The failure of the Domino's 30-minute delivery guarantee(thehustle.co)
thehustle.co
The failure of the Domino's 30-minute delivery guarantee
https://thehustle.co/originals/the-failure-of-the-dominos-30-minute-delivery-guarantee
300 comments
This is just a social credit system designed to control behavior, but attached to your workplace instead of your person.
The proof is simple. If you move this system from a single workplace to multiple workplaces with an ID for the worker, you get social credit.
This is a system that many governments and corporatists are in love with, as it generally “punishes troublemakers” without having anyone who’s a lawsuit target get overly involved. In my opinion, social credit systems are repression and totalitarianism masquerading as systems of personal responsibility.
The proof is simple. If you move this system from a single workplace to multiple workplaces with an ID for the worker, you get social credit.
This is a system that many governments and corporatists are in love with, as it generally “punishes troublemakers” without having anyone who’s a lawsuit target get overly involved. In my opinion, social credit systems are repression and totalitarianism masquerading as systems of personal responsibility.
> society taking a wrong turn to being driven by ratings on the I internet
Workers being driven by ratings systems pre-dates the popularity of Internet gig economy jobs. By a lot.
The customer ratings concept even infected places like your local doctor’s office a couple decades ago. Doctors have been complaining about how patient satisfaction surveys have discouraged them from bringing up obesity, smoking, or excessive drinking for decades. Doctors are also more likely to give in to patient demands for unnecessary antibiotics or controlled substances when they know it’s going to result in a hit to their ratings if those ratings are related to their compensation.
Every time I’ve visited a car dealer for service in the past few decades, the service manager is almost begging me to give them a “9 or 10” on the survey that will be sent to me afterward. He pleads that I work with him first to address anything that might reduce his rating.
Even vehicle drivers have had “How is my driving?” numbers on the back of their cars for a very long time.
Having customer satisfaction surveys tied to performance reviews isn’t new if you’ve worked in anything customer-facing. It’s just getting more attention now because “gig economy” has become a journalistic buzzword and people are more likely to be sympathetic to an hourly worker than, say, the doctor or service manager at their local dealership.
Even long before all of this, tipping was the standard way of linking customer feedback to compensation. This applied to delivery drivers, too! The hand-wringing over customer feedback being an internet-era gig economy thing is misplaced. It has always been this way.
Workers being driven by ratings systems pre-dates the popularity of Internet gig economy jobs. By a lot.
The customer ratings concept even infected places like your local doctor’s office a couple decades ago. Doctors have been complaining about how patient satisfaction surveys have discouraged them from bringing up obesity, smoking, or excessive drinking for decades. Doctors are also more likely to give in to patient demands for unnecessary antibiotics or controlled substances when they know it’s going to result in a hit to their ratings if those ratings are related to their compensation.
Every time I’ve visited a car dealer for service in the past few decades, the service manager is almost begging me to give them a “9 or 10” on the survey that will be sent to me afterward. He pleads that I work with him first to address anything that might reduce his rating.
Even vehicle drivers have had “How is my driving?” numbers on the back of their cars for a very long time.
Having customer satisfaction surveys tied to performance reviews isn’t new if you’ve worked in anything customer-facing. It’s just getting more attention now because “gig economy” has become a journalistic buzzword and people are more likely to be sympathetic to an hourly worker than, say, the doctor or service manager at their local dealership.
Even long before all of this, tipping was the standard way of linking customer feedback to compensation. This applied to delivery drivers, too! The hand-wringing over customer feedback being an internet-era gig economy thing is misplaced. It has always been this way.
My SO is a restaurant manager, and she has told me that the only reviews/ratings that have any positive effects are 5s out of 5. 4 out of 5? You might as well have put 0 or 1.
It's extremely toxic.
It's extremely toxic.
I remember once I bought a car and the salesman said if I had any reservations about giving him a 10/10 on every question in the survey no matter what it was that I should text or call his personal phone and he'd do whatever he could to fix it, also directly saying that it's better for them to have 95% of people not fill it out at all and get 10/10 from everyone else than to have 100% completion with a single 9/10.
I don't know if it's true or not but he told me he lost out on a $10k volume bonus because someone who was extremely happy with everything gave him 9/10 on all questions and in the comments simply put "I wouldn't change anything about my experience, it was great! But perfection is reserved for God."
I've heard this from everyone I've ever bought a car from, everyone I know who has ever been involved with that industry, etc.
Why even have surveys if the point is just to collect 100%s and not actually find things to change without taking money out of people's pockets?
I don't know if it's true or not but he told me he lost out on a $10k volume bonus because someone who was extremely happy with everything gave him 9/10 on all questions and in the comments simply put "I wouldn't change anything about my experience, it was great! But perfection is reserved for God."
I've heard this from everyone I've ever bought a car from, everyone I know who has ever been involved with that industry, etc.
Why even have surveys if the point is just to collect 100%s and not actually find things to change without taking money out of people's pockets?
This is classic Goodhart's Law stuff[1]. The key takeaway is that any company that implement these kinds of incentives doesn't actually give a shit about customer experience, they just like to play pretend.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law
When I'm buying a product on a site like amazon with 5 start rating scale, I find that all of the useful information is found in the 2, 3 and 4 star reviews.
1 star reviews are mostly people pissed off for some reason, people with unreasonable expectations, or competitors trying to hurt their competition. 5 stars reviews are either zero effort reviews from people with low expectations or they are outright fake reviews from people incentivized to inflate the rating.
The 3 star reviews identify key and serious problems with the product that the customer otherwise would have liked. Usually the most information is found here. 4 star reviews identify weaknesses in the product that the customer still liked despite the drawbacks. 2 stars often are the same as 1 star but from less critical people.
The only signal I pay attention to from 1 star and 5 star reviews is if there are too many of them it's a red flag. More than 10% 1 star usually indicates a serious problem with product defects. More than 80% 5 star indicates a product that's buying fake reviews.
1 star reviews are mostly people pissed off for some reason, people with unreasonable expectations, or competitors trying to hurt their competition. 5 stars reviews are either zero effort reviews from people with low expectations or they are outright fake reviews from people incentivized to inflate the rating.
The 3 star reviews identify key and serious problems with the product that the customer otherwise would have liked. Usually the most information is found here. 4 star reviews identify weaknesses in the product that the customer still liked despite the drawbacks. 2 stars often are the same as 1 star but from less critical people.
The only signal I pay attention to from 1 star and 5 star reviews is if there are too many of them it's a red flag. More than 10% 1 star usually indicates a serious problem with product defects. More than 80% 5 star indicates a product that's buying fake reviews.
Or that is just a simple theory that is easy for you to understand. 80% 5 stars might mean something else and 1 stars might mean as much as 2/5.
Of course it's a simple theory that's exactly the point. It has explaining power though and I find it useful YMMV. What I was trying to get across is that you learn more from the text of the reviewers who voted somewhere in the middle. The 5 star reviews rarely bother to say more than a sentence and they rarely include any useful criticism. The people giving 1 stars are often just pissed off for some reason that will not affect me. Stuff like "It wasn't what I ordered" or "they sent me a used product" - The signal is in the remaining reviews if you take the time to read them.
> Why even have surveys if the point is just to collect 100%s and not actually find things to change without taking money out of people's pockets?
"So if I implement this system then either I get confirmation that everything I'm responsible for is perfect or I get an excuse to save money on labor?" - management approximately 8 seconds before implementing the surveys.
"So if I implement this system then either I get confirmation that everything I'm responsible for is perfect or I get an excuse to save money on labor?" - management approximately 8 seconds before implementing the surveys.
This mirrors my experience in retail. Anything less than the top score is counted as a negative, often counting the 1-9 score as a 0 with the 10 as a 1. The heat lands on a local manager when corporate comes to town. What ends up happening is that the customer-facing employees train the customers to put down 10s.
It's ultimately a metric that's been gamified by everyone involved. I think the cynics keep it around because it gives customers a voice.
