and others want to enable a world where no one goes to the store (and we all order from them). It's nice not having to go to the store. Your cute calculation of 4.3 minutes saved is making assumptions that totally don't apply to people like me. I don't want to take a 30 minute experience and shave ten seconds off, I want to eliminate the trips to the store entirely.
It's fine if you don't see the need for new products, but just because you don't see the need doesn't mean there isn't one. Not saying this product has a need (I feel like I can use my smartphone) but you've completely missed the big picture of deliveries for everything. In San Francisco you can get a bento box delivered in 15 minutes for $12, and I just got a flyer for dinners delivered starting at $8.
Everyone wants to do deliveries, and once they're done by robot it will be so cheap we'll all have it.
I'll give you an actual scenario, maybe you can relate: One of your kids is sick and yells for attention. You shuffle in the next load of bedcovers into the washing machine while trying to remember to call the doctor for an appointment. The detergent box is near-empty. If you are like me, it could take days until you get the 20s of uninterrupted time to jot down the detergent to your shopping list. Fast forward 1 week. No detergent. You are out of bed covers. The other kid is sick. Someone hands you an Amazon Dash that orders your standard detergent. You break down and cry, thanking that someone for the act of kindness. OK, the last part is exaggerated.
Now what about when the price goes up? Will you ever even notice how much the increase was? Would you have considered switching brands? Or sizes? Did you have time to go through your email receipts, or now that the kid was finally asleep, did you open a beer and sit down with your partner?
I'm guessing that the people using this, and order-everything-online are relatively price insensitive for the types of things this appears to be targeting. Saving $0.30 or even $1-2 probably isn't going to make it worth it for me to reconfigure or find a new brand.
It's also self-selecting: if you ARE searching for the absolutely lowest price, or are price sensitive, you're not the right target audience for this kind of tech or company :)
>> But why do you need a specialized button that only does that? That's the part that makes no sense.
It -does- make sense if you take it as a way to introduce not a product ("specialized button") but a platform[1] for long overdue and much needed innovation that some very influential people have started to fund and promote[2]. It is not the only way to do it, but it is amazon's way to facilitate it and in the process get some market pioneering advantages. A company like amazon doesn't have the infrastructure to start building home appliances but it required little effort for them to contribute in a way that brings them great benefits. Smart move, amazon.
The example they use is detergent because showing someone reaching for toilet paper and realizing she needs a refill isn't such an easy commercial to shoot.
So you run out of paper, press the button and, under 2 minutes, an Amazon InstaPaper delivery drone arrives (yes, they bought the service and the brand), entering your apartment thanks to wonders of a cloud-synced Lockitron, and drops the paper next to the toilet door. As it leaves, you're left wondering if maybe it's time to buy that Amazon Echo and have it react to you shouting "OH FK", saving you from having to clean the button...
Do you really think that ordering something online from the comfort of your couch, in your underwear, is so inconvenient that you need a magic button to press when you run out of laundry detergent? You buy the big jug of high-efficiency stuff that's good for something like 100 loads, that means you need new detergent what, 5 times a year?
Or are you just being hyperbolic?
I don't know about you, but I make a trip to the grocery store about 1.5x every week anyways. I definitely would never use an online food/grocery service; I prefer to see the lettuce I'm buying when I take it off the shelf.
So, given that I'm already at the grocery store something like 80 times a year, and assuming I need to buy more laundry detergent 5 times a year, that's 16 opportunities for me to not pay Amazon shipping and just pick up a jug of detergent when I'm going to be out shopping anyways.
Assuming this isn't an April 1 joke and I just got trolled, hard, this is definitely a solution in search of a problem.
> If so, what happens when, say, your apples come bruised?
Me: these apples are bruised
Tesco man: sorry sir, let me refund that straight away. And keep the apples, you could make a pie with them.
Though in five years of online grocery shopping I've only returned a couple of items. The apples have made it all the way unbruised from New Zealand after all, four more miles is nothing.
So in other words, if your apples show up bruised, you're still stuck with bruised apples? And then you have to wait for the new unbruised ones to arrive?
That sounds like a much worse experience than simply going to the market and picking out unbruised apples.
Do you really think that getting a few bruised apples once or twice a year, if that, and keeping them for free when this happens until the replacement comes, is so unacceptable that you need to be going to the grocery store each and every time to handpick and carry carefully your apples back home?
You tell them, and they refund you, and they look into their operations and figure out how they let bruised apples slip into a customer's order so the problem can be remedied.
I value my time more than I value not experiencing the pathetically infinitesimal trauma of the occasional bruised apple (something I experienced not once in the 6 years I lived in Santa Clara and had 100% of my groceries delivered).
This is relatively common in the UK. Online grocery shopping is very much mainstream. All of the major supermarkets offer it, plus Ocado which is online only (and the best).
For the Ocado-deprived, the main feature that makes me stick with Ocado is that when I forget to make an order, they pick a set of products based on my purchase history, and delivery it at my usual fixed weekly slot anyway.
It is predictable enough (and with options for "always include" and "never automatically include") that we quite often don't bother adjusting the order.
My grocery shopping have never been less stressful.
We've been using Ocado for the last few weeks as my wife was finding it too much hassle to go to the supermarket with a toddler. It's freed up a lot of time and the service and quality has been excellent.
I hadn't noticed that they help you to remember your order and try to deliver what you normally have. Is this automatic then. What happens if you are out of the country for a couple of weeks?
Is this kind of service not common in the US then? It seems to be massive in the UK now.
I don't need it. But I'd like to have a dozen or so of them spread around the house near wherever I'm likely to notice I'm out of something.
You may make a trip to the grocery store about 1.5x every week, but I "never" go to the grocery store any more - it's all delivered. I can not imagine going back to shopping in person other than the odd "emergency" purchase.
More importantly to cover the various other uses I could see for this, such as printer toner, just the grocery store would be insufficient.
This is a solution in search of a different demographics than you. Like me.
> Do you really think that ordering something online from the comfort of your couch, in your underwear, is so inconvenient that you need a magic button to press when you run out of laundry detergent?
Maybe that's your daily pattern, but for example in my case, this almost never happens. I just don't sit on my couch thinking about home maintenance; I have too much other, more interesting stuff to do. Phones have really annoying, user-hostile UI, so I don't even use mine much at home. They are good enough for commuting, when I can't really do anything else except maybe read a book, so I schedule tasks I can do from my spartphone for the to/from-work route.
It's mildly convenient. There's nothing wrong with mild conveniences, of course. I love them! But I don't see the point in mild conveniences for something you do 20-30 times a year when it requires dedicated hardware.
If the use case was something like, push this button and dinner arrives, I'd say it's fantastic. If it was something like, push this button on your phone to re-order detergent, I'd say that's pretty sensible. But a physical button to order an infrequently ordered product makes no sense to me.
Half of those steps would be eliminated if Amazon would simply add a "favorites" or "regular items" panel to their mobile app, where all the "buttons" for the items you regularly need would be displayed, and you could just tap on one to re-order it. Given the fact that people almost always have their smartphone with them now, having a separate external button for every product is ridiculously redundant.
The time I'm least likely to have my phone with me is when doing things like starting the laundry, or starting the dishwasher, or grabbing the last soda in the fridge, or similar stuff around the house, where I may have left the phone somewhere else in the house.
Pretty much every other time the phone will be in my pocket and the value would be less. But even then it'd mean fishing my phone out, unlocking, starting an app instead of just pushing a button. Not torture by any means, but if I can just stick a button there and not have to think about it again, then awesome.
I'm sure it's great for Amazon when someone gets one of these things. For a relatively small cost, you've likely permanently neutralized all possibility of switching brands or suppliers, and substantially reduced awareness of price increases. From that perspective, this is clearly the product of a diabolical genius mind. I just don't get why anyone else would care....
If you use their app instead of their web site, and you order it often, it'll be way faster. Of course, if you don't carry your phone with you then that's not going to work, but it seems like putting your phone in your pocket is a better solution than a specialized single-purpose button widget.
From the description, it sounds like you don't need your phone with you. If it used bluetooth, then I think you would. But it uses wifi. So as long as your phone is on your wifi network, then it should work.
My point is that if you have your phone in your pocket, you can use it to place an order directly, rather than relying on a separate single-purpose widget.
> My point is that if you have your phone in your pocket
When I'm in the privacy of my own home, and I'm not expecting guests, you'd be hard pressed to find me dressed at all, let alone in anything that has pockets ;)
I think it does work without your phone on you - it says it uses wifi, so as long as your phone is currently on your wifi network, it sounds like it will work. That should be likely for most people, even if they don't carry their phones with them.
The phone is only required for setup (configuring the button's WiFi connection to your router). Once that is complete, the button talks to your router directly via WiFi, with no phone required.
For things you regularly buy (but not regularly enough to set up a subscription), you can speed that up quite a bit by going to your order history, and using the search field there that searches just within your past orders. Find a prior order for that product and use the "But It Again" button.
Its about how much time it takes less to order from Amazon then it takes to either grab an additional item when you are already at the store, or make a trip to the store just for one item.
Wow you are right! It sounds so convenient when you manufacture a description to make it sound like we are currently going through 9 arduous steps instead of opening a website!
I pretty much agree with him. Although I am a smartphone user I don't think they are as practical as usually portrait. I'd rather press a single button on my washing machine to get more detergent than go through the hassle of pulling my phone, unlocking it, trying to type into an on-screen keyboard (where I'll get it wrong 4 times) etc etc. Actually, I HATE pulling my phone to look stuff up on it, it's usually a huge hassle caused by the combination of shitty wait times til things happen (not just connecting to stuff - why do I have to watch a 0.5s animation of stuff sliding or fading for everything I want to do on it?) + clumsy fingers.
It's not about opening a website, its about having technology integrated into your workflow such that you don't have to use a computer to finish a task.
There was an article posted about usage of bands in Disney world. The idea is to have technology integrated with you such that the idea of interacting with a generic computer shouldn't exist.
what about the consequences of "streamlining" all these activities? We will create tons of disposable, one-purpose devices to add "convenience" to our life?
Amazon have had a few "ridiculous" ideas (e.g. drone delivery, 1 hour delivery, pre-emptive shipping). I think they know these ideas are a stretch but it gets people thinking in a new way and out of it there may be a few more solid ideas. Product marketing by annealing if you will.
It's not about saving time, it's about avoiding context switches. Also I'm really bad at remembering that I'm out of something even 5 seconds later, much less when I'm at the store racking my brain for what I'm running low on.
I solved this problem with a notepad in my back pocket. Write it down as soon as I realize I need it, and refer to it next time I'm at the store. Not saying it invalidates this Amazon offering, just a suggestion if this is a real problem you're struggling with.
Same here, but just a notes app on my phone. If I think of a thing, I put it in there, and I get to forget about it. I then pull it up when I go to the store.
Is this like, what society wants though? Are we all here to be waited on hand and foot, have our every need taken care of? Do we end up being able to solve more real problems this way, or do we end in a dearth of imagination? Interesting implications - we either end up with a higher percentage of people being self-actualized or an idiotistopia a la wall-e and idiocracy.
