• Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Algorithmic pricing is all about making a very small set of people richer by making all the rest of us pay more money for products.

    So, fuck no.

  • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    15 hours ago

    The algorithm analyzes data and determines the optimal price for products or services to maximize profits.

    In that case, I’m against it.

  • puppinstuff@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    17 hours ago

    If this pricing model is permitted it should be forced to put products on sale when items are overstocked or expiring food is closer to its due date. Why am I paying more for salmon at dinner time but not less when it expires tomorrow?

  • Typotyper@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Does this mean flyers with listed prices are now useless.

    What happens when the marked price on a shelf changes when I get to the cash register. Currently I walk away from a grocery cart of food if there is any hassle at the till. They can deal with it.

    How are you supposed to plan trips when the the price is always changing

    • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Does this mean flyers with listed prices are now useless.

      Yes, and it would make price matching and planning ahead obsolete, too.

      Basically, this is designed to maximize profits by “optimizing” how customers get screwed over.

    • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      14 hours ago

      At minimum it should not be allowed to change prices while the store is open to customers. (I guess with an exception for 24/7 stores)

      And/or limit the number of price changes on any item to one per 24 hours, or 2 per 7 days, or something like that.

  • melsaskca@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    12 hours ago

    What about fucking cost accounting? That is closer to the truth of value than charging what you “feel”. Cost accounting is transparent. Fair for everyone.

  • teppa@piefed.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    14 hours ago

    So we accept that our currency is being debased by an inflation index that barely tracks real inflation, as we buy half of all mortgage bonds federally to juice home values and running QE, but we want to ban algorithms that attempt to maintain profits?

    If you don’t want prices to rise then perhaps a lower inflation target makes more sense. Maybe even a law that wages automatically rise with inflation. But we all know they don’t want that, they would need to actually raise taxes if they did that, and housing wouldn’t turn into a giant ponzi scheme that artificially boosts GDP.

    • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      12 hours ago

      How about we ban all of that crap, then? Because algorithmic pricing will be abused, we all know it because things like these always get abused because the abuse is so damn simple.

      An absolute no to this

      • teppa@piefed.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        What is the outcome you want, to have prices stay the same?

        I’m just saying they cant stay the same, if prices do fall then the Bank of Canada will do QE and buy mortgage bonds to push prices up, so what is it you think you are fighting by banning algorithm?