It's ultimately a metric that's been gamified by everyone involved. I think the cynics keep it around because it gives customers a voice.
Which is ironic, given that it modifies the customer's actual voice when interpreting the numbers in such a toxic way. I point to the cousin comment where a salesman lost a $10k bonus because a customer didn't give them a 10, despite the customer's comment being very explicit that they were extremely happy with the experience, but that they refused to rate anything perfectly, as they reserved that for God. Despite that comment, the 9 was used as justification to deny the bonus, effectively also denying the customer's voice.
Or pull a YouTube/google and just eventually totally remove the option to down vote at all. “ Yeah… we’ve heard the vox populi and ehhh, gonna have to pass on that one.”
And Ebay, so 20+ years. It was either positive and A+++++ or it's effectively negative.
To me that’s the crazy thing. You give a 4/5 and immediately you’re asked what was wrong.
It’s also why Netflix moved tot the thumbs up/down system. When they moved into new territories their recommendations system had troubles since some territories would rate everything as “bad”, because in that territory 3/5 meant it was fine and they enjoyed the show.
It’s also why Netflix moved tot the thumbs up/down system. When they moved into new territories their recommendations system had troubles since some territories would rate everything as “bad”, because in that territory 3/5 meant it was fine and they enjoyed the show.
Yes, these ratings problems aren't new, but they are more pervasive and less useful than ever before. For my part, I just refuse to give ratings or pay attention to them.
The effective binary nature of ratings (if you don't give the best one, you may as well give worst one) was the last straw for me. Ratings are a game that harms both customers and the people providing good and services.
The effective binary nature of ratings (if you don't give the best one, you may as well give worst one) was the last straw for me. Ratings are a game that harms both customers and the people providing good and services.
Agreed. And because ratings are so broken, there are multiple ways to game them. In addition to rarely leaving ratings, I rarely trust the damn things either.
In my opinion, ratings need to decay over time. For service workers like Uber drivers any rating >1 year old (or maybe less) should decay to 0 significance. For online retail like Amazon, maybe 2 years but not much longer than that. This not only allows people to "clean up their act" after bad ratings, but makes botting a recurring cost instead of a one-time investment.
In my opinion, ratings need to decay over time. For service workers like Uber drivers any rating >1 year old (or maybe less) should decay to 0 significance. For online retail like Amazon, maybe 2 years but not much longer than that. This not only allows people to "clean up their act" after bad ratings, but makes botting a recurring cost instead of a one-time investment.
Notably steam ratings on games are divided into "all time" and "recent" categories.
App store ratings are gamed through bugging users to rate the app, cozying up to the app store maintainer who can delete reviews, or even Sybil attacks on competing apps.
> Workers being driven by ratings systems pre-dates the popularity of Internet gig economy jobs. By a lot.
Your electronic report card is now more persistent, and there's a much smaller number of companies dominating these gig industries, and they cross areas (food delivery + driving people, for example). It's not as easy to start over.
Your electronic report card is now more persistent, and there's a much smaller number of companies dominating these gig industries, and they cross areas (food delivery + driving people, for example). It's not as easy to start over.
Is this necessarily a bad thing?
Do we want to make it easy for someone to "start over" when that means instead of driving bags of food around they're now driving around people?
Do we want to make it easy for someone to "start over" when that means instead of driving bags of food around they're now driving around people?
The scoring system doesn't necessarily reflect reality.
Separately, there is a drive towards a sort of "social credit rating" that I do think is a bad thing.
In the narrower space of having a criminal history, the US is very different in how that affects people that have done their time. Any company can do a dirt-cheap background check, this makes people close to unemployable. In other countries, like Australia, employers can request a "yes/no" answer to "is this person's history suitable for this specific job" from a government agency...but they can't just get history themselves.
The combination of consolidation in the space into a few giants, and dirt cheap sharing of data across employers is, over time, applying the same sort of permanent mark problem to everyone else. I think it's a bad thing.
Separately, there is a drive towards a sort of "social credit rating" that I do think is a bad thing.
In the narrower space of having a criminal history, the US is very different in how that affects people that have done their time. Any company can do a dirt-cheap background check, this makes people close to unemployable. In other countries, like Australia, employers can request a "yes/no" answer to "is this person's history suitable for this specific job" from a government agency...but they can't just get history themselves.
The combination of consolidation in the space into a few giants, and dirt cheap sharing of data across employers is, over time, applying the same sort of permanent mark problem to everyone else. I think it's a bad thing.
Some US states have now adopted "ban the box" legislation which prohibits asking job candidates about criminal history (at least for certain jobs). Of course, it's still tough to explain a 10-year employment gap on a CV.
https://www.nelp.org/publication/ban-the-box-fair-chance-hir...
https://www.nelp.org/publication/ban-the-box-fair-chance-hir...
It's also toothless when the employer's insurance company can require a (post-hire) background check to cover the employee and failing it is grounds for canceling the hire.
I don't see an obvious solution, because compelling commercial insurance to cover someone with repeat duis/reckless driving/addiction issues in a work truck doesn't feel quite fair, but there needs to be a path to gainful employment for ex-cons if we want our supposedly rehabilitative justice system to have even a chance of working, and there's not a lot of options that aren't customer facing, don't involve driving, and don't put you in some sort of security context or in charge of accounts or money.
Basically, any job that pays worth a damn requires a bit of trust, and we simply don't trust ex cons. And they're probably statistically somewhat less trustworthy, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't have a path out. For our sake as much as theirs.
I don't see an obvious solution, because compelling commercial insurance to cover someone with repeat duis/reckless driving/addiction issues in a work truck doesn't feel quite fair, but there needs to be a path to gainful employment for ex-cons if we want our supposedly rehabilitative justice system to have even a chance of working, and there's not a lot of options that aren't customer facing, don't involve driving, and don't put you in some sort of security context or in charge of accounts or money.
Basically, any job that pays worth a damn requires a bit of trust, and we simply don't trust ex cons. And they're probably statistically somewhat less trustworthy, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't have a path out. For our sake as much as theirs.
Ideally the insurance company only cares about crimes that are relevant to the job; theft or embezzlement for workers handling cash. DUIs for drivers. Etc. There are certain combinations of crime and job that are sensibly going to be risky, but how do you prevent companies from being overcautious? An insurance company that was more optimally cautious than overcautious won't gain much for it.
Why do you need to "prevent companies from being overcautious?" It's their money they're spending, it's their customer relationships they're putting at risk, it's their liability they're increasing by having someone with multiple DUI convictions driving around the work truck.
Criminal history is not a protected class (nor should it be), there's nothing wrong with a company saying it doesn't want to hire people with criminal histories in the recent past for certain jobs, or any job.
Criminal history is not a protected class (nor should it be), there's nothing wrong with a company saying it doesn't want to hire people with criminal histories in the recent past for certain jobs, or any job.
Collectively, blackballing people with a criminal past has negative effects not just for those people.
We don't "need" to but we'd all be generally better off if ex-cons can find honest jobs to support themselves.
> There are certain combinations of crime and job that are sensibly going to be risky, but how do you prevent companies from being overcautious?
Your words imply we do need to do that.
Your words imply we do need to do that.
While your words imply that you have an ideological opposition to telling businesses what to do, and that external effects need to be ignored. Why do businesses have the right to do things harmful to society so that they can make money?
I'd be more than happy having a period of time where these things can't be taken into account (like bankruptcy). But if you have repeat DUIs / reckless driving incidents, you've proven that at least currently you can't be trusted to drive safely. Having a job where operating a vehicle as part of your job isn't a human right so I don't see anything wrong with saying "you're not allowed to have this job." Isn't it much more humane to do that in the application process than firing the candidate in their first week because the insurance will not cover them? Isn't it wrong to force the insurance to cover someone at a loss, or force the employer to pay more to cover this person who probably shouldn't be driving anyway?
The argument isn't about whether to disqualify someone for a job that involves driving if they have a DUI, at least to me.
