Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

When autonomous grocery delivery becomes common, that's going to be huge for people without cars.

Obviously you can already get delivery from Whole Foods, FreshDirect, etc., but it's expensive due to the drivers.

And public transport and bikeshares are great for transporting you, but not for trying to carry four or six bags of groceries along with you.



If people were legally allowed to live near grocery stores, they wouldn't feel the need to carry four to six bags of groceries along with them.


Just for a bit of comparison... I'm in the UK and don't drive. It is a 10-min walk to a big Tesco superstore, which is really convenient. It is on my commute too (which I also walk, Uber if its raining heavily).


That is a US thing. They even have a term for it: food desert.

As European it's hard to imagine a place where you cannot walk to a grocery store.


It's not inherently an American thing, it's the result of several mid-century zoning and urban design decisions.

I used to live in a 1920s era "streetcar suburb" neighbourhood. I lived on the third floor, and the ground level was a full (but small) grocery store. I never spent more than ~$50 at a time on groceries because I only bought for a couple days at a time.

The same decisions and laws that created the current system can be changed to take us back to the "norm" in the rest of the world.


Same with Asia.


People have a lot of hyperbole about grocery store density. Pull up a random city and see how they are actually distributed. Even in flyover state metros grocery stores are basically evenly distributed 1-3 miles apart from the next across the entire urbanized/suburbanized area.


In my California suburban hometown, half of the housing was in the hills and any store, let alone a grocery store, was effectively unwalkable.


Its california. You have what 14 days of rain a year? Ebike. Done.


> If people were legally allowed to live near grocery stores

My rural grocery store is 1.9 mi away. I tend to shop a few times a week, and only for what I need.


How many bags is "only for what I need" and how large is your household?


> How many bags is "only for what I need" and how large is