

Staff is also usually instructed to make you buy more as well.
Anyway my key point isn’t that kiosks are flawless, my point is, there is a tangible benefit, a reason why a decent portion of people may actually get a benefit to them from a kiosk. (IE less factors for order mistakes, potentially easier time finding what they want, some people don’t want to have to use their voice and talk to someone at all).
My point is, in the fast food restraunts in my area, the ones that have kiosks, mostly also have human casheers as well, and even when the restraunt is slow and there’s no line for either one, it’s close to 50/50 of where people go to. While if an AI voice bot were added, I would be shocked if 1% of people would chose that over a human or a kiosk.
Kiosks, by definition reduce the points of failure in making an order. If I order through a human.
I might mis-speak, Employee might mishear me, Employee might hit the wrong button.
When I use the kiosk… I might hit the wrong button.
That’s a clear defined advantage of the system on the fundimental level
an AI drive through window
I might mispeak, AI might mishear me, AI might do something unexpected even with the correct data. All the flaws of humans and kiosks.




and as if this isn’t something that flags with the historical trends
https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/
In short, up till the 1970s worker pay and productivity moved nearly in perfect sync with each-other, more stuff happens, people get paid more, then, it stopped, company profits shot up, while worker pay barely went up at all (could be argued it went down due to inflation), Point is fixing that part first is kind of what matters. Then we can look into expecting the average person to care about “productivity” going up, THEN we can start finding out if AI is even being directed in a way that accomplishes that.