I mentioned the Australian system...when the employer sends the candidate name/info and the complete job description, and a government agency replies yes/no. I assume they have some criteria for how long ago the offense was, etc. And that candidates generally know if they apply for a job that's not a good match, they will get a "no".
In the US system, even for a job where driving is not involved, the employer gets the full record and gets to decide what to do with that information with whatever arbitrary opinions they have.
I mentioned the Australian system...when the employer sends the candidate name/info and the complete job description, and a government agency replies yes/no. I assume they have some criteria for how long ago the offense was, etc. And that candidates generally know if they apply for a job that's not a good match, they will get a "no".
In the US system, even for a job where driving is not involved, the employer gets the full record and gets to decide what to do with that information with whatever arbitrary opinions they have.
Good - they're the ones hiring, they're the ones taking on risk, it's their money they're spending. It should be up to them whether a particular criminal history is relevant to the job. Even if it's not relevant and they just don't want to work with someone with a particular criminal history, isn't that their right?
[deleted]
I had I think, a related issue. I moved, need a new dentist, called one, told them I wanted to take a sleeping pill because it helps me with my anxiety from previous painful dentist visits. They said they'd have their office manager call me back. He vehemently steered me to another dentist. It was ridiculous how much corp-speak he used to try to convince me it was in my best interest. They had a 5/5 rating. I assume it's because they reject anyone the think might lower it.
You're probably reading too much into that interaction. Look for a local sedation dentistry practice. They specialize in managing patients with anxiety. Regular dentists may not be set up to handle patients with major anxiety.
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/treatments/22275-sedat...
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/treatments/22275-sedat...
[deleted]
my last dentist did it and was not a "sedation Dentistry" practice. She was head of the California Dental Association tho
Asking someone to temporarily take on the responsibility of your medical wellbeing while admittedly being on psychotropics is a bit of an ask, isn't it?
Is it? My last dentist did it
Doctors telling patients they're fat doesn't help them get skinnier. The literature is pretty clear that in every double blind study, the category of medical advice or helping make nutrition and exercise plans leads to 0lbs average weight loss over 5 years.
No, but some people do need to be informed of how dangerous it is, and doctors can either prescribe weight loss medications or give a referral to a doctor specializing in medical and surgical weight loss.
Regardless, it’s something I would expect doctors to nag patients about, the same way my dentist nags me to floss.
Regardless, it’s something I would expect doctors to nag patients about, the same way my dentist nags me to floss.
Why, if there's proven to be no benefit?
The person I responded to said that there's no benefit to advice to diet and exercise. Presuming that's true (I doubt that there's 0 effect, and e.g. [1] would disagree), there are still benefits. As I mentioned, advice on dieting and exercising is far from the only tool doctors can reach for here.
There are medical options that doctors can prescribe (or refer to another doctor for a prescription). WeGovy/semaglutide, Adipex, HCG, good old adderall, etc. I haven't followed the space in about a decade so I don't know what's in and what's banned, but I'm aware there are a range of options there. I believe there are some outpatient programs as well, semantically similar to outpatient rehabs.
There are also surgical options that doctors can refer patients to a surgeon for. Laparoscopic bands, gastric bypasses, I think there's a third that I can't recall.
The incredibly sad issue is that doctors are sometimes forced to fall back on advice to diet and exercise because many of these treatments are contra-indicated with common comorbidities of obesity. Anesthesia can be very risky for patients with a BMI of 45 or 50, so they may need to lose weight the old fashioned way until they're at a weight where they can be safely anesthetized. Stimulants (adipex and adderall) are very effective at curbing hunger, but are contra-indicated by high blood pressure which is incredibly common.
I also believe there's a large segment of primary care physicians who aren't up to date on weight loss procedures, because they change fairly frequently relative to something like treating strep throat.
[1]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6169796/#:~:tex... (
There are medical options that doctors can prescribe (or refer to another doctor for a prescription). WeGovy/semaglutide, Adipex, HCG, good old adderall, etc. I haven't followed the space in about a decade so I don't know what's in and what's banned, but I'm aware there are a range of options there. I believe there are some outpatient programs as well, semantically similar to outpatient rehabs.
There are also surgical options that doctors can refer patients to a surgeon for. Laparoscopic bands, gastric bypasses, I think there's a third that I can't recall.
The incredibly sad issue is that doctors are sometimes forced to fall back on advice to diet and exercise because many of these treatments are contra-indicated with common comorbidities of obesity. Anesthesia can be very risky for patients with a BMI of 45 or 50, so they may need to lose weight the old fashioned way until they're at a weight where they can be safely anesthetized. Stimulants (adipex and adderall) are very effective at curbing hunger, but are contra-indicated by high blood pressure which is incredibly common.
I also believe there's a large segment of primary care physicians who aren't up to date on weight loss procedures, because they change fairly frequently relative to something like treating strep throat.
[1]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6169796/#:~:tex... (
It’s the right thing to do at the individual level. The doctor should be honest with each patient and every individual should be given the chance to act on that honest information, even if studies show that many people have difficulty overcoming weight issues on their own.
"Proven to have no benefit" in this case only means that most people won't lose weight after being told to. A minority will though, so doctors refusing to tell fat people to lose weight is a disservice to the few who stand a chance of making it. The rest should either be signed up for surgery, drugs, or written off as lost causes.
It's much broader than that.
Having people with little to no understanding of work evaluate and exercise power over it has been foundational for capitalism since its beginning.
Having people with little to no understanding of work evaluate and exercise power over it has been foundational for capitalism since its beginning.
I don’t really understand why you think having financial incentives to avoid bad ratings and deliver food warm is bad?
Because, delivery drivers, unlike uber or whatever, are frequently screwed by things outside their control. No parks near the restaurant, so delay in the pickup?
Bad driver!
Restaurant behind on orders?
Bad driver!
Something missing from order?
Bad driver!
Incentives can cause perverse outcomes, but it’s worse when you are not in control of the outcomes at all.
Incentives can cause perverse outcomes, but it’s worse when you are not in control of the outcomes at all.
Having worked as a server in college, servers get blamed for everything, and it definitely made me avoid and lose most of my confidence in humans other than close friends and family. People can be just mean and horrible for no real reason. Most are nice and patient, however a significant minority are just awful and must lead miserable, empty lives.
xvector(4)
In a vacuum, there’s no problem.
Unfortunately though, those same incentives also incentivise risk taking and dangerous driving.
Unfortunately though, those same incentives also incentivise risk taking and dangerous driving.
May I suggest reading the article you're commenting on?
I did read the article. Hence my confusion.
What are you suggesting then? A company that is selling warm pizza with prompt delivery should not do anything to incentive employees to deliver on that value prop?
What are you suggesting then? A company that is selling warm pizza with prompt delivery should not do anything to incentive employees to deliver on that value prop?
I read the article. I don't think the article made a persuasive case that this policy was bad.
They aren't bad in themselves, but the consequences of reckless driving are.
Because it can encourage dangerous behavior.
I was a delivery driver for Dominos during that time. My manager (bless her heart, truly) was always saying "DO NOT SPEED OR BE DANGEROUS"; we had literally zero incentives to be on time, or at least we weren't punished if we weren't.
The markup on delivered pizza at THAT time was in the 800% range, so a free pie now and again wasn't going to hurt that much. A lawsuit over a crash probably would, though.
I suspect I was lucky there.
The markup on delivered pizza at THAT time was in the 800% range, so a free pie now and again wasn't going to hurt that much. A lawsuit over a crash probably would, though.
I suspect I was lucky there.
This strikes me as one of those things where scale works against incentives. If you own one store, you're making good money. There's little reason to push your managers to try to drive that margin to 810% by eliminating the occasional free pizza.
But when you own a dozen stores (like one of the stories in the article) all you see are numbers, you don't care, you push as hard as you can to "drive efficiencies" and you end up with managers who are getting yelled at because they're at 97% sub-30m delivery instead of the 98.5% goal or whatever. And then you have a manager pulling a pizza out of a car wreck and giving it to another driver.