I think society as a whole does want to be taken care of in that way. I don't know that it will ever lead to mass idiocy but I definitely notice a laziness in some friends who are overly attached to their phones or cars. Emphasis on overly attached, it's totally possible to use these tools effectively but the power can be seductive.
I think I'm better off for the effort I put into things like buying detergent, walking to work and figuring out my way instead of using GMaps. It's not like I'd be worse off if I stopped doing any one of those things, but the lifestyle in aggregate where you have a button for everything does have an impact I think.
I have a hard time seeing how people can develop the schlep tolerance and planning skill to do something challenging and big if they can't remember to buy detergent.
Really? They're still backlogged? Are they being hand crafted by a small village of elves?
I did eventually get mine back in February or so. The add to shopping list feature is very convenient. I don't see this obsoleting that Echo function which is much more general purpose. (Can add anything whether you get it from Amazon or somewhere else.)
> How often do you need laundry detergent? Every two weeks? If this button saves you ten seconds each time, that's a total of 4.3 minutes per year saved
It takes more than 10 seconds to go to the store and get detergent. I suppose it'll save the 30 seconds it takes to order detergent on a phone, but the big gain is that it's RIGHT THERE so you can't forget to order it and then find yourself dead in the water and have to go to the store to get detergent instead of wait 2 days for amazon to deliver it.
You don't go to the store to buy detergent. You go to the store to buy a whole bundle of items, and you go regardless of whether or not you need detergent. 10 seconds is IMO a decent approximation of the marginal cost of time for adding detergent to the stuff you buy.
As for the big gain being that it's right there, I figured everybody's phones are right there too. Apparently not everybody does that. Seems like if you really find this to be a problem, you could just keep your phone in your pocket.
10 seconds is the marginal cost /if you're going to the store/. It's entirely possible to make zero regular trips to the store under normal conditions. I'd use the heck out of a "cause more cat litter to arrive in a day or so" button, in fact I have a bookmark on my laptop for just this use. Mobile apps are (imo) universally horrible for this kind of directed action.
My question/complaint is basically: rather than put all this effort behind a single-purpose button, why not work on reducing the friction for using a mobile app for the same purpose? There's no reason you couldn't have, say, a button on your phone's home screen where pushing it causes cat litter to arrive. This would be about as convenient, and way more flexible.
Edit: and the answer is pretty clear, I think. If people actually go for this, it'll be a massive advantage for Amazon. It essentially banishes competition permanently for people who use the button regularly. It'll also make people much less price sensitive. So I completely understand why Amazon would try to push this. I just don't understand why anyone else finds it interesting besides that.
Personally I think smartphones will never be good at known-goal interaction. They're general-purpose devices with a hilariously low-throughput interface that need to accommodate low-tech users. You're always going to have to navigate a bunch of screens to get to any given function because the real estate is so small.
Could apps be better? Sure. Can any app get as good as a button that's already right there when you realize you need a replacement? I don't see how.
How do you get your food and other things? I'm genuinely interested. I've lived for periods where I ate out every meal but I still ended up in a store now and then.
Safeway or another chain probably delivers if you're in a major metro. Some smaller cities have local stores with online ordering, too. And, of course, with some more trouble, you can get groceries delivered in just about any populated area if you have access to a phone.
> How often do you need laundry detergent? Every two weeks? If this button saves you ten seconds each time, that's a total of 4.3 minutes per year saved. And that assumes you buy the stuff one at a time instead of getting a bunch at once.
Eh about once every 2 months.
It's taken me 2 weeks so far to remember to get it. I go to the store almost daily. :(
That seems like a pretty solvable behavioral problem. I hesitate to recommend using some todo application since todo apps have turned into kind of a joke in the last few years, but.. maybe try using a todo app?
Why use a todo app that requires me to grab my phone, unlock, start an app and enter a todo item, when I could instead just press a button that'll be right in front of me at the moment I notice I'll need more of some product soon?
> It's taken me 2 weeks so far to remember to get it. I go to the store almost daily. :(
This is a behavior that isn't going to change by having a thousand buttons all over your house. Maybe you won't ever worry about running out of detergent or dogfood again, but there's always something else. "Oh shit, I bought pasta for dinner but I forgot to buy pasta sauce!" What's the solution, get a pasta sauce button?
I see nothing wrong with dedicating a wall of my kitchen entirely to Amazon buttons for everything in my fridge and pantry. :)
As I mentioned in another comment, though, a better system would probably be to use some cheap, single-purpose wall-mountable tablet computer (probably e-Ink based, maybe even with a column of physical buttons instead of a touchscreen to bring costs down to a pittance) that one could load up with a list of products that need to be routinely reordered for a partiuclar room. If prices could be brought down considerably (if not free with Prime membership, as is being proposed for these Dash buttons), this could be pretty viable.
The choice is between a button and ordering the product on your smartphone in ten seconds, or picking up the product at the grocery store the next time you're there.
The choice is between having to remember to buy the product next time you go shopping, having to remember to order the product next time you are in front of the proper device, or not having to remember a thing.
Being able to move a task to 'done' as soon as it is recognized is a savings in cognitive load far more valuable than any time savings.
Then again, I am the type of person who frequently says "might as well do it now before I forget." Younger, more single people might not see the value in this sort of thing.
Maybe you can order something in ten seconds if you really try, but it's not really about the time, it's about the experience. If I go to the Amazon web site, I'm bombarded with a LOT of irrelevant, distracting information. Having a button next to my washing machine means reordering barely even interrupts the flow of what I'm doing.
Clearly Amazon understands that human aspect, and credit to them for not getting stuck on the idea that if I have to go to the web site, they can up-sell while I'm there.
I don't get household supplies from Amazon now, but this is making me consider it just as soon as I've compared prices.
Just compared a bottle of Tide. $32 from Amazon compared to $15 from the store with a coupon. If other things are priced as badly, I certainly won't be bothering with it.
To take that further, Amazon will automatically re-order products for you if you tell them to on their site, via their subscription service.
There's an obvious reason Amazon is doing this: they're trying to continue to grow their share of the consumer's brain. When someone thinks about shopping, Amazon wants to be on the very short list of that thinking. So this button is a relatively inexpensive way to keep doing that. Get into someone's house, get into someone's mind, and try to show yourself as innovative.
I think time savings is the wrong way to think about this. I also don't think people are in the habit of ordering things as soon as they need them. I suspect the item goes onto a list (physical or not), which then has to be processed.
With this system instead of adding an item to your list to process later it's processed immediately.
> I think it's ridiculous just because it clearly involved a lot of effort to solve a problem that doesn't really need solving.
Perhaps you don't see the value in it, but that doesn't make it ridiculous. Why not just move along instead of complaining about a new option for those who do happen to appreciate it?
I'd use this. Every time I return from the store, there's always something I forgot to purchase. Yes, I so use a list. The problem is when, say, cooking, I actually focus on what I'm doing. When I'm running low on something, I don't rush to my phone to log it because it's an interruption that takes away from cooking (especially when there's a notification waiting for you). Amazon is providing an extremely low-friction solution that won't take your away from what you're focusing on.
> The choice is between a button and ordering the product on your smartphone in ten seconds, or picking up the product at the grocery store the next time you're there.
I don't know how anyone actually remembers to do this. I know I don't. What inevitably ends up happening is that, despite making a bunch of trips to the store, at some point I'll discover that I'm out of dog food and make a purpose-specific trip to pick some up so my dog can eat. Later that day I'll remember, when I go to do laundry, that I'm also out of detergent. Then it will be dishwasher tablets.
Between my wife and I, we inevitably have to pick-up diapers at the grocery store between amazon diaper orders (we are irrational and don't have a diaper subscription from amazon)...Having a button in the diaper drawer would go a long way in terms of reducing friction, friction caused by sleep deprivation, that diaper rash, and n other immediate needs of your child which get in the way of picking up that smartphone and placing the order the old-fashion(?) way.
It's not the online ordering that I need to save time on, it's having to make a trip NOW because I forgot to order more <X> ahead of time. That extra trip to Target takes a whole heck of a lot longer than 10 seconds, and when I consider how many extra Target runs I make every year it adds up fast.
There is also the financial danger of, here I am at Target, may as well get my money's worth for the car gasoline and buy a whole cart full of stuff (from target not amazon). And every dollar I spend at target is a dollar I won't spend at amazon. All because I ran out of laundry detergent.
Every bottle of Tide I buy at target also means amazon just lost out on a toilet paper sale and a paper towel sale and maybe some food if its a supertarget and all that other stuff target sells. Its not amazon selling a $20 bottle of tide but preventing the target sale of a $120 shopping cart full of junk.
This only applies if you're incapable of buying the stuff ahead of time without the button. I suppose some people might qualify for that, but is it really a common thing? Don't you have your phone right there already?
I am in top 1% US population by income, graduated from elite university with almost 4.0 GPA and I am often incapable of buying stuff in advance. I am sure I am not the only one.
Last month I had to go to store at least twice in the morning before work because we ran out of milk and my two year old was close to having mental breakdown without cereals for breakfast. We use combination of Google Shopping Express, Walmart and Safeway delivery services - they are godsend and save us enormous amount of time. Unfortunately Amazon Fresh is not available where we live.
Having one second ordering for regular staples will marketdly improve ordering process, especially if buttons are reliable and convinient to use.
I'm not incapable at all, but the point is I have to stop whatever it is I am doing in order to do it. If I'm in the middle of something, I may think to myself "I need to buy more toilet paper soon" but not actually follow through the act of doing it. You've never ran out of a commoditized good before?
It's definitely a common thing for me and my fiancee - we're not forgetful people, just busy. The less disruptions and banal activity in my life the better.
Because that may distract from whatever I am doing. If you haven't ran out of any sort of consumable in years, then obviously you don't have that problem. It doesn't sound like this product is for you, but there are plenty of others like myself who would benefit from this.
I think the hardware component is a promotional item just to get people used to and eventually using a software component, such as a short list of essentials quickly accessible through the Amazon app. Getting people excited and changing behavior is hard through, and I think this may be purely for that.
You're asking people to abstain from something that requires less work than what you're recommending. For most people the incentives just aren't in the direction you're arguing.
I'm pretty sure most Americans will give up amazon for free education, health care, paid maternity and paternity leave and the many other social benefits Norway provides to its nationals.
I definitely would not give up amazon for free education, health care, etc... Those socialists implementations come at a very high cost. Yes, our current system is not well, but it's better than the government taking 60% of my earned income.
I agree with what you are saying, but my effective tax rate this year in California was ~40%. All of the above benefits for an additional 20% sounds like a bargain.
> The effective tax rate in Norway is around 45% BTW.
But I believe your employer pays an amount equal to about 20% of your gross income as pension fund payments. I don't know if USA has similar "hidden" costs which makes direct comparison of grass salary difficult.
You wouldn't get all of the above benefits with our government, for the additional 20%. The US has an extremely inefficient government fiscally.
You might get properly funded roads; that is if they don't squander it between the time they lie and promise to use it for that and when it comes time to do road repair.
Basically, underground rail construction in US costs much more per kilometer than in other countries, and people in the comment section claim that the same holds true for other types of infrastructure construction, like bridges and highways.
