Computer glitch leads to supermarket free-for-all | Hacker News Reader

Computer glitch leads to supermarket free-for-all

smh.com.au

32 pointsjdrucker19 comments

"This [Pak 'n Save incident] is like some mad experiment, because you've sent off to church the religious and it's the secular who have gone shopping on Good Friday ... and you've put them to the test.

Citation needed.

I don't know why you're getting voted down. It's a pretty central quote in the article, and it is of course ridiculous to assume that all religious people were at church between 8am and 9:20am on good friday.

Yeah, it is pretty farfetched to assume that a significant portion of a religion's adherents would bother to observe one of that religion's major holidays.

It is at that early in the morning. Many would probably be out getting last minute supplies for dinner before heading off to church. If not that, then sleeping or working.

Good Friday is not formally marked by many non-Catholic denominations. There would be many religious people shopping on Good Friday who observe Easter but don't spend all day in church or at home on Good Friday. In fact, it is not even common practice in the United States for the general population to take Good Friday as a holiday.

I will add to that that Catholics in particular are highly unlikely to be at church in the morning on Good Friday since the Mass is not celebrated that day and none of the sacraments are celebrated. The only religious service churches have is around 3:00 in the afternoon.

if you read what I wrote again, you'll notice that our statements are not contradictory. Even if we assume that everyone religious visited church that day, even the Buddhists, I will continue to assert that they weren't all at church during that hour and 20 minutes.

I don't have any evidence, but I guess we could start looking at the schedules of nearby churches :) Wikipedia says that just over half of New Zealanders identify as Christian, but cites a survey that says only about 15% of the country attends church regularly. I wonder how many of the rest of them went to church at 8am and not, say, 10am, or that night, or maybe just skipped over Good Friday and waited until Sunday?

Anyway, that whole angle of the article was kind of silly. I was a bigger fan of the store owner's commentary.

What a rubbish headline. And to think the owner is quoted in the same article saying ""They weren't in for a free-for-all". Bad reporting.

And I have no idea how this came to be a religious debate. New Zealand is pretty much secular and religion has almost no bearing on the lives of the majority and is pretty much absent from politics. Especially in Hamilton. Go there on a Friday when there is a holiday and petty theft will seem tame!

Edit: a slighty better version of story. Wow they open early. http://www.3news.co.nz/Computer-glitch-opens-Hamilton-Pak-n-...

Professor Morris said the footage revealed nearly all would have paid had alcohol purchases not blocked the self-scanners.

So the choice was: leave without paying VS put all the groceries back on the shelf and leave empty handed, wasting an enormous amount of your own time due to the store's screw-up. Not really a fair "moral test".

Sounds like idiotic design, not a computer glitch. The doors should be opened by an employee, not by an automated system.

"They weren't in for a free-for-all. They were doing their normal shopping and then got to the checkout. Half of them paid and the other half thought, `this is a good deal' and walked out."

This is poorly titled.

I think this shows the promise of fully automated shops (the honor system + technology?).

The Japanese have vending machines for nearly everything related to shopping.

You're right in that blogs like to claim this a lot, but sadly the reality doesn't quite match the image. Around my area I can get about 100 different drinks from vending machines, but apart from that I can only think of machines that sell condoms / dating club membership cards and one that sells diet candy bars.

That's got to be one of the easiest ethical tests those potential shoppers ever faced.

... Why do you imagine it was so easy? If you feel the "correct" answer is "obvious", you simply have a strong moral predisposition in one direction already. Many people teeter on the fence.

Single word. Cameras.

To behave amoraly you'd have to assume that cameras aren't rolling or conceal your identity acknoledging openly that you are a thief which most of regular people are not comfortable with.

I imagine it would be easy, because it's a clear cut case of good old fashion theft. Doesn't everyone (even thieves) know that theft is unethical?

Perhaps is the shoppers were having trouble taking financial care of themselves or their family, it might be worth calling an ethical dilemma, but the article mentions nothing about that.

What began as a simple glitch and a footnote in the history of howlers and error turned into an interesting tale of morality, honour and ethics. Fascinating.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com