But when you own a dozen stores (like one of the stories in the article) all you see are numbers, you don't care, you push as hard as you can to "drive efficiencies" and you end up with managers who are getting yelled at because they're at 97% sub-30m delivery instead of the 98.5% goal or whatever. And then you have a manager pulling a pizza out of a car wreck and giving it to another driver.
I think it is also the decoupling from real people doing real job. The farther you go from ground level work, the easier it is to theorize what they could do - whether it is asking drone operators to bomb some place, or set a policy without setting foot in the store on a daily basis, or do a leveraged buyout based primarily on a spreadsheet driven model, the farther you go away from people whose lives are being impacted, the easier it is for you to make decisions that do not think about them.
"The rise of microwaves and frozen dinners made Americans more accustomed to convenience and averse to going out in public. (One food industry exec described these consumer habits as “cocooning.”) "
Would love to see what this person would think after Covid. If microwaves wrecked this person's outlook on people, covid would have blown their mind
Would love to see what this person would think after Covid. If microwaves wrecked this person's outlook on people, covid would have blown their mind
I don't think this one is actually true. I remember TV dinners replacing home cooked meals not eating out.
Going back before frozen dinners you're back to the time when people actually cooked at home, going out to eat was a rare treat rather than a daily occurrence.
Going back before frozen dinners you're back to the time when people actually cooked at home, going out to eat was a rare treat rather than a daily occurrence.
> Going back before frozen dinners you're back to the time when people actually cooked at home, going out to eat was a rare treat rather than a daily occurrence.
Fwiw some of us still cook at home and go out rarely. It’s cheaper, tastier, healthier, and can be a pretty relaxing evening activity
Fwiw some of us still cook at home and go out rarely. It’s cheaper, tastier, healthier, and can be a pretty relaxing evening activity
It was common when you had a stay-at-home parent who did fresh shopping in the day then cooked a meal later for when their spouse (husband) came in just before 6pm (6.30 if he'd stopped off for a pint on the way home)
Not so common when people get in from picking the kids up from daycare at 7.30pm and have to be up and out by 7am the next morning.
Longer commutes, less time at home, and all that extra income has gone into housing and childcare costs. Yeay.
Not so common when people get in from picking the kids up from daycare at 7.30pm and have to be up and out by 7am the next morning.
Longer commutes, less time at home, and all that extra income has gone into housing and childcare costs. Yeay.
We've made our lives and society so busy and complicated. I've always been confused by how much we collectively value convenience products/services while simultaneously making everything more complex.
I do hope that everyone is living the life they want and I'm just out of touch though. The idea of being away from home and my kids for 12+ hours every day and eating out before going to bed and doing it all over sounds miserable to me, but to each their own!
I do hope that everyone is living the life they want and I'm just out of touch though. The idea of being away from home and my kids for 12+ hours every day and eating out before going to bed and doing it all over sounds miserable to me, but to each their own!
>We've made our lives and society so busy and complicated
"We" have done nothing. Our managers, bosses, and executives have made everyone else's lives miserable, for their benefit.
"We" have done nothing. Our managers, bosses, and executives have made everyone else's lives miserable, for their benefit.
Sure, there are absolutely people helping make it happen but we each have to accept our due blame for allowing and accepting it.
Companies won't make products that no one will buy. Bosses can't fill roles that no one is willing to take. Executives won't keep their job if employees choose to leave the company rather than work for them.
Companies won't make products that no one will buy. Bosses can't fill roles that no one is willing to take. Executives won't keep their job if employees choose to leave the company rather than work for them.
Don’t forget the politicians; they deserve our scorn as well
The one real downside is that learning to cook well at home spoils eating out - it sets your standards for what constitutes a good meal that much higher. If I'm spending €16 on a plate of pasta, it better be a lot better than I can make myself.
You are so right. There are very few things I look forward to when thinking about eating out - french fries is one. I don't deep fry and air fry or baked at home does not compare to the real thing.
Steak is one where I've had better at a restaurant, but it was a $100/person type of place that work paid for. Mine at home is not quite there, but far above the average steak.
When I eat out now I'm hoping to find some combination of spices I don't use or some new idea to take home.
Steak is one where I've had better at a restaurant, but it was a $100/person type of place that work paid for. Mine at home is not quite there, but far above the average steak.
When I eat out now I'm hoping to find some combination of spices I don't use or some new idea to take home.
Once I learned how to make a great steak at home, the appeal of going to a high-end steak house has completely lost its appeal.
Sous vide makes steaks 100% idiot-proof. Takes zero skill to get a perfect steak every time. Kosher salt, pepper, granulated garlic, vacuum seal it, drop it into the circulator for ~2 hours, then use whatever the hottest method of cooking you have available to give a quick sear on each side. I use my gas grill pre-heated to about 800 degrees.
But to really kick it up another level, get yourself a smoker. Doesn't have to be a fancy $2000+ offset, a $600 Traeger or even a $200 electric can give good results. Smoke at 225F until it gets to about 125F internal, then sear like above. If you like it extra smokey, you can smoke at a lower temperature.
Now, the only expensive meals I will go out for are seafood. I haven't quite mastered seafood. Fish can be very delicate and fall apart, and it's hard to get the right color on shrimp without overcooking it and drying it out.
Sous vide makes steaks 100% idiot-proof. Takes zero skill to get a perfect steak every time. Kosher salt, pepper, granulated garlic, vacuum seal it, drop it into the circulator for ~2 hours, then use whatever the hottest method of cooking you have available to give a quick sear on each side. I use my gas grill pre-heated to about 800 degrees.
But to really kick it up another level, get yourself a smoker. Doesn't have to be a fancy $2000+ offset, a $600 Traeger or even a $200 electric can give good results. Smoke at 225F until it gets to about 125F internal, then sear like above. If you like it extra smokey, you can smoke at a lower temperature.
Now, the only expensive meals I will go out for are seafood. I haven't quite mastered seafood. Fish can be very delicate and fall apart, and it's hard to get the right color on shrimp without overcooking it and drying it out.
The trick with steak, I’ve found, is to think “Steak is $50”. Then you spend that money at the butcher instead of a restaurant. Put it on a skillet for a couple minutes each side and voila, you have a delicious steak way better than you’d find at any normie non-michelin-star restaurant.
Cooking is 60% having good ingredients, 30% avoiding mistakes, and 10% technique.
Cooking is 60% having good ingredients, 30% avoiding mistakes, and 10% technique.
Steak is the one thing I can get consistently better than restaurants. It's all thanks to the book "Salt, Fat, Acid, Heat: Mastering the Elements of Good Cooking"
It's a text book size cookbook. The author experiments different cooking methods and documents, taste tests.
It boiled down to seasoning the steak over night so the salt extracts juices and tenderizes. Getting the temperature just perfect using a thermometer (I have a Ninja Foodi Grill that does it automatically).
The quality and thickness of meat also matters. I get mine at Costco or Sam's Club.
My pasta game is a lot better too. Main thing was to stir as the pasta cooks.
It's a text book size cookbook. The author experiments different cooking methods and documents, taste tests.
It boiled down to seasoning the steak over night so the salt extracts juices and tenderizes. Getting the temperature just perfect using a thermometer (I have a Ninja Foodi Grill that does it automatically).
The quality and thickness of meat also matters. I get mine at Costco or Sam's Club.
My pasta game is a lot better too. Main thing was to stir as the pasta cooks.
I owe so much of my cooking to that book!
Eating at home made me realize how hard restaurants lean on salt and fat to make food taste good.
I don't like eating out anymore because it's all either expensive greasy over seasoned food, or extremely expensive tiny portion food that maybe tastes about the same as home cooked.
I don't like eating out anymore because it's all either expensive greasy over seasoned food, or extremely expensive tiny portion food that maybe tastes about the same as home cooked.