The US tax system offers a lot of deductions. When I first moved here I was paying ~12% in total taxes (state + federal) on $60K worth of income once I took advantage of the 401k deduction, mortgage interest deduction, etc,etc.
I'm not sure where you came from, but the US system offers more or less the same deductions as other systems. On $60K, the tax rate in Canada for example would be about 15-17%, before credits.
Add your health care costs to that 12% and I think you'll find Canada has the cheaper rate, and you still get to take advantage of many (not all) of the same credits a typical American can.
There's no mortgage deduction in US either. There's a mortgage interest deduction, which I'm sure while significant isn't a major variable in this eqaution overall.
Incorrect! Since most mortgage payments are >95% interest in the first few years, you could easily reduce your taxable income by 30-40% without a large mortgage.
You're also forgetting that the US doesn't have a national sales tax or high taxes on gasoline.
I would agree that the highest tax states in the US aren't that different than the lowest tax states in Canada (income tax only), my own person experience tells me that the US, on average, has a much lower tax burden than countries like Canada. And many jobs pay a higher salary.
Also the US brackets kick in at higher incomes. In Canada the highest bracket (29%) is over $136K. In the US, the highest bracket is 35%, but it doesn't kick-in until you earn more than $375K per year.
I don't think you actually have any idea what personal tax rates are in these countries and are just repeating Tea Party nonsense. If you live in CA and NY you are paying European level taxes and getting basically nothing in return.
Yes, this is a chocking fact I realized when I moved from Sweden to New York. In the former I payed ~30% in tax, whereas here in NY I pay the same. Because you have several levels of taxes in the U.S.: federal tax, income tax, state tax, and city tax, and in addition taxes like FICA, etc.
Don't forget to add your health insurance premiums to your tax rate before comparing. I pay less in Canada than I did in California when you add health care costs. And I and my kids can never lose insurance from a run of bad luck.
Income taxes aren't the only tax. Don't forget sales tax, gas tax, import taxes.
I easily have more disposable income in the US than I did in Canada, even after taking into account insurance costs. Even living in a high-tax US state.
I'm in Australia where we get all that stuff (and amazon sells books and not a whole lot else) and my tax rate (in a relatively high tax bracket) is ~35%, a chunk of which is paying off my (government run, non-profit) university debt. Judging by the sibling comments, it seems like that high cost is about -5% tax at best...
No thanks. I would like the freedom to choose where my money goes and not be forced by government or people lobbying government to allocate other people's hard-earned money to subsidize their preferences. Being able to withdraw money from something when it becomes corrupt, outdated, or inefficient is powerful. You don't have that power if government is taking your money by force. You are funding education even if the implementation is shitty, even if people are graduating with useless degrees.
In other words, you aren't entitled to people's money with no strings attached; you have to work for it. Using institutionalized violence to get what you want is lazy and immoral.
The fallacy in your argument is that it rests in the assumption that the US doesn't also take your money by force, when in fact they obviously do, so not having your money taken away isn't one of the choices.
Except Norway is an oil welfare state, so those social programs don't come from increasing the tax rate like we'd have to do in America (and suffer the negative effects of that).
Or live in the UK and get all of those, plus Amazon and ubiquitous online grocery shopping. On which point, I'd go for a button like this that added items to my Ocado basket.
Only Scotland has free higher education, higher Education in England and Wales is freaking expensive compared to continental Europe, and thanks to "free" student loans only goes higher every year.
I've known people who used government assistance after losing their job, then just a few years later complain about people using welfare and unemployment income. Some of us Americans can be really weird when it comes to helping out our neighbors.
"I'm pretty sure most Americans will give up amazon for free education, health care, paid maternity and paternity leave and the many other social benefits Norway provides to its nationals.
reply"
I would rather be paid enough and have the choice of where to put my money, instead of the government making all of those choices for me.
There is something to be said about not being 100K in debt after getting your degree and not having to go bankrupt if say you were diagnosed with cancer in your early to mid 20's.
Sorry but i rather not to have parents have to work their arse off just to send me to college, or hope they have enough money to treat me if i get sick just as i fall of their coverage plan.
I also would like for my self or my wife to be able to go of work for a year and raise a child without having to be afraid of losing income or job security.
I remember when I first heard of twitter, the exact moment. My response was "Oh that's dumb. Why would I care if somebody posts what they ate for lunch? And it's only 140 characters?" Basically, I'm a visionary.
I think Amazon has the right idea. Just launch products and see how they go, what you learn, and if they stick. Very interesting company to watch operate.
You are right, I guess I've only read the top few comments, and read other comments from people that said "HN didn't like Dropbox". Thanks for correcting me.
> Buying essential shit isn't fun, it's a burden that needs to be done. I can't understand why removing the hassle of purchasing stuff like toilet paper and detergent is "dystopian consumer hell". Dystopian consumer hell is what we have here in Norway, where we need to physically go to the store and buy the same stuff over and over and over again.
Sure, maybe if that's your mindset. Personally I love going and doing the grocery shopping with my kids, and they love noodling around the supermarket, helping select things from the shelves, and it's generally a good time.
The drive to crush every interaction beyond a screen flow that sticks money into Bezos' pocket, glorified by misanthropes under the banner of "efficiency" seems more like a vision of hell to me.
I've recently signed up for Amazon Prime (in Canada). I "Subscribe and Save" for a few items. Two of those items being paper towel and toilet paper. My wife does most of the shopping and carrying out 36 rolls of toilet paper to the car doesn't make sense when she's also carrying a baby. So I figure what's the harm in having it delivered to my door every month? I love Subscribe and Save.
I've just started taking advantage of Subscribe & Save. The products are cheaper than what I pay for them at the local grocery store, plus I've made sure to include at least 5 items in each order so I get the 15% discount (instead of 5%). Subscribe & Save is really great for items that are hard to carry when coming back from the store and that don't degrade quickly.
Agreed. I usually cross reference Walmarts online prices. They are usually the same (for the products I have looked at). I utilize the subscribe and save for items that I never realize I need until I'm all out (razor blades, shaving cream, diapers). However I've yet to fully explore all the offerings.
Pro-tip: Walmart and Amazon are both significantly marking up the price of paper online (be it in rolls, tissues, or sheets).
The rolls are smaller, the prices are higher. Actually do the comparison. Note that box stores rotate the sales weekly between the major brands, but they each go on sale in turn each month.
In major Chinese city like Beijing and Shanghai, it's even possible for "same day delivery" if you order before 11am (Jingdong -- jd.com -- delivers 3 times a day) and it's also possible to "pay when delivered" (i.e. give cash to the delivery man) since many people don't have credit card or web payment is too complicated/dangerous for them.
Most people in US don't realize what Amazon has done to prices in US. I'm too used to prices like $18 Syma 107G RC heli and $50 waterpiks. Other countries are not like that. They have little competition from online shopping and as a result people there usually pay significant premiums. I recently traveled to so-called shopping capital of the world, i.e. Dubai. My expectation was that everything would be cheaper, well, because most of the Dubai is just made for shopping and its even tax free. I was horrified to find things like Syma 107G at $50 and most other stuff at 20%-50% premiums even at "discount" shops. In my foreign travels, I have yet to encounter a place that consistently beats Amazon on prices anywhere close even with best currency conversion rates and even after high sales taxes in US. Most consumers in world have to pay about 30% margins to retailers while people in US gets away with just 3% - thanks to Amazon.
I have been using the Amazon "scan" function (in the app) a lot recently and I really doesn't think it gets any easier than that to reorder things you're running low on. I don't need a freaking button I will need to configure, hope it uses the right payment method and address, hope it I didn't just press it a few days ago... etc.
Americans are spoiled. Whether you think this innovation will be useful to you personally or not, the amount of hate spewed at it is just fascinating. Think this is not useful? Don't buy it.
> we need to physically go to the store and buy the same stuff over and over and over again.
The horror....
The "dystopian consumer hell" is that humans spend their time making this crap instead of, you know, something that's not a complete waste of time and resources.
It's a intermediate step towards absolute frictionless purchasing.
We went from physical in-store cash payments to online 1-click delivery. The purchasing experience has continuously been quickened, to close the gap between the intent and the action.
Nowadays, running out of coffee capsules (for example) still requires some interaction, via your phone or your laptop. There's at least a dozen of seconds between the intent and the action.
Having a button attached to the products container doesn't only remove that intent/action gap physically but also mentally, because you're actually consuming the product at that exact moment.
The ultimate frictionless experience would be for coffee capsules to be delivered before running out of them, through a prediction system à la Google Now. But that would require some kind of physical tracking system...
Some people think it's an April fools joke. I'm not so sure. It makes sense to me.
If you think about what a butler would do, that's the logical endpoint, it could mostly be done in software I think. Given a budget and a set of goals (keep certain things stocked, fresh, replace when used) it would try to satisfy them. It might warn you if it can't, and you could adjust criteria if you don't like the results. Given the API that appears to be behind the buttons I think we're already at the point where you could create a device so you could just yell in frustration "GODDAMMIT I NEED MORE TIDE™" and then it shows up an hour later (in select cities).
> Given the API that appears to be behind the buttons I think we're already at the point where you could create a device so you could just yell in frustration "GODDAMMIT I NEED MORE TIDE™" and then it shows up an hour later (in select cities).
> Nowadays, running out of coffee capsules (for example) still requires some interaction, via your phone or your laptop.
Just taking a moment to enjoy that the above quote would have sounded exactly "like the future" to childhood me, and yet is both true and how I live my life today.
Now that door-to-door supermarket deliveries are a thing (at least, they are here in the UK) it actually seems that a lot of items would just be more convenient to order on a subscription basis. For example, I'm pretty much always* going to need toilet paper, soap, shampoo, deodorant, toothpaste, tea bags, salt, pepper, etc. at about the same rate as I need them now. None of those things will spoil fast enough for it to be a problem if they're not delivered exactly when I need them. I would be delighted to just not have to think about the essentials and leave grocery shopping for the more interesting, impulsive decisions. These buttons seem to be just for the former, though. In other words, I'd rather not have the button OR the auto-running-out-sensing thing when a regular order would just be easier all round.
I'm annoyed they haven't closed the PID loop to track how many oz of mouthwash I consume, or use, per month, so it could predict how often to ship me various sizes and quantities of mouthwash.
Also being individual item oriented every time inflation leaves its mark and bottles shrink in size, my subscription is cancelled and I need to make a new S+S for the "new and improved" one oz smaller bottle. And every time the mfgr decides to play games with 2-pack vs 3-pack of bottles, I gotta resubscribe again. Really annoying.
What I want from amazon is a web interface of "based on order history I seem to be using 412.345 oz of mint mouthwash per year and amazon predicts I have 20.001 oz on hand (click here to update quantity on hand) and to meet our guarantee of you having 2 weeks supply on hand at all time we're shipping you our current mint mouthwash best deal of two bottles in one box" or whatever.
I get a pretty big S+S box every month. I have not automated down to weekly purchases like toilet paper but inevitably it'll happen some day. I wonder if they'll ever have a standard reusable stackable shipping crate like peapod food containers. That must be cheaper than all this cardboard.
I like the idea (diapers and UHT milk packets) until they tell me they can't fulfill the order every once in a while (or fulfill it significantly later). I get an email (and not in time to order a replacement elsewhere in time) and have to go about ensuring that I have enough.