We're one of those families as well. We eat out once or twice a month, usually its a social thing when we're going to visit friends or family.
It definitely takes some effort up front. It took us a few years to really build up a good list of go-to recipes we like and get to the point where we could wing it in the kitchen without chasing down recipes for everything.
Part of our motivation was going further down the rabbit hole learning how industrial agriculture and the food industry actually work. Dig far enough and you'll want to plant a garden, raise chickens, and cook at home as much as you can.
It definitely takes some effort up front. It took us a few years to really build up a good list of go-to recipes we like and get to the point where we could wing it in the kitchen without chasing down recipes for everything.
Part of our motivation was going further down the rabbit hole learning how industrial agriculture and the food industry actually work. Dig far enough and you'll want to plant a garden, raise chickens, and cook at home as much as you can.
> It definitely takes some effort up front. It took us a few years to really build up a good list of go-to recipes we like and get to the point where we could wing it in the kitchen without chasing down recipes for everything.
It can take a bit of time to get to the point where you can experiment and still be confident that the result will be edible, but that time investment is definitely worth it. It’s nice to be able to improvise whatever recipe depending on what’s actually available. It’s like a puzzle game, a kind of reverse Tetris when opening the fridge.
(It’s also nice to have a bunch of no-brain required easy and quick recipe for when you don’t want a challenge)
It can take a bit of time to get to the point where you can experiment and still be confident that the result will be edible, but that time investment is definitely worth it. It’s nice to be able to improvise whatever recipe depending on what’s actually available. It’s like a puzzle game, a kind of reverse Tetris when opening the fridge.
(It’s also nice to have a bunch of no-brain required easy and quick recipe for when you don’t want a challenge)
[deleted]
I have been doing this more and more, for the reasons you cite. Also, restaurants are increasingly doing things (like requiring the use of apps or websites) that make the experience far more unpleasant than it used to be.
So my habits have changed to eating out much more rarely, but at much nicer restaurants.
So my habits have changed to eating out much more rarely, but at much nicer restaurants.
> tastier
I often see this mentioned during discussions of home cooking as if it were objective truth, but it confuses me because I enjoy a pie from the local pizza parlor as much as I enjoy my boeuf bourguignon. It's a different experience for sure. There's pleasure to be had in taking the time for the mise en place and coming up with tweaks over time to micro-optimize the flavor, but is it really tastier?
I often see this mentioned during discussions of home cooking as if it were objective truth, but it confuses me because I enjoy a pie from the local pizza parlor as much as I enjoy my boeuf bourguignon. It's a different experience for sure. There's pleasure to be had in taking the time for the mise en place and coming up with tweaks over time to micro-optimize the flavor, but is it really tastier?
One factor that makes the comparison more apt may be accounting for the price difference. I can cook at home for a fraction of the price, or spend just as much but use much better ingredients.
When I do eat out there is always something nice about not having to cook or clean up. That skews it a bit for me, maybe it wasn't actually as tasty as cooking at home but the whole experience is nicer (on occasion).
When I do eat out there is always something nice about not having to cook or clean up. That skews it a bit for me, maybe it wasn't actually as tasty as cooking at home but the whole experience is nicer (on occasion).
And the people who Uber Eats everything or go out for dinner are always the first to cry about cost of living or how prices in restaurants are so high. And then they cry that groceries are the same price.... ahah
I first heard about cocooning in a Faith Popcorn book a friend was reading.
It was some of what was written, but also about how we don't sit on the front porch and visit with neighbors in the evening, and rarely see our front doors, much less our neighbors.
It was some of what was written, but also about how we don't sit on the front porch and visit with neighbors in the evening, and rarely see our front doors, much less our neighbors.
"wrecked this person's outlook on people"? "Cocooning" was not an insult or meant to imply there was anything wrong with people, it was just a description of a "trend".
(And was probably in part about the large "boomer" generation aging and having kids and thus going out less)
(And was probably in part about the large "boomer" generation aging and having kids and thus going out less)
A guarantee memorably parodied in the setting of Snow Crash.
I prefer the Bill Hicks reference of making it mandatory for everyone to smoke weed so the only people on the roads are Domino's delivery
I have recently re-read Snow Crash but, lacking the context (since I live in a difference country), I missed how closely the setting in the book parodied what is described in this article. For instance, the boss of the pizza chain being ex-military was an important plot point later in the book, but I didn't know that the real-life boss being parodied was also ex-military.
i heard snow crash was a great book so i start reading it. immediatley it gets deep into pizza, the deliverator, the extreme attention to on time delivery, universities that specialize in franchising a pizza shop
and then a little farther on you learn part of the book takes place in the virtual internet world. and i’m absolutely sure the pizza stuff is all part of this virtual world…
one of my favorite books
and then a little farther on you learn part of the book takes place in the virtual internet world. and i’m absolutely sure the pizza stuff is all part of this virtual world…
one of my favorite books
Hiro/the deliverator, YT, and most of the characters inhabit meatspace and "jack in" to the metaverse. Plenty is virtual but the dystopian pizza delivery is real
The funnest opening scene of any cyberpunk book. Perfect for a film treatment.
Directed by Neill Blomkamp
Hopefully not. He made District 9 then every single following film he's made has been from mediocre to garbage.
Chappie was awesome and Elysium was at least entertaining. Anyway, I was trying to think whose aesthetic a dystopian but wacky futuristic tech movie would suit best
Snow Crash was the first thought that came to mind when I saw the title of this post
My dad tells a story that happened in 198X while the 30-minute guarantee still existed. He was living in DC and traffic in his neighbourhood was absolutely abysmal at peak hours when gov employees were leaving work. Apparently it could take 20 minutes just to get drive a few blocks.
So he ordered pizza with the delivery time carefully planned to coincide right when traffic was greatest.
Yet somehow the drive was able to get it to his house in 28 minutes. He tried to ask the driver how this was possible, but the driver was allready rushing back to his car.
So he ordered pizza with the delivery time carefully planned to coincide right when traffic was greatest.
Yet somehow the drive was able to get it to his house in 28 minutes. He tried to ask the driver how this was possible, but the driver was allready rushing back to his car.
I drove delivery in the period shortly after 30-minutes-or-N guarantees went away and customer expectations hadn't really caught up to the change. From cutting through park access trails at 60 miles an hour to using an elementary school soccer field as a shortcut between neighborhoods, nothing and I mean nothing was off the table if it shaved minutes off your drive time.
What your dad did is not cool. Stressing out some delivery worker to try to scam a free pizza is gross.
"They're offering a free pizza if it takes over 30 minutes, I wonder if they can manage that during rush hour?" Seems like a fairly normal response.
Some basic empathy shows that his intellectual curiosity is not worth putting stress on some dude. That worker clearly is under a lot of pressure to deliver pizzas quickly, that's why he was out the door immediately with no small talk. Think about that delivery guy's state of mind when he realizes he just received an order at rush hour at an address that's hard to reach, and if he misses it he will probably get penalized.
Inspiring people to order pizza that they wouldn't otherwise was the entire point of the campaign.
While I agree it made things unreasonably shitty for drivers, the customer can't really be blamed and shouldn't have to sit at home thinking "am I being a prick by making this person do their job?"
While I agree it made things unreasonably shitty for drivers, the customer can't really be blamed and shouldn't have to sit at home thinking "am I being a prick by making this person do their job?"
I agree the campaign was foolish overall, and dominos agreed. But there is a big difference from happening to order at a difficult time to purposely choosing the most difficult time. Multiply it by a billion and all that.
There are people who see a system and wonder how it can be broken or misused, or whether there's corner cases where the guarantees the system offers don't hold up. These people sometimes take actions that inconvenience or harm others, but we value them nonetheless because we acknowledge that these systems must be fixed, and this cannot happen if nobody draws attention to it.
If some hacker notices that a website has sequential id's and no session cookies and you can use this to dump their entire database, you think this doesn't cause any stress for the employees?