If it's not reasonably reliable, it's not really worth subscribing to.
Didn't I just read on HN the other day that you can do motion tracking with audio? I wouldn't be shocked if my Nest thermostat and protect smoke detectors could geolocate my in my home.
not sure why this is being downvoted, but this seems like the best solution of all. it's still a one button operation but you're not locked in to pre-programmed choices and it can service the whole house (and office if you press it at work).
They really want to find a way to have me do exactly this. "Hey I need more detergent. Press skinner-box level. Great more detergent is on it's way! Right from your favorites list on Amazon."
And frankly, that would be great and wildly convenient.
If it all goes as planned, you will likely have that too automated(More like automated detection if you are running out of groceries, in some way), either self driving cars or drones will deliver it to you.
I've got to drive to the store, find it, wait in line, check out, put it in my car and then drive home. That's much more friction than just pressing a button.
> But that would require some kind of physical tracking system...
Package RFID tags with every item, and a smart fridge/smart cabinet. It's not that hard.
A retailer like Walmart might even pay for the manufacturer to install these RFID tags, as they can be used double-duty in the retailer's own inventory process.
Or, you can do what I do -- a barcode scanner near my trash can that scans the UPC codes of everything that I throw away (or recycle) and adds it to my shopping list for the next time that I'm out.
This just seems like a stop-gap solution before the true solution which is wearables (or Amazon Echo/Glass).
Saying the name of what you want to buy into your smartwatch/glass/echo is going to be a lot more frictionless and scalable than putting these buttons all over your house.
| The ultimate frictionless experience would be for coffee capsules to be delivered before running out of them
But it's not like people can't be this, without much mental overhead. If I know it takes two days to ship something, and I use it daily, and recognize I'll be out in three days - I'm gonna push that button.
It's frictionless because it integrates perfectly with the use of the product.
How long before automatic cat-feeders automatically purchase cat food for you?
The data generated by even a few dozen people using these buttons will greatly improve prediction algorithms for consumables.
This is totally creepy and awesome.
I think the end game is delivery of a good by robotics in under an hour. I'm not sure what the next step in that is. But this doesn't solve the main problem Amazon faces that their traditional competition solves: I don't have a good, say laundry detergent, and I need it now. I'd wait an hour for a drone to deliver something to my apartment if it meant not having to go out to the store.
It's not just a physical button — it's an API. If you develop a hardware product you can apparently integrate with Dash to order supplies from the embedded controller.
Apparently, Whirlpool washing machines and Brita water filters will be using it. This doesn't help for basics like paper towels, but it would work for paper towel holders (if it's true). The IoT is here.
I'd worry about an appliance too quickly re-ordering. My printer refused to print because it thought the toner was all gone. A black marker to the sensor on the side of the toner and I'm back and printing. It's been almost a month now and still going strong.
Sure, I would love to press a button that will order things for me without seeing the price I'm going to pay ... oh wait, no, Amazon would love that, I wouldn't.
This is for people who don't care what things cost and that don't have children (children loooove pressing buttons!).
1. It sends an alert to your phone with the price and easy cancellation. (I was actually surprised at this feature, because I cynically agreed that Amazon would use this to constantly be trying to pull one over on customers.)
2. I also believe it said that repeat clicks will not order until the previous order delivers, which should help somewhat on repeat orders.
This product isn't really aimed at price-sensitive consumers, but I also don't see Amazon fucking over their customers with this. One thing I like about Amazon is that they don't play pricing games: they show you the best price in the search results, period.
When you push the button you get a push notification to your phone, which will show you the price and give you the option to cancel it, which at least gives you some way to back out if the price is hiked up.
Hardware is the easy bit in the whole IoT business model. The tricky bit will be persuading people that it's something they need. For this business model to work it has to solve a big enough problem that taking the time to sign up for something like this button, getting it delivered, setting it up, and actually remembering to press it when necessary is worth the effort. That's a challenging thing to market to people - especially those who live outside of the tech industry. Which is most people.
"Build it, they will come" will not work here. Because it doesn't work anywhere.
This isn't a product for consumers, this is a product for CPG companies. As a result, I imagine a lot of the cost here will be covered by the companies making the products. If Amazon covers the logistics of everything (making the buttons, managing the APIs, stocking and delivering the products, managing payments) then P&G just pays to give you a "Tide" button.
CPGs will pay a LOT for this because it makes their brands "stickier". I can't tell you what brand of paper towels I normally buy, but if I always bought them through my "Bounty" button, I would always buy Bounty paper towels instead of whatever is on sale at the store.
I doubt this button connects to Wi-Fi directly - that's too much hassle (and too power-hungry). I wonder if Amazon has some sort of Zigbee-like controller embedded in the Amazon Echo that is set up to manage low-power devices like this.
Wi-Fi is power hungry because it's always on. It seems like these little buttons would only need to connect when you press them, then shut off right after. It's a very minor power draw when you consider the wi-fi will only run for 15 seconds every month or so. Of course, that's my read on it - maybe it does connect to the Echo.
CPGs will pay a LOT for this because it makes their brands "stickier".
Exactly right, and this is exactly analogous to brands (or more often, their distributors) renting shelf space, and sometimes even hiring their own people to stock shelves.
Or you'll have to set up your MyWhirlpool account on their website so that you can pair their app on your iPhone with your washing machine so you can search their incomplete list of detergent brands and add your second choice to your MyWhirlpoolBrandSelect Favorites List and then give up when Amazon seems to stop supporting that brand.
The MyWhirlpool website will also require the Silverlight plugin and you'll have to connect your washing machine with an USB cable in order to do anything.
Every once in a while the button will just randomly stop working and you'll have to go through the motions again.
Finally, after several months of struggling against the sunk-cost fallacy that forces you to spend more time working with auto-ordering than you would simply manually ordering detergent because this washing machine cost $700 more than the non-connected model, you concede defeat and return to ordering from your phone.
More like "You'll have to call a technician to replace the machine's motherboard for $1500 dollars because the machine won't start up at all if it can't get a response from the button."
Looking at you, printer/scanner combos that won't print because the scanner is failing.
Or you could, oh, I don't know, do what you've always done and go buy products yourself? Or buy a separate button for your product of choice? You don't have to use the built in system.
And there is absolutely no indication it's hardcoded to use a specific product.
So you'll have to go through the improbably strenuous exercise, mustering all your strength, and .. not configure and/or push the button. Then go to the Amazon website and order a button you can configure to deliver whatever product Amazon stocks for the shockingly ruinous price of zero.
Where do you see that the Whirlpool washing machine will be hard coded to use <brand name> products? The system is controlled via the smartphone app. I would think you could re-assign the product/brand associated with the button on the machine.
I wonder how open they are (they do say open to hobbyists). I'd really like to whip up a RaspberryPi box with buttons for things I actually reorder (instead of depending on particular brand partnerships).
Is there a one-click IoT purchase/event/signal patent? There must be many open, generic BLE buttons which can trigger users events, sending recurring orders directly to a vendor, without needing to go through a middleman API.
I didn't say it would be easier. I want something a lot smaller and less visible. Plus using the beacon is optional. If I'm on the couch and want to place aa couple quick refills...
Of course that would be amazing if it had any chance of ever existing, but it's just not possible in the society today.
Companies with money will build stuff and lock you in, and companies trying to unify everything either don't have the money or don't get the big players in, because they're not interested in shared markets, they much prefer monopoly.
The same thing happens in messaging, music, OSes, video content, etc.
These things will probably come in every box of washing powder, or cereal, or whatever, in the future. Then you can paste them all onto your fridge, from various brands and vendors.
What would be better?
I would have rather seen a third party come out with these little buttons, with an open API such that they could be connected to things like:
- Todo/grocery list apps that adds the item as a reminder the next time I run to the store
This is exactly what I was thinking. I think the core idea is actually pretty good- a seamless way to remember to get stuff you need at the time you realize you need it. One of the major pain points for shoppers is keeping track of all the crap you need at the time you are at the store. If you could continuously add to the list and then the grocery stores had some kind of integration with their loyalty program so it knew when you had purchased what was on your list and automatically removed it, that would be a huge time-saver. Even if it just synced to a todo list, that would be really nice.
However, there are two things that I think would prevent this from becoming a game-changer for Amazon. First, most shoppers are extraordinarily price-sensitive when it comes to household goods. Wal-Mart is a $270 billion company precisely because of this. Most people like to comparison shop based largely on price. If the concept of price is completely hidden from view until after the purchase is made, you are trading transparency for ease-of-use. There is certainly a market for this, but not the largest share of it.
Second, as long as there are other things that shoppers have to get at the grocery (namely, groceries), I believe that most will opt to wait until they go next time since they have to go anyway. This product doesn't solve the problem of instant-gratification and having the product at the time you need it, it just makes it a little easier to order it when you need it.
> Most people like to comparison shop based largely on price.
Amazon, and many others, are betting this is increasingly less true, and not only that, but price discrimination is the most important profit maximizing method in the world. These are price discrimination buttons.
I don't think you can really make that claim considering that Walmart has been profitable since its beginnings and Amazon hasn't been profitable in about ten years. What makes you think that now is the time for a change in consumer behavior that has shown itself not to exist to this point in time?
It really only needs to be on for a few seconds after pressing the button to connect to wifi, and submit the order. No need for it to be in sleep mode.
Even if it's Wifi, an ESP8266 only uses 78µA in deep sleep mode, which is how these buttons will spend 99.99% of the time, so it could last more an year on a single AA battery.
i think many people are missing this key point. this isn't a "i need this right this very millisecond" its more of a "i need this later today if its early enough or tomorrow would be fine" button. which a single press of a button would wake up the device, connect to what ever configured network connection it is assigned to, send some data to an API end point, go back to sleep. that could make the button last many years.
I thought so too, but they have a real sounding TOS and quotes from executives at the various partner companies that check out. Seems like a really involved joke from a company that is quite serious about a lot of ridiculous sounding things (drone delivery for one).
I can see it being a very clever PR April Fools stunt. I wouldn't launch a real product like this around April 1st. However, launching a plausible but fake one will grab a lot of attention, genius.
I think the battery situation could be fine. I have a wireless mouse that boasts 3 year battery life. Since a 'dash' would only ever need to switch on and send a quick signal when pushed (which for detergent might be 50 times a year?) I imagine it could live for years (say a few hundred pushes) on a single cell.
I know a gent working on e-ink tags for grocery store shelves. They have a similar energy usage, lots of sitting idle punctuated by doing something. He's gotten 5 years on a single coin cell. I can't imagine that this would be much different.
The most interesting part of this is the "Dash Replenishment Service" linked at the bottom of the page. Looks like they're building APIs to insert the service back-end into appliances - they give an example of a coffee maker that automatically orders beans when it runs low.
They list several partners who are going to release products using it - Brita water filters (buys new filters), Whirlpool washer/dryer (detergent), Brother printers (ink/toner) and Quirky who seems to have several products that all re-order consumables.
Looks like Amazon's investing heavily into the "Internet of Things" with this.
Well how about automatically compiling a grocery list of things you need for you... and a web interface that has a one click order for each item you need restocked?