If some hacker notices that a website has sequential id's and no session cookies and you can use this to dump their entire database, you think this doesn't cause any stress for the employees?
You think his dad really did it to draw attention to the plight of delivery workers, and not out of desire to be clever, "beat the system" and get a free pizza?
Yeah it is objectively not cool, but I have to say that I'd have tried it too.
What a nice example of 1980s corporate greed maximizing profits over human life. Modern delivery food delivery services can be seen making the same delivery-by guarantees, so we haven't fully learned our lesson.
> In Domino's annual report last year, Mr. Monaghan said that ''failing to honor the 30-minute delivery guarantee was one of the big disappointments of 1987.'' He added that the delivery performance ''is still totally unacceptable and therefore must be our biggest priority in 1988.''
> ''Not fulfilling a promise is inexcusable,'' he stated in the report. ''It not only goes against everything we believe in, but it's also bad business.'' [1]
Absolutely zero consideration for the possibility that the problem wasn't the staff, but the completely arbitrary 30 minute policy that couldn't possibly be consistently adhered to across thousands of franchisees without introducing significant risk to staff.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/1989/08/29/business/fight-on-quick-p...
> ''Not fulfilling a promise is inexcusable,'' he stated in the report. ''It not only goes against everything we believe in, but it's also bad business.'' [1]
Absolutely zero consideration for the possibility that the problem wasn't the staff, but the completely arbitrary 30 minute policy that couldn't possibly be consistently adhered to across thousands of franchisees without introducing significant risk to staff.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/1989/08/29/business/fight-on-quick-p...
> Absolutely zero consideration for the possibility that the problem wasn't the staff, but the completely arbitrary 30 minute policy that couldn't possibly be consistently adhered to across thousands of franchisees without introducing significant risk to staff
Could it not? I'm sure I could organise a pizza restaurant with a 99.9% success rate delivering pizzas within 30 minutes (the nationwide top- performing restaurant in TFA had 99%) and no more crashes than, say, the national per- mile rate for short journeys.
But to achieve this, I'd need the restaurant to be overprovisioned in delivery drivers and conservative in rejecting requests that were too far away or too busy. My restaurant would lose money. The #1 priority is never really punctuality or timeliness or customer service - those are just means to an end. It's always money in the end.
Could it not? I'm sure I could organise a pizza restaurant with a 99.9% success rate delivering pizzas within 30 minutes (the nationwide top- performing restaurant in TFA had 99%) and no more crashes than, say, the national per- mile rate for short journeys.
But to achieve this, I'd need the restaurant to be overprovisioned in delivery drivers and conservative in rejecting requests that were too far away or too busy. My restaurant would lose money. The #1 priority is never really punctuality or timeliness or customer service - those are just means to an end. It's always money in the end.
Or come up with a way to finish the pizza in transit that delivers an acceptable product.
Masayoshi Son is listening intently.
Ha, well I'd do it as a precooked pizza with a light cheese base, then drop precooked toppings on as needed and use heat lamps to melt the cheese. I doubt it'd be tasty, but it'd be fast.
Attach a pizza oven to a drone...
Hypothetically - why wouldn't not having a set amount of time for delivery be corporate greed too? I mean, if a corporation saves money by screwing over the customer it's corporate greed. If it screws over the employees it's corporate greed.
There doesn't seem to be a lot of people left over to screw.
There doesn't seem to be a lot of people left over to screw.
"corporate greed" is gen z talk... The current economic climate has a lot of gen z's suffering, they see capitalism as the problem, thus everything is corporate greed.
It is a low quality signal, along the lines as a fiduciary duty to screw customers for profit.
It is a low quality signal, along the lines as a fiduciary duty to screw customers for profit.
It seems like an extremely straightforward term to me, describing corporations prioritising their own profit over customer experience. I’m a millennial and I’ve heard the term in use a lot longer than Gen Z have been around.
Because if you ask the owners of most of these business, this was not the plan they had in mind.
Unintended consequences, it is one reason why business students study these cases, to hopefully not repeat them.
Try running a business with low margins and low skilled employees, you make choices or go out of business, some choices win, some don't.
Unintended consequences, it is one reason why business students study these cases, to hopefully not repeat them.
Try running a business with low margins and low skilled employees, you make choices or go out of business, some choices win, some don't.
It is still a pretty stupid term that shows they have understanding of economics shallower than a puddle. Not reducing the profit margin to zero is also prioritizing profit over customer experience.
The article elaborates about that at the end. This isn't "1980s corporate greed". It's just corporate greed, and it's just as relevant today as it was 40 years ago.
Yeah, you can pick a year of your choice, and find a story like this.
I agree in general but I think the 80s deserve special recognition because it marked a turning point in the relationship between wages and productivity[1][2] and the long decline of collective bargaining[3] at the same time it became even more acceptable to brag about wealth because that linked into the Cold War comparisons we made with the Eastern Bloc countries. A lot of older Americans also didn’t track how much things stood in other countries – e.g. the standard of living in much of Europe relative to people doing the same jobs domestically – but I think a lot of younger people are looking at how many trend lines have a knuckle point in that decade and are feeling cheated.
1. https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/
2. But see also https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2023/03/when-comparing-wages...
3. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/03/12/majoritie...
1. https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/
2. But see also https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2023/03/when-comparing-wages...
3. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/03/12/majoritie...
The failure of the 8-minute delivery free pizza guarantee ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7JaKr-ERZw
Wow. This Canadian business man seems really smart. I bet he went to a great business college.
Also what would have destroyed 8 Minute Abs https://youtu.be/rnso4nfdM9w?feature=shared
When the 30 minute guarantee ended I had a recipient of my pizza delivery pull a gun on me when I refused to give a free pizza! (I handed it over) An anecdote I tell at parties
Have you managed to get out of Somalia? Or was it a favella in Rio?
You act like most probable place for such an event, when discussing on HN, ain't simply some rural US. Some folks are crazy and vastly unbalanced, period. If they have access to guns, bad shit happens frequently.
The amount of folks in US who legally own guns and never ever should be allowed to touch one is staggering.
The amount of folks in US who legally own guns and never ever should be allowed to touch one is staggering.
You're more likely to get killed using a gun in the US than Somalia
(Somalia: 7.02 per 100K, US: 10.84 per 100K)
(Somalia: 7.02 per 100K, US: 10.84 per 100K)
More than 50% of that 10.84 consists of suicides - a fairly typical, convenient omission for folks with an agenda. "Get killed" would imply that "you" weren't the actor doing the killing.
Somalia suicide rate: 7.90 per 100K
United States suicide rate: 14 per 100K
How many of these US and Somalia deaths are associated with organized crime?
Somalia suicide rate: 7.90 per 100K
United States suicide rate: 14 per 100K
How many of these US and Somalia deaths are associated with organized crime?
Considering the rate of "regret"[1] on failed suicide attempts, this isn't the slam dunk you think it is.
[1] https://ennyman.medium.com/a-lesson-from-29-golden-gate-suic...
[1] https://ennyman.medium.com/a-lesson-from-29-golden-gate-suic...
The original comment was:
> You're more likely to get killed using a gun in the US than Somalia
How is suicide or the regret thereof relevant to "getting killed?"
> You're more likely to get killed using a gun in the US than Somalia
How is suicide or the regret thereof relevant to "getting killed?"
Source for those figures? Do they include suicides?
Yes, that figure is more than 50% suicides - this is a common statistical ruse.
I ordered a pizza from Domino's in 2019 and it took 3 hours to be delivered. All it took was that one awful experience and I'll never order from them again.
FWIW this happens even with pickup. I used to use their 7.99 pizzas a lot when money was short.
Their app tells you when the pizza is ready, about 30% of the time the pizza was not ready when their app said it was. This means the workers were gaming their timing system with fake pizzas.
Often times I'd be sitting in their pickup area for 20 minutes after the pizza was supposed to be done.
Their app tells you when the pizza is ready, about 30% of the time the pizza was not ready when their app said it was. This means the workers were gaming their timing system with fake pizzas.