Not sure why there's so much doubt about itss use. This is amazing for things like detergent.
When I run out of detergent, I don't want to add it to shopping list. I don't want to remember when to buy. I just want it outside my door before I run out! This applies to any item that I don't feel like buying but have to buy regularly.
This would be perfect for my pets items. I always buy the same products for them, and the pet store is always a detour from my typical shopping routine. I would even like to have a macro button, that combined hard food, soft food, and litter all in one order!
I was just thinking how this is a good idea that doesn't really apply to my living situation. And then my housemates started bugging me about ordering more printer toner.
Can I get a Dash button for any random product? 'Cause I want, well, pretty much just one.
To be clear, this is not for 20-somethings. This is for parents that have screaming babies or have many competing events for their attention. For all you non-parents, there is a distinct possibility that things get forgotten between the time you realize something this out, and the time it takes to pull out your smartphone, navigate to Amazon or Google Express, and order whatever you need.
The use of this by parents immediately had me thinking about how one could child proof this.
Imagine how much it would suck if your kid got hold of one of these buttons thinking it is a toy and accidentally ordered 200+ bottles of detergent (at a cost of $1000)? I foresee this being a hilarious potential problem of the future: accidentally buying too many things due to user error or a malfunctioning button.
Knock, knock. "Hi, I'm Alexa, and my OkCupid profile is a 94% match to yours. Because of that, OkC unlocked your pre-selected social profiles for my perusal. Google Now alerted me to the opening in your schedule right now, Uber took me to your house, and plus I saw you like that Thai food joint down the street based on your FourSquare, so I brought some. Oh, and I thought we might as well watch a comedy flick you've been wanting to see according to your Netflix."
I'm sure someone (more creative than me) could write a better one
Nah, no need for her to say all that, because that info will be pushed to your phone while she's on her way over. That will give you time to arrange Homejoy to come tidy your place up real quick, while you use the new Facebook Advanced Analyics to find out that there's a very strong correlation between how long she lingers on a guy's page and how short his hair is. So you Magic over a hairdresser for a quick buzzcut, while turning up some music you think she'll like (based on her Spotify account).
That's how innovation works: 99% of the time it doesn't. Think about that the next time you give a group a hard time for being too conservative. Whenever they are not conservative, people blast them for wasting time and money on something that has a 99% chance of failure.
You could say the same thing about Google. They launch so many products and if they don't work out they just disappear. Isn't that what an innovative company does? Try crazy things and see what works.
I'll add one more to the list- whatever happened to that ridiculous device that sits in your living room and listens to your every word, responding when it happens to hear something it recognizes? I think it was called Echo?
Basically everything you get with any modern smartphone, only larger, more expensive, and probably technologically inferior!
It's $200 and if it only performs a small fraction of the functionality at what is almost certainly an inferior implementation that's a tough sale to make.
This looks awful. Imagine a house full of branded buttons. Yuk. Though I'm sure my toddler would love pressing them endlessly. And all that packaging in the video, the horror.
I don't know, looks amazing to me. Yea the branded button isn't great, but let's face it, it's going to be sitting next to the branded box/bottle anyway.
If your toddler presses it, the worst they can do is order once. It's configured to only allow one order until the item is delivered. That isn't to say your toddler still cannot do damage...
If I have to approve orders on my phone as the video suggests, I may as well create the order then and there.
Something about that video (and much of my opinion is based on the video and look of the product) makes me uneasy. It's suggesting my life is a series of purchases and top-ups, and I will be happier when I can click my branded button. Like a junkie or something. When the woman runs out of coffee it looks like she's lost a loved one. Quickly, press the button! A dystopian future, only today.
Then there are questions about when to press the button, will I have to factor delivery time and frequency of use to arrive at that answer? And will everything arrive separately? Will orders aggregate... Time will tell.
This a case of you seeing in the video what you want to see. Practically every advertisement ever created has happy people using a product. This is just a device meant to make life easier - stop overthinking it.
The difference is that while most advertisements show people happily using a product, this one shows people becoming happy merely from the act of purchasing. I also got a very uneasy "consumer junkie" vibe from it.
Of course, it's in Amazon's best economic interest to normalize and associate good feelings with the ideas of endless consumption and perpetually repeating purchasing.
The buttons are to assist with repeat purchases that we All make and that are a hassle for most of us. Detergent, toilet paper, razors, etc. It's not a matter of whether we buy these things - we all do - it's How. And for a lot of us the How is still inconvenient. This is not the perfect solution but that's the problem it seems to want to solve. It IS a problem of Remembering to purchase. How do we make it easier for people to purchase those core items they frequently run out of?
The only "junkie" vibe I got from this was the k-cups.
There should be a button for the construction of Moai and another for a family set of inflatable row boats complete with solar-powered floating kitchen (the latter delivered by amphibious drone, of course).
Clearly, as a species, we have not yet learned anything about the collapse of civilizations, and in so doing, proceed to another Tragedy of Commons at a gentle pace, because it's "not an emergency." ("Boiling frog" parable.)
Carbon emissions need to be cut drastically, and this product sets a terrible example contrary to that.
Nearly everything arrives separately already with Amazon, so not that big of a change. They seem to ship things from different warehouses half the time.
I'm not sure I understand the blowback on how and when to push the button. It's only for amazon prime members right now, so presumably you'll press the button when you need something within the next few days.
Do you wait until you are completely out of something, drop everything and drive to a store and buy it, or do you plan ahead? Same thing here without having to go to a store or write it down on a list to remember.
> If I have to approve orders on my phone as the video suggests, I may as well create the order then and there.
The first shot of the phone is during setup. The second shot is the "an order was made" push notification, which you can use to cancel the order, but no action means it will just go through.
Come now, you can't tell me that you've gone to use $PRODUCT_NAME, only to realize that it's out/almost out. We all forget to replenish our stock once in a while.
This seems like a great product for the post-college individual, living away on their own for the first time (i.e. me). Heck, I know already that I'm low on detergent, yet I keep forgetting to go to the store to pick up more. Obviously that's my fault, but being able to LITERALLY press a button and have what I need appear at my doorstep is pretty sweet.
Though, I'm still not totally convinced that this isn't an April Fool's joke that's a day early...
Hell, it's going to be sitting in my pantry, behind the paper towels. That way, when I have few rolls left, the button becomes visible and then the button gets pushed.
The timing is terrible. Even if it's not a joke, they've just set themselves up for this exact comment.
Surely someone would have thought of this? Just seems like a really bad choice -- too bad for a company like Amazon to make (the timing, that is, coupled with a highly-branded product like this).
You don't remember Google's April 1st announcement of Gmail, then. With gigabytes of storage, it was the perfect joke for the day and naturally carried by news outlets everywhere. And the joke continued on the next day, people realized that it wasn't actually a joke and, naturally, another media frenzy happened. Perfect example of guerrilla marketing IMO.
I guess, if your philosophy is "bad coverage is still coverage". But hasn't this happened with an Amazon product announcement before, and backfired? Amazon Echo comes to mind.
Not even sure that was around April fools, but my point is, bad coverage can, and has often, backfired.
That's sort of my point. Most people, with April Fools just around the corner (and already here, for some), it will still be used in mockery comments about the product, even though they know it's a real product.
Maybe considering their history of product announcements (Amazon Echo), they're being cautious about it this time. If it gets mocked, they'll just say "Oh it was an April Fool's joke"
This happens every year. Lots of product announcements do go out around April 1 because it's the end of first quarter. Also there's lots of B.S. april fools day jokes. Hilarity ensues.
Agreed, but I would give up the micro-locations of having all these buttons throughout my house for a single panel with a half dozen or 10 buttons which are configurable for products I actually re-order pretty regularly (coffee filters, etc.)
It seems you're more worried about your toddler having access to the button than the detergent and bleach it's next to. Why would one be out of reach but not the other?
This would work great in an office environment. If it's an API, it would be great if there is a chance for an office admin to manage requests as well (i.e. still easier to buy milk from the store; additional coffee cartridges may be in storage locally somewhere.)
The video reads like some kind of dystopian consumer hell. Everything comes in a packet from a trusted brand who is taking care of you. Consume! Consume! Consume! See you useless you are when you can't consume! Your whole day is ruined.
Good job we've got your back. We'll send you some more of those precious packets.
So then you don't get the coffee button. There are a set of products where selection isn't important or where you have brand loyalty (detergent is an excellent example).
Interesting link. Suggests that presenting unnecessary choice leads to passive behaviour. I'm thinking of active choices rather than seeing a row of a dozen different identical kitchen towel brands at the supermarket. Like, what are the ethical standards of this shop, how does it treat it's suppliers, does it exploit it's workforce etc.
Every decision is important, and every time it is automated for the sake of convenience is a little bit of disenfranchisement.
Again, it depends what you consider important. Purchasing decisions arguably dictate much transnational economic concerns. For example palm oil, the fair trade movement. As a global citizen I would say that was well spent decision juice.
I'm sitting higher up on my high horse than I started, but discussions tend to polarise / crystallize views!
Most supposedly anti-consumerism arguments I hear imply we should devote more attention to our purchases.
But, if you want an identity that isn't based on consumerism, it seems we should devote less attention to your purchases rather than more.
Honestly, I don't care about toilet paper. If I can hit a button and move on with the rest of my life, that seems better than spending time shopping for it.
Except this is literally FOR consumables. Like, detergent and toilet paper and things that get used up quickly.
If the physical button was free, I wouldn't mind having a few of these to just press when I need some more of something like that. Remembering to write it on a list and bring it with you to the store and pick it up is a bit of a hassle.
I already don't question my habits for paper towels or laundry detergent. I buy the same ones every time because it works and it's not worth optimizing the $20 of paper towels or detergent I'll buy every 6 months.
Maybe you're right about those particular things (but maybe in a dystopian future you would because the interference with competition drove the price up into local maxima).
Seriously though, do I question my habits when buying food, drinks and coffee. This video is saying "you can lock yourself into a cycle of dependence on this one brand of coffee and this one brand of water and this one brand of cheap unhealthy ready-made packaged food".
Either you find that unpalatable in principle or you don't. It's probably a cultural thing.
Why all of this talk about a dystopian future? I can choose to refill on a particular brand of paper towels without giving up my right to choose what I eat. This entire thread is full of absurdity.
The conversation started about consumables like laundry detergent and paper towels, not food and drinks. So I'm not sure why food and drinks came up, and then why the further jump to "unhealthy" food and drinks.
Personally, I buy the same stuff over and over because it doesn't matter. I don't want to spend time worrying about things that don't matter.
No point dragging this out. But this conversation started with a video about how you can order things including food (e.g. microwave ready made food) and drinks (coffee and bottled water).
What if I know what kind I like and don't want to change that? I don't see why you think it's such a bad idea for people who know what they like and want to make their lives easier with a little button. You don't have to get one, but don't try to make people who want one out to be mindless consumer drones.
I'm not commenting on the people who want to use the service, I'm commenting on the video which is unashamedly monoculture big-business. If they'd included a custom button for organic honey from the local local yoghurt-weaver I wouldn't feel quite so negative...
I would feel guilty using a button like this. I mean, do I seriously lack the time and/or willpower to go to the store and pick up my own groceries? Thanks Amazon, but I got this.
> I mean, do I seriously lack the time and/or willpower to go to the store and pick up my own groceries?
I think it's more for refilling things you commonly use without needing to worry about them. I can't tell you how many times I've forgotten things like detergent when we were low or out but pressing a button when I notice it's out right after I use it? That's really low friction. It's not a half bad idea in my opinion.
Between Google Shopping Express, Instacart, and Amazon Fresh, yes, I'd say there are tons of people who lack the time and/or willpower to do their own groceries.
Did we see the same video? Those were all megabrands, probably all manufactured by a small number of Unilever-type companies. (Of course amazon carries it, they carry everything.)
what isn't to love about this, oh look i'm running out of bog roll so I push the button ordering more....a little while later it arrives - probably the next day with 0 p & p as i have amazon prime.
I get lots of small deliveries of whatever i need an can spend less time shopping - perfect.
This is the part that bothers me most. A lot of small deliveries are convenient and all, but the cost to ship multiple small items (maybe separately) to your door has an impact.
We are currently in a single-serve consumer-focused environment and this takes it a step farther.. potentially a single item shipment environment.
Unless they batch days or a full week, I think this is a bad habit to get in.
Showing this around the office, the best answer I heard was "Someone made the Staples Easy Button a real thing"
This extends the 'Subscribe and Save' model to products that people are unsure about how often they will need it. You put a Dash button on the shelf where you store toilet paper, and you know precisely when to hit it.
This seems like a small thing, but it's not. There are metrics that measure easily measure how much you forget simply by moving between different rooms in your house.
They say that the full API for this will be openly available in the fall. Am I correct in understanding that this means that I could make my own service to order things (for myself only) I'd like at the push of a button? Like could I set up my own button that buys something I like (regardless of whether the brand does anything with this? Or will only vendors be able to use this for their own products? (Maybe my scenario is already possible and I just don't know.)
Consider me old fashioned, but what is so hard about a shopping list, or a problem that's not already solved by amazon subscriptions? Especially on essential items, usage rate is pretty static, and its not like hitting "OMG IM OUT OF BOUNTYS!" button will make them instantly appear.
Perhaps this is their implementation of Adobe's "encyclopedia" commercial? (ok im done with TV references)
What WOULD be cool and useful is a way for me to say "hey, send me this subscription item a week later/earlier because my usage rate is not what i thought it would be.
this actually reminds me a bit of the amazon echo in that it is completely and totally household dependent.
i have an echo and think it's completely amazing. my friend, basically has siri in his pocket and doesn't understand my crazy-love. the difference is that he's a single guy with his own apartment who always has his phone or computer within reach. i'm not.
my house is a family of four (me, the beautiful wife, a couple pre-teen boys) with a large common area filled with lots of traffic and commotion. the kids don't have phones. my wife and i have phones and computers, but they're not always in reach. whether she's making everyone's lunches in the morning, i'm playing munchkin with the boys, she's helping them with homework, i'm washing dishes after dinner, etc. -- it's rarely convenient (not to mention the poor social etiquette around the dinner table) to whip out a phone and do any 60-seconds-or-more task. with a family, you are kind of forced to be fully engaged most of the time.
this means we use the heck out of the amazon echo for the shopping list (also the music player, weather check, and timers for the boys) out of pure, unadulterated convenience.
in a busy household, it may sound cliche, but it's EXTREMELY convenient to just say "alexa, add sandwich bags to the shopping list" and the like while you're elbow-deep into putting away leftovers.
but having a free, physical button that magically reorders trash bags or detergent or paper towels placed in the very location where you would consume such things? magical!
because, again, in a busy household there are about a thousand other things you need to get to by the time you notice "oh, we're almost out of toilet paper" and inevitably, you'll catch yourself standing in costco next week trying to remember all the things you were almost out of.
and these are just the benefits to me -- for tide? this seems like a huge opportunity for brand lock-in and is probably even a joint venture between them and amazon.
> but having a free, physical button that magically reorders trash bags or detergent or paper towels placed in the very location where you would consume such things? magical!
I don't get it. I keep tens of such things in my kitchen alone (paper towels, napkins, dish sponges, aluminum foil, plastic wrap, etc, etc). Does anyone really want a bank of these buttons lined up inside each cabinet? Wouldn't it be about 1000x more convenient to just have an app for this with all my Dash buttons running on the little computer that's always within arm's reach?
i would certainly rather have a small bank of interchangeable buttons for the 1/2 dozen items below my sink (dishwasher pods, 408, windex, sponges, trash bags, dish soap) than having to (with wet hands) find my phone/app/screen/button/click. those, of course, would be different than the small bank of buttons near the shelf in the garage. which would be different than the small bank of buttons in the laundry room.
would it make the inside of the sink cabinet door nicer-looking to have an app in my pocket? probably. also, this isn't a zero-sum thing. we can have both!
We'll have to agree to disagree then. I don't want a bank of buttons anywhere. Do you really want 30 different devices to set up and then worry about whether they've lost the connection to your wifi or run out of battery life or had their contacts corroded by your ever-soggy button presses?
I'd like an app with a lineup of Amazon Dash consumables. If my hands are filthy or wet I'll try to keep a single intention in my head for 30 seconds until that's no longer the case. And if I don't feel like doing that I can just write a note on a pad.
Luckily along with the buttons they're putting out an API for doing exactly that (https://www.amazon.com/oc/dash-replenishment-service). I wouldn't be surprised if some apps pop up soon that do exactly what you described. The buttons are just easier to market to the general population.
I can't help thinking about the internals of this thing. Does it communicate via WiFi or Bluetooth? What about battery life time and manufacturing cost per unit? The form factor looks pretty slim.
It says right there you have to setup your wi-fi password on the device, so that's (kinda) clear.
Manufacturing cost can be off-loaded to the product makers: the buttons look branded, so if you are Tide you are paying something like $20/40 bucks to get a constant Tide logo inside my cupboard and getting the path of least resistance for purchases... if you've ever dealt with marketing numbers, that's not bad at all!
It says it uses wifi.
There are $5 wifi modules, which I guess would have enough processing to remember your wifi, and do 1 HTTP request, and (in volume) should be feasible for $10. A spark core (which has a bit more functions), costs $20 retail.
They have removed the last piece of the hassle of shopping. Now you don't need to even get your computer out and search your past orders.
In all honesty, I don't think I would use the buttons though. The API is the important piece. I could see me configuring this with IFTTT do button or something. Do things like order a week of groceries when I know I'm going to be home for a week, etc.
I'm sure people are going to hate on these buttons, think of the API here.
My wife likes to order some detergents, soaps, and other supplies from Amazon, but one rather cumbersome aspect is all the extra packaging that has to be torn down and recycled or thrown away. Since my wife doesn't like to bother with such things, I end up spending 5-15 minutes a week deconstructing Amazon packaging. I would rather pick up these types of supplies while getting groceries, but for some products Amazon is cheaper.
Those branded face-plates are magnetic and swappable... right?!
Also, knowing Amazon, they will pack a Prime box and ship it with just that one *$%! bottle of laundry detergent or an envelope with just the pack of razors. Short press for "some time in the next week", long press for "tomorrow", and 12-rapid-clicks for "I'm naked and have no clean clothes, send it on the drone!"
I am conflicted by this. On the one hand the EE in me is excited to see how technology is making our lives easier by allowing us to spend less time on mundane tasks. On the other hand I have this nagging feeling about all this e-waste. I think about all the electrical components being used for a device that has a single use and is likely (at this price point) will be very disposable
I'd like to hack one of them to do something more interesting. I suspect it's probably quite capable under the hood and could be re-purposed. Sort of a double edged sword though, what if you got malware on your Tide button?
I have to say - this actually looks like a great idea for products like detergents, etc. I can see how this can work on a laundry machine. Apart from that... Where would I put the button for Bounty? Or Gillette?
This is clearly an April fools campaign. This approach is simply not the most viable. How many buttons are you going to have in your household? How are you going to protect it from kids etc!
Are you willing to bet it's an April Fools' joke? If you're not willing to bet, you don't really believe in it. I'll wager $200 against your $20 that it's not an April Fool's joke.
Before you give me your money, consider:
* You can have as many buttons as you want. They want you to have as many buttons as you can have. They have hooks and adhesive, which means you can basically have a button physically on every product that needs to be replaced. Your toilet paper holder can have a button. Your shower can have a button for shampoo and conditioner. Your mirror can have five buttons on it. Personally, I would fucking love for my house to be covered with buttons that I can just push to get things sent to me. That's the future I want.
* The button generates a notification on your phone and doesn't respond to subsequent presses, so you can cancel the order on your phone if your kids press the button. But the real solution here is to not have children. The world is overpopulated enough, and with the money you save by not having kids, you can just get more stuff from amazon. Which would you rather have: A new gaming PC, iPad, and iPhone every year, or some brat that won't appreciate you, won't call you more than once a month after you spend the best years of your life trying to raise them into a halfway decent person and failing because their snot-nosed friends ruin them, and keeps asking for money? The choice is obvious.
You had me convinced at 'real solution is to not have children'. While this is a compelling social message, I don't believe Amazon would knowingly, consciously, commit to such a message.
If it's an April Fools', think it'll be announced as such in a month? Willing to take $200 of my money risking only $20 of your own to put a stake in that belief?
If you won't even risk the price of four Starbucks coffees on your belief, do you really have it?
What's a better approach for in-the-moment, one-touch ordering of household necessities? I'm sure Amazon would like to hear your idea.
> How many buttons are you going to have in your household?
However many you would like. Sorta depends on what kind of products you'd like to buy in this manner. That's kinda the point.
> How are you going to protect it from kids
First of all, children are short. Put the buttons out of their reach. Second -- these are incredibly boring buttons that order boring things and provide no immediate pleasure or feedback. Kids don't crawl around on top of washing machines looking for buttons to press because washing machines are boring. Also you get a notification when you order something, so a kid smashing it is easily reversed. Common sense works fine here.
(Also, lots and lots of people don't have kids, or have kids old enough that they're not going to press a button to order laundry detergent willy-nilly, etc.)
The real solution is a family robot that monitors consumption of household items in a smart home and orders everything that you need in a timely manner.
The world is moving towards connected homes, connected cars, connected fridges etc, why the hell would you want individual stick on buttons, that would be silly.
This is really cool! But for price-conscious consumers like me (I'm cheap) it may not be an option. I'm sure this is going to cost more than if I just buy whatever is on sale at the grocery store. However, if this becomes ubiquitous, it may mean the product is even cheaper than it is at the store.
I think this is great! Some may complain about all of the branding in their house, but the branding is already there. You have packages of Tide, Bounty, Clorox, etc. You can just place these buttons where you store the products. I'd imagine a column of them stuck to the inside of a cabinet door.
I have started removing the labels from branded products as much as possible: shampoo, face wash, soap, bleach. I like the simplicity. I avoid wearing branded clothes as much as possible. The last thing I would do is put an advertisement for P&G in my home, but I am clearly in the minority.
Interesting. I'd say you're definitely in the minority :) Clothes I can understand, but removing branding from something like a bottle of bleach that spends most of it's life out of sight seems like wasted effort. That could just be me though.