Often times I'd be sitting in their pickup area for 20 minutes after the pizza was supposed to be done.
>This means the workers were gaming their timing system with fake pizzas.
Or it meant the person cutting and boxing your order was falling behind.
At least ~15 years ago, the way Domino's timer works is that when the cook puts the order in the oven, they hit a button. ~8 minutes later it says it's ready, which is how long it takes to get through the oven. That was the only input for carryout, delivery had another for when the driver left.
If it was 30% of the time, I'd guess you requested something unusual like "no garlic spray" where the mistake happened or was noticed after the computer says your order is ready, then had to remake it. Or most of the times it was just a few minutes and somebody was boxing it.
Or it meant the person cutting and boxing your order was falling behind.
At least ~15 years ago, the way Domino's timer works is that when the cook puts the order in the oven, they hit a button. ~8 minutes later it says it's ready, which is how long it takes to get through the oven. That was the only input for carryout, delivery had another for when the driver left.
If it was 30% of the time, I'd guess you requested something unusual like "no garlic spray" where the mistake happened or was noticed after the computer says your order is ready, then had to remake it. Or most of the times it was just a few minutes and somebody was boxing it.
> At least ~15 years ago, the way Domino's timer works is that when the cook puts the order in the oven, they hit a button.
The Domino's location near me very obviously hits that button as soon as they get the order when things are busy, regardless of if it's actually going in the oven then or not. I've had many, many times where I arrived at the location, with the app saying "your pizza is ready!", only to have them say "it's not in the oven yet, it'll be 10 minutes" when I ask for my order.
I'm certain the stores and even individual employees are rated on how fast they get the orders done so of course they're going to mess with that system to show the best metrics they can. I'm not even a little bit surprised, nor do I really blame them. Even though it's frustrating to find out my order isn't actually in the oven, I just say "no worries" and wait a few minutes.
The Domino's location near me very obviously hits that button as soon as they get the order when things are busy, regardless of if it's actually going in the oven then or not. I've had many, many times where I arrived at the location, with the app saying "your pizza is ready!", only to have them say "it's not in the oven yet, it'll be 10 minutes" when I ask for my order.
I'm certain the stores and even individual employees are rated on how fast they get the orders done so of course they're going to mess with that system to show the best metrics they can. I'm not even a little bit surprised, nor do I really blame them. Even though it's frustrating to find out my order isn't actually in the oven, I just say "no worries" and wait a few minutes.
>certain the stores and even individual employees are rated on how fast they get the orders done
They weren't fifteen years ago. The only speed incentive was not pissing off the customer. That may have changed, I can't say.
One thing I didn't consider earlier, if the store is busy enough the oven might be full and the cook hits the button to clear the entry they're done with so they aren't confused.
They weren't fifteen years ago. The only speed incentive was not pissing off the customer. That may have changed, I can't say.
One thing I didn't consider earlier, if the store is busy enough the oven might be full and the cook hits the button to clear the entry they're done with so they aren't confused.
No one ever notices the no garlic spray order. I eat dominos weekly and every time I move, it takes a few weeks for the new store to catch on that I order without garlic, and they always know me after that. Any Dominos ordered while out of town is 75% chance of being wrong. I've given up at this point. Papa Johns and gets it it perfect every time, and I can forgive Little Caesars.
From when I worked the job, when cutting pizza the general flow was; remove from oven, prepare and box, then check what order it was for.
As adding the garlic spray is part of the prepare step, it's really easy to fuck up. It's not uncommon to mess it up, ask for a remake, then mess it up again. When you follow the same steps every time it's hard to skip one.
If you want a tip, the Brooklyn style (I think they renamed it?) doesn't come with the spray by default, so it's easier to stop yourself. Only other difference is the pizza has less dough.
As adding the garlic spray is part of the prepare step, it's really easy to fuck up. It's not uncommon to mess it up, ask for a remake, then mess it up again. When you follow the same steps every time it's hard to skip one.
If you want a tip, the Brooklyn style (I think they renamed it?) doesn't come with the spray by default, so it's easier to stop yourself. Only other difference is the pizza has less dough.
That's really surprising to hear! I have bought 100s of the 7.99 larges (don't get me started on the shift to one topping, where a sauce switch is counted), and have never arrived to an incomplete pizza... Though, I don't leave until the tracker shows done as my store is under a mile away, so maybe there's some speculative execution happening?
I think I had read once on another-site-which-shall-remain-nameless that that timer actually had nothing to do with them, and there actually wasn't a way for the employees to indicate whether it's done or delayed or anything. In other words, that timer was just bullshit.
Yeah, the timer in the app is fake.
I'm willing to bet you wouldn't be willing to accept your boss firing you after one mistake though.
Totally, but I think there was more than one mistake in that instance.
I would guess the single mistake was that it was accidentality scanned as having being picked up, but wasn't actually picked up, it just sat on a shelf for a few hours.
After the rush calmed down people started saying "hang on, what's this pizza doing here", then they made a new one and delivered it.
Of course the correct thing to do is issue an apology and refund with the replacement.
After the rush calmed down people started saying "hang on, what's this pizza doing here", then they made a new one and delivered it.
Of course the correct thing to do is issue an apology and refund with the replacement.
An offer so good (dangerous, yes) that took a shitty pizza place to a current 16B-ish valuation is a failure?
This is actually a good example of a mediocre product growing due to an incredible offer. Something that most business don’t event bother to consider. Your offer is definitely more important than even features in most cases.
This is actually a good example of a mediocre product growing due to an incredible offer. Something that most business don’t event bother to consider. Your offer is definitely more important than even features in most cases.
In fairness to Domino's, they did also increase the quality of the pizza. It is at least no longer terrible.
https://hbr.org/2016/11/how-dominos-pizza-reinvented-itself
https://hbr.org/2016/11/how-dominos-pizza-reinvented-itself
I read about that back then, thought "oh I should give Domino's another try", and it was still terrible. If it was even worse before, I can't imagine how that is possible.
I actually like it a lot
reminded me of the minuteman blast door: https://www.nps.gov/teachers/classrooms/military-morale-art....
I believe it was 1989 when Dominos came to Staten Island, NY, for the first time. They opened up in Old Town and the entire staff was migrated from GA. They used pickup trucks with Dominos colors and started hiring drivers.
I was one of them, and the policy sucked ass. There was zero incentive for us to beat 30 minutes, and when we did, the customer was always UNHAPPY that we got there on time and would not get any discounts. The tip always sucked when we beat the clock.
When we didn't beat the clock, we got a decent tip. Our manager was an old fart from GA, and while he didn't say anything to promote speeding, he didn't say anything about not beating the clock. After a few accidents in other shops, the whole thing was trashed, which is when the quality of the driver and tips improved significantly. I also don't recall that it was less busy when the policy was removed. All in all, I don't think anyone liked this policy.
I was one of them, and the policy sucked ass. There was zero incentive for us to beat 30 minutes, and when we did, the customer was always UNHAPPY that we got there on time and would not get any discounts. The tip always sucked when we beat the clock.
When we didn't beat the clock, we got a decent tip. Our manager was an old fart from GA, and while he didn't say anything to promote speeding, he didn't say anything about not beating the clock. After a few accidents in other shops, the whole thing was trashed, which is when the quality of the driver and tips improved significantly. I also don't recall that it was less busy when the policy was removed. All in all, I don't think anyone liked this policy.
This campagin is still alive in China today. But the circumstances are different tho, distances are closer (denser community), and drviers use mopeds insteads of cars (can navigate through cities faster than cars).
And if an order exceeded 30 mins, the customer will receive a 9-inch pizze coupon.
And if an order exceeded 30 mins, the customer will receive a 9-inch pizze coupon.
Similar is the case with apps like Uber Eats and Getir. I only know that in Getir they use different algorithms with artificial intelligence to find the shortest and fastest route. I'm sure other vehicles also use it, but I haven't heard such rumors about them.