For a minute I thought they were getting rid of the Amazon Dash (https://fresh.amazon.com/dash/) and replacing it with the button. Looks like both products still exist.
I can see this being really cool for some products but for a number of the ones they show on that landing page I already use subscribe and save. If you aren't using S&S you should check it out. I use it for items that I am going to buy no matter what (needs more or less) and things I have pretty consistent need of. Currently I get the following through S&S which means I just don't even have to worry about them anymore:
* Paper towels
* Toilet Paper
* Shaving Cream
* Razor Blades
* Body Wash
* Shampoo/Conditioner
* Tissues
* Deodorant
* Some K-cups
* Dryer Sheets
* Dish Washing soap
* Laundry Detergent
* Dishwasher powder-stuff
And I'm sure there are a few more I'm forgetting. It's awesome to never have to worry about these things and have them just show up. If I start piling up with too many of certain item I just go online and adjust how often they send it to me. I highly recommend it!
I'm really late to the game on this one, and there are too many places I want to put this comment, so hell, I'll just drop it here at the top level.
This button prevents you from playing the "specials" game.
I don't know about the rest of the world, but in Australia, our groceries are put on special once month for a week or so 30-50% off regular retail. (I would love to see this graphed out somewhere.)
I assume the reason is so that, people that don't care how much their groceries cost, or don't have the foresight to buy in advance pay 30-50% more than somebody who buys things when they are on special.
I like to think the special price is the actual price, and the regular price is the suckers price.
My 1.5 year old will be excited to see this button in our dishwasher. Every time we goes that side, he will make sure to press it at least 11 times. More so, if he gets a good music feedback when the button is pressed.
I have no need for this, but I signed up anyways to play with it and hack it, if possible. Imagine hooking up these buttons to call the kids to the dinner table... :-D
Added later: is anyone else reminded of CueCat, from the 90s?
While this rendition of such a concept seems... odd, I can picture something similar on a more flexible scale with, say, a cheap e-Ink-based touchscreen (or maybe a column of physical buttons to the left or right of the screen) tablet of sorts dedicated to being a sort of household ordering kiosk; just preload it with the sorts of products you might need for a particular room, then set and forget. When you need to restock on something, just press the button.
For example, in my bathroom, I'd load up my preferred choices of, say, soap, shampoo, hand soap, toilet paper, toilet bowl cleaner, toothpaste, etc. onto this cheap tablet, mount it somewhere in my bathroom (maybe on a wall somewhere near the sink or something), and forget about it until I realize I'm nearly out of shampoo, at which point I'll hit the "Head & Shoulders" button on my little bathroom kiosk and Amazon will have a bottle of seleniumy alien-invasion-stopping goodness delivered to my front door within 2 business days.
My laundry room would then have a similar little e-Ink kiosk loaded with options for detergent, dryer sheets, and the various cleaning supplies I store in there. The kitchen's kiosk would have buttons for things like dishwasher gel, soap, and some commonly-purchased food items like Top Ramen and Deschutes porter and glass-bottle Mountain Dew.
Basically, I can see a future where such a concept of integrating restocking with day-to-day activities can be reality, and while these Dash buttons ain't perfect, they're a step in the right direction in ways that current smartphone-centric methods can't easily replicate.
Linking yourself to a brand in this way completely removes any power you have as a consumer. I don't understand why people do it. And to be honest it seems more prevalent the younger you are.
If you like a brand, you should really be doing a quick c/b analysis prior to making any purchase. Why? Because it changes often.
A seller's entire goal in life is to extract maximum profit, so they tinker endlessly, with formulas, package sizes, prices, etc, etc.
As a consumer, you should be looking at how this movement affects your personal cost benefit analysis. At some point, the price may become too high, the formula not ideal, etc. for you.
Simply disregarding that and saying "no matter what, I buy Tide" is a sure way to be taken to the cleaners.
This is a genius bit of technology for businesses that want to maximize profits, so I'm sure they will be all over it. P&G would love to sell you Tide without you even looking at other brands, or the size of the package, or the price. It's a seller's dream.
It's horrible for a consumer though. I'd suggest all consumers give careful thought to relinquishing any bargaining power they may have in an already unbalanced equation.
Case in point: Disposable razors.
EDIT: Heh, didn't think this would be a popular post. Go figure.
Here's why people do it... If you have something you like, it's frequently easier not to have to rethink the purchase decision every time. We have finite attention spans. We can spend it on price shopping staples, or programming, or being with our families. For many people, the $10/order of rethinking prices isn't worth the hassle of 15 minutes and uncertainty in a less important decision. They'd rather invest the time picking software, clothes, cars, schools, or whatever. It's the same reason people won't drive an extra 15 minutes to Walmart.
It most certainly is "easier" to not negotiate to get the best value for your money. Businesses love taking your money, especially if you give them extra. Hell, I like it when my customers do this too.
>For many people, the $10/order of rethinking prices isn't worth the hassle of 15 minutes and uncertainty in a less important decision.
I'm perfectly aware that people prefer not to actually think about their money. Hell, that's why credit cards are so popular. I'm saying though that whether they realize it or not, it is not in their best interests to value their few minutes of time over the money they have.
You're putting words into my mouth. Consumer debt is another thing entirely.
It's much more time efficient not to sweat every financial detail. Save time for the big ones. (Mortgage rates, negotiating cards, optimizing debt, making investment choices, etc)
"Not sweating" the small details is a big part of why we have consumer debt levels where they are.
The two are distinctly connected. People who are likely not worrying about an extra $5-$10 are likely not worrying about an extra $5K-$10K either. It's a mentality, not a number.
How does it screw them? Is the gov't requiring people to use it?
As far as I can tell you can decide if you think the price/convenience tradeoff works for you.
As it stands right now, when I go to get replacement razor blades from Amazon, I don't price compare anyways. I know what the ballpark price is, and if its in that ballpark I order. I could spend 2 hours on SlickDeals and other various sites finding the best price, and doing auctions on EBay, but I decided that saving a buck or two isn't worth it (especially since half the time I'd end up saving no money).
There are also people who make $70/hour who will spend 100 hours price shopping to save $200 on a stroller. Time is finite and valuable. You shouldn't walk away from every financial decision, but the small ones aren't worth worrying about.
I absolutely get why people choose brands and just stick with them - especially for relatively cheap and occasional things like these. But you do have a point.
There's a washing detergent I usually buy because it tends to be cheap and does the job well. But this weekend in my local supermarket it seemed more expensive than usual and another similar one was on sale. I figured I'd take a look - turns out they're both owned by procter&gamble, their ingredients are identical and they claim to do exactly the same thing with the same amount of liquid. My assumption is they're bottled from the same vat, they're certainly interchangeable for me.
I'm not saying go analyse every product on the shelves instead of just picking up whatever, but if you're not in a rush it's worth checking special offers if they're really similar to what you were going to buy.
And it's definitely worth being aware of the megacorporations that own the brands on the supermarket shelves - most of the well known brands are owned by a few umbrella organisations and not really competing at a high level.
I doubt this is a surprise to anyone, but as a couple of examples PG [0] own BOSS Black, Christina Aguilera, Hugo and Old Spice fragrances; as well as Bold, Daz, Fairy, Flash and Lenor detergents. There are nowhere near as many competitors as there are brands on supermarket shelves.
I think what we may have here is Amazon using hardware to simulate interest and jump-start eventual software. While this seems really cool, it also seems so wasteful that I'm not sure I can bring myself to really use one of these. What I think would be good though is an Amazon quick-list of essentials that you can access in a very streamlined way through the Amazon phone app.
A quick list of purchasables through the phone app is something essentially have, or could have with very minimal work. Getting people to use what essentially doesn't sound like that interesting of a feature is the problem. A cool swizzy new hardware device fits that need, and once people are using that, the App just pre-fills the quick list with items they are using through hardware. People can then decide whether they want a new button for a new essential, or just to add it to the app, and eventually people are just using the app more because there don't exist certain buttons or waiting for them is a hassle.
Not the kind of thing just any company could pul off, but it is the kind of thing I think Amazon could.
It being so extremely single-purpose makes me think it is a joke.
But it could easily be made real: Add a camera and you could have something to either scan a bar code or recognize the product label. Press button, hold the item in question still for a second, done. No need for 2 rows of buttons in the kitchen ;)
(I've actually seen something like this for shopping list creation as a DIY project somewhere, years ago)
Like google glass this seems almost more interesting in a business or office environment.
There are many situations where your inventory runs low of something fairly obscure. Having the employee press the "order more" button and have shit show up is productivity boost. Sure, you could accomplish the same with a barcode and scanner app, but it is a little bit more automation.
This is incredibly cool. I love the way it blurs the line between the physical and the digital. I very much dislike the trend towards touchscreens on everything, I personally like physical controls that have a single purpose, like a volume button.
I could easily order laundry soap on my phone, but this is far quicker and easier, and a genius move by Amazon.
I think it will surely be useful for many people and in the end that's what really matters here. But will I use it? unlikely. I'd much rather have something on my phone, a bunch of icons for things i order frequently, and single tap there.
How long until these light up and start talking to you, begging you to press the button whenever it senses motion near it?
But whatever - they're pushing the ball. If this takes off, eventually you'll be able to build your own - something I have been waiting for at a reasonable price point. It also means other market engagement - things like food or medical monitoring - some good possibilities there.
But I don't think this is an april fools joke. If it is, they're the fools. It's only march 30th.
Not much of an opinion on this, but a step beyond this seems like it could be interesting.
1) You register all the products you reorder with any frequency (detergents, napkins, whatever)
2) Each package comes with a remotely readable electronic tag
3) A device periodically scans for inventory (I'm assuming very little intelligence in the tags, so an evented system is out)
4) When the number of packages per type reaches some critical threshold, you receive an email/app alert asking if you'd like to reorder
Some refrigerators have this, but it would be much more interesting to have it be all products. One of the first steps would be to have some kind of open standard for the tags so any manufacturer could include them.
I tried for about 5 minutes to find it, but I was unable: there is a startup that does this. It ships you things in a box, you keep them there, and when an item leaves the box, it will reorder that for you (so the box is always stocked).
My 2 year old and 5 year old will be clicking this button like crazy. I'll come home one day and find 20 boxes of Tide and Toilet paper and a bill for $900.
"Button! Must Click it! What does it do? I don't know! Click it again!"
Works over Wi-Fi? Is there a screen on the back and a keypad to type the password and select the network? Wifi takes a lot of power. Does it use AAAs, or do you have to periodically recharge the batteries? That surely would be impractical. Especially if you have a button for multiple products in your house, as shown in the video - maintaining five or six of these things would be a pain. A separate Amazon app or a component of the Amazon app with a list of products you plan on reordering periodically seems much more practical.
Just doesn't seem plausible. April Fools is tomorrow.
My reading of it is that the app on the phone is used to configure the button, and the button from then on operates independently (which would be good in that it would allows others to use it when the original person isn't around). It's ambiguous, though, and could go either way.
Given that it would literally only have to connect to the wifi and do the API calls when the button is pressed, the power usage would be minuscule.
IMHO, this is a long game. What if every branded product (or ones that cared enough or could afford it) shipped with a dash button or was given one at checkout? What would brands pay for that? Customers wouldn't have to. And yes, I see the anti-incentive for a Safeway to disintermediate themselves unless Amazon was the delivery agent anyway. I can see brands willing to try this out. Given the amount of money spent on promotions and coupons with no clear, trackable value, this seems like something they would get behind once some basic metrics are in place.
I like going out shopping the essentials, i like to pick up my own coffee and maybe check what else is on the shelve...this product looks a bit depressing "just stay home and order from amazon"
I'm not from the United States, so forgive me if I don't understand how Amazon works. But does this system imply that orders through this system will be delivered in individual mail packages, with delivery fees paid (either explicitly or implicitly) for every package? When a normal human makes an order, she will group several items in one delivery package most of the time. Especially for the inexpensive and non-urgent stuff like the laundry detergent. Will it cause more wasted packaging materials and more fuel spending overall?
With Amazon Prime (required for this, at least for now), you pay one time per year and get free two-day shipping for the year (along with other benefits like Amazon's Netflix-like video service and free delivery of diapers/nappies). With Prime, you generally don't think about combining shipments, since there is no benefit in doing so.
Except for those intangible benefits like reducing carbon footprints. I tend to feel guilty purchasing one-off small items and tend to group those purchases, even though I don't have to.
Amazon spends significant effort to join separate orders into combined shipping units for reduction in cost and impact. It's clearly in their own best interest to do that. I've experienced multiple times where I've placed more than one order on the same day and they show up at my door in the same package.
The cost is at least another box to fold, move along a conveyor belt, fill with padding, attach a label, route for shipping, gas/diesel/electric energy to deliver from end-to-end and waste to recycle.
Those aren't costs I pay. Anything it costs Amazon is absolutely meaningless to me; I've already paid for it in my Prime membership, and I already brought up the point about the intangible costs.
This disruptive solution really helps me solve my only remaining excuse to not get out of the house. Buying detergent at the store nearby every 3 months was such an ordeal. Thanks Amazonistan.
as a parent, the places these buttons would need to be for me are already child-proofed. if it's sitting next to where i keep my laundry detergent, that space is already child-proofed. if it's under the sink next to my bottle of 409, it's already child-proofed.
Anyone know where you can buy hardware like this (a wifi button) that you could then use for your own stuff? Eg. Using your own little web server: Press to order an uber etc.
This seems like a cool idea, but in my experience Amazon's prices for household goods fluctuate dramatically. Sometimes things are a great deal, but a month later they could be more expensive than purchasing at a local store (and I'm in NYC, the stores I'm comparing them to certainly aren't cheap).
So I'd be willing to use a button like this for a store with consistently low prices like Costco (or even WalMart), but not for Amazon.
I can't wait for Amazon to release the Amazoniotic Sac, a revolutionary new technology to make everyday hassles easier for the common man. You just step inside the goo-filled sac from Amazon, place the Nutrient Nozzle like a scuba mask over your mouth and nose, place the Dross Duct (Rubbish Funnel? I haven't market-tested these) you-know-where, sit back, and relax comfortably until the inevitable heat death of the universe.
Am I alone in thinking that it's already more than easy enough to buy things? E-commerce is great the way it is and sometimes I enjoy going out into the world to shop at a real store.
All this lock-in to Amazon does is obscure that these days you can find the same deal or better elsewhere with a little bit of looking. Especially with groceries and household items Amazon has never been as competitive as they consistently are with media.
Brilliant idea! I can't tell you how many times I've gone to do some chore around the house and didn't have paper or a smart phone with me to make a note. I only hope they don't patent it such that a generic version of this can't be done. Like, using a few cleverly placed Rasberry PI's that wirelessly update a TODO list on my computer.
> my asshole friends have ordered me 100 boxes of [...]
Also my curious little-one, my playful and naughty cats, my ...
I believe that Amazon would place in some security features, like not processing the orders when they come in at a rate that is too frequent to be normal, require confirmation via email/SMS/etc. But then again, why make sth. like buying detergent which is as simple as going to the nearest market and giving them some change into a technological action that involves the postal service, an internet company, a bank, the internet, and electronics?
As others have said, the default configuration is to not order another if one is already ordered. In addition to that, you'll get a push notification from which you can quickly cancel the order. I don't know how the two combine though - friend presses, you cancel, friend presses, you cancel, friend presses, you cancel etc.
> Amazon sends an order alert to your phone, so it's easy to cancel if you change your mind. Unless you elect otherwise, Dash Button responds only to your first press until your order is delivered.
So people have to authorize the purchase via their smartphones anyway, so why not just have a simple amazon app with the list of your frequent consumable purchases and have a 1 click shop button for what you need? That way you can order it even from work if you remember you are about to go out of laundry soap. Less e-waste waste.
It feels like a joke, but I could use this. I already have Amazon Subscribe-and-Save set up to deliver products on a regular basis, but the available schedules don't always meet my usage patterns. Having a button for "I took the last box of diapers out of the closet" would be perfect.
I might find this more interesting when and if they connect this to brands and products I would buy. Linking this solely to major brands owned by mega-corporations is a significant turn-off.
I want to be able to modify it to buy the things I want, not just from the limited set it confines me to.
I think that if they are remotely serious (being almost April 1st) I think I'd like to see them offer to bundle NFC stickers with each product purchase, so that I can place them near the product's point of use should I want to replace it at some point in the future.
All I want is to know what products are offered for same day delivery. That way we can make services that empowers the consumer to purchase items they may need on a weekly basis or need by days end. If there is currently such a way, by all means please let me know.
What would be really great is if it could learn how often to order refills. Then I don't even have to think about buying essential goods at all, and it could optimize, e.g., how to package goods together to minimize the amount of wasted shipping costs.
I think announcing a product on April 1st is a genius strategy. They can see if customers want it or think it's a joke; if nobody likes the product, they say it's for April Fools, if, on the other hand, people like it, they launch it for real.
Often, it doesn't register that I need a household item replaced until it's gone. In this case, going to the store would fulfill my needs immediately whereas ordering from amazon could cause me to wait two days for a roll of toilet paper.
Does your two-year-old also turn on your stove burners? That seems a lot more dangerous. Put them out-of-reach. Worst case: they press the buttons anyway and you have to open an app and cancel the orders.
Beautifully done Amazon. No one will ever comparison shop. They won't price check. They will happily order whatever the button is linked to for the rest of time.
Next up, buttons for kids, to get em hooked early. A Cheerio button! :)
It seems like for a lot of products a less gaudy solution would be a recycling bin with a barcode scanner. Combined with reorder thresholds, that would seem to also have a seamless process without the fugly.
That defeats the purpose of the button then. The Dash is supposed to prevent you from having to pull out your phone to order things. For example, you notice your detergent getting low, you notice the Tide Dash button right in front of you, you push the button and voila, 2 days later your next box of Tide is on your door step.
True, I guess I imagined it more as building a shopping list throughout the day/week and ordering once at the end of the day, not separate orders for every button click.
Eventually these buttons may be on the boxes themselves somehow if there was a way for a new box to read from a master device in the house and know which account it was tied to?
This device is an intriguing idea. I wonder what other cool things can be done around the house with a single purpose wireless button connecting to the internet.
Is there also a button with which you can order the batteries to put in all the buttons? Do they also provide the service of replacing all the batteries for you?
It seems like automation gone too far? There can simply be dash button(s) in the smartphone app itself like a quickdial list, but for pre populated Amazon items
Am I the only person that buys sensible amounts of things?
I don't buy one bottle of detergent. I buy 5. When there's two left or whatever, I have weeks to get another 5. If the item has high shelf life and I know that I need it for essentially forever, I might even get 10 or 15 or more.
And no, my home isn't especially cluttered.
Boggles my mind. Why is pasta even sold in 500g bags?
I believe it said the default setting is that it will only register a click as an order after the previous one was delivered. I could have misread that, though.
I guess kids these days have to learn H.P. Lovecraft the hard way...
"I say to you againe, doe not call up Any that you can not put downe; by the Which I meane, Any that can in Turne call up Somewhat against you, whereby your Powerfullest Devices may not be of use."
(edited to add, HP Lovecraft was my favorite sysadmin in my youth)
It's already 5 hours into april the first in australia. This is surely a cross-branded april fools joke. I'm just shocked that so many people are taking it seriously. It's testimony to the insane state of the industry/world.
If it's real then I might need to go and have a little cry.
As someone who has worked in a warehouse facility as a picker - though not Amazon. I find the 'slave-like conditions'a bit unfair.
Now I can't speak for Amazon themselves, most of the complaints seem to stem from the fact that being a picker IS a skill. Not everyone can be good at it. It's physical - which I personally found fantastic, getting paid to stay fit, and on company time. You need to have somewhat a good memory, but more importantly an analytical brain to process the information on the scanner. Whilst the locations of the items might not have any seemingly logical order, the layout of the facility does. If you can process the bin locations immediately then you save many seconds of your target. Which brings me to the targets. It may seem 'slave-like' to have a timer between picks but each and every one is achievable (through analysis of every other pick ever made), and even if you miss a pick by 5 seconds, you've probably saved 5 seconds somewhere else during that same day/week/month (depending on how they evaluate your performance). Again though that's no to say that everyone has the skill to do so.
The episode you highlighted mentions that employees at Amazon tend to enjoy their work. If you can do the job, there's very little stress, pay can be good - we're talking about a generally unskilled job, certainly more than most retail stores. Decent benefits - vacation, healthcare etc. Shifts can be very favourable depending on the facility - 4 in 4 off can mean long weekends and plenty of opportunity for family time.
> From an interview with Kurt Vonnegut in the November 1995 issue of Inc. Technology. Vonnegut was asked to discuss his feelings about living in an increasingly computerized world.
>> I work at home, and if I wanted to, I could have a computer right by my bed, and I'd never have to leave it. But I use a typewriter, and afterward I mark up the pages with a pencil. Then I call up this woman named Carol out in Woodstock and say, “Are you still doing typing?” Sure she is, and her husband is trying to track bluebirds out there and not having much luck, and so we chitchat back and forth, and I say, “Okay, I'll send you the pages.” Then I go down the steps and my wife calls, “Where are you going?” “Well,” I say, “I'm going to buy an envelope.” And she says, “You're not a poor man. Why don't you buy a thousand envelopes? They'll deliver them, and you can put them in the closet.” And I say, “Hush.” So I go to this newsstand across the street where they sell magazines and lottery tickets and stationery. I have to get in line because there are people buying candy and all that sort of thing, and I talk to them. The woman behind the counter has a jewel between her eyes, and when it's my turn, I ask her if there have been any big winners lately. I get my envelope and seal it up and go to the postal convenience center down the block at the corner of Forty-seventh Street and Second Avenue, where I'm secretly in love with the woman behind the counter. I keep absolutely poker-faced; I never let her know how I feel about her. One time I had my pocket picked in there and got to meet a cop and tell him about it. Anyway, I address the envelope to Carol in Woodstock. I stamp the envelope and mail it in a mailbox in front of the post office, and I go home. And I've had a hell of a good time. I tell you, we are here on Earth to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you any different.