You don't use "artificial intelligence" for routing. You've just fallen to marketing speak.
Pathfinding algorithms are absolutely artificial intelligence. A* and so on were invented in just that sort of research.
It may not be AGI, but that was never claimed.
It may not be AGI, but that was never claimed.
If I write an if statement, is that AI?
No, but if you wrote a thousand if statements two decades ago it might be.
IMO, what counts as "AI" is one of those "I know it when I see it" things, simply because trying to write a lawyer-proof definition isn't possible.
I'd argue that "AI" doesn't have to be attempting to achieve AGI to be considered AI. For example, "Computer" players in games are AI. This applies whether you're talking something as advanced as a deep strategy game like the Civ series, or something as basic as the ghosts in Pac-Man, or even an automated Tic-Tac-Toe player.
So...is a path finding algorithm "AI"? I dunno. I could go either way.
But like...I seriously can't come up with a real definition of "AI" that wouldn't end up including things that definitely aren't AI. For example, is AI simply any code that seems like it has agency and makes decisions? If so, then is any sort program that triggers execution based on certain detections "AI"? Certainly not. Is it code that attempts to mimic human behavior, even at a basic level? If so, then is AutoHotKey AI? Nope, definitely not.
I'd argue that "AI" doesn't have to be attempting to achieve AGI to be considered AI. For example, "Computer" players in games are AI. This applies whether you're talking something as advanced as a deep strategy game like the Civ series, or something as basic as the ghosts in Pac-Man, or even an automated Tic-Tac-Toe player.
So...is a path finding algorithm "AI"? I dunno. I could go either way.
But like...I seriously can't come up with a real definition of "AI" that wouldn't end up including things that definitely aren't AI. For example, is AI simply any code that seems like it has agency and makes decisions? If so, then is any sort program that triggers execution based on certain detections "AI"? Certainly not. Is it code that attempts to mimic human behavior, even at a basic level? If so, then is AutoHotKey AI? Nope, definitely not.
In the end, it’s all jumps, adds, flips and shifts.
> Getir they use different algorithms with artificial intelligence to find the shortest and fastest route
Were they that desperate for funding that they had to come up with some AI stuff for an already solved problem?
Were they that desperate for funding that they had to come up with some AI stuff for an already solved problem?
Not entirely the same thing but navigation and path finding for delivery apps is not a solved problem everywhere.
Especially in places where street data isn't complete or works differently (no street names) than in the western cities where Google Maps etc. are developed.
Grab (https://engineering.grab.com) always has interesting blog posts about these topics like: https://engineering.grab.com/road-localisation-grabmaps
Especially in places where street data isn't complete or works differently (no street names) than in the western cities where Google Maps etc. are developed.
Grab (https://engineering.grab.com) always has interesting blog posts about these topics like: https://engineering.grab.com/road-localisation-grabmaps
> Were they that desperate for funding that they had to come up with some AI stuff for an already solved problem?
Path finding is one of the classic AI research areas, back when it mostly meant making robots able to interact with their environment. Yes, it's an "already solved problem", in that we already have several good enough algorithms derived from all that AI research; but that doesn't change the fact that this is "AI stuff", and it doesn't prevent new AI approaches from being used (perhaps something based on neural networks as a path finding heuristic, since we have a lot of computing power to spare nowadays).
Path finding is one of the classic AI research areas, back when it mostly meant making robots able to interact with their environment. Yes, it's an "already solved problem", in that we already have several good enough algorithms derived from all that AI research; but that doesn't change the fact that this is "AI stuff", and it doesn't prevent new AI approaches from being used (perhaps something based on neural networks as a path finding heuristic, since we have a lot of computing power to spare nowadays).
OK, I'm imagining some system just painting a large green arrow onto the windshield, so the driver can just Crazy Taxi their way to the destination.
I was just thinking about Crazy Taxi the other day. It doesn't seem quite so "crazy" now, more a real satire on the gig economy.
Where is the Deliverator when you need him?
Domino's driving was lucrative in the 1980s. I lived near Wash DC and a number of delivery drivers were spotted with diplomatic tags.
During that time there was also controversy about dip tags being ~100% exempt from ticket penalties. (IDK about today.)
Confidence was high that those pizzas always arrived on time.
During that time there was also controversy about dip tags being ~100% exempt from ticket penalties. (IDK about today.)
Confidence was high that those pizzas always arrived on time.
Further evidence we should build a Futurama-style series of tubes in cities for delivering items. I'm not joking. Might need extra packaging to pin the pizza down to survive the forces however. Maybe stack the slices and wrap them or something.
Those existed, though ones large enough to ship a pizza were rare. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pneumatic_tube
Tom Scott videos
Inter-building tubes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMTZvA8iFgI
Food by tube in a cafe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTHZLKFblKo
Inter-building tubes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMTZvA8iFgI
Food by tube in a cafe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTHZLKFblKo
Just have to roll it up. Sadly PFAS are banned so can't put non-stick plastic layer in between to avoid sticking...
Switzerland's working on it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_Sous_Terrain
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_Sous_Terrain
[deleted]
On the other hand it's not hard to imagine how a modern pneumatic tube mail system could be abused (trafficking, terrorism, ...).
Basically the same way a normal mail system can be abused?
Steve?
I honestly believe a fully automated drone delivery system is easily possible with our current technology, the only issue would be funding and widespread adoption. And the delivery drivers annoyed at losing jobs
> ...the only issue would be...
And inclement weather, and overhead wires, and crashes, and liability, and NIMBYs, and all the creeps (from local cops to data aggregators to foreign intel orgs) who want access to the data, and ...
And inclement weather, and overhead wires, and crashes, and liability, and NIMBYs, and all the creeps (from local cops to data aggregators to foreign intel orgs) who want access to the data, and ...
You’d probably be able to hire those delivery drivers back as part of the huge fleet of “drone engineers” you’d need to maintain the fleet as they crash, get attacked, batteries run flat…
And noise
Food delivery driver the most dangerous job.
I still remember the ad before the Simpsons from when I was a kid
this is worth a read too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Noid
Btw, it works in india
No, it doesn't? I don't think Domino's or any pizza vendor has offered 30 minutes or free guarantees in a long time.
They have different timed delivery policies in India - even a 20 minutes delivery guarantee.
Read the section "Service Guarantee"
https://pizzaonline.dominos.co.in/tnc
Also see: https://www.business-standard.com/article/news-cm/domino-s-p...
Read the section "Service Guarantee"
https://pizzaonline.dominos.co.in/tnc
Also see: https://www.business-standard.com/article/news-cm/domino-s-p...
I am not sure if they actually give out very many free pizzas. The language is quite vague, probably intentionally. Just looks like a gimmick.
The only 30 minute delivery I see is DoorDash telling me my food is going to be 30 minutes away for 45 minutes.
Domino's Pizza in India offers a 30-minute delivery guarantee. https://www.dominos.co.in/hot-pizza-30-minutes-delivery-guar...
Are you referring to the Dabbawala system for lunches? That’s a really interesting example.
No, that doesnt have anything to do with it. Dominos delivery drivers are not part of the Dabbawala system.
Will take this as an opportunity to complain about how sub-par dominos ordering is in Canada compared to Belgium. In Belgium, they have a modern website with a real-time tracker for when the food will arrive. In Canada, they have a progress bar that just says “out for delivery” without any indication of how long it will take.
Their website and ordering experience in Canada is so frustrating that I mostly stopped getting Dominos, except for exceedingly rare occasions
Their website and ordering experience in Canada is so frustrating that I mostly stopped getting Dominos, except for exceedingly rare occasions
> Gig drivers don’t face an edict for speed like past Domino’s drivers, but Wells says the requirement to be fast is built into the job, with drivers hurrying to make financial incentives, avoid bad ratings, and ensure the food is warm upon delivery.
Annoying corporate policy replaced by society taking a wrong turn to being driven by ratings on the I internet - that we unlike the bad policy can't get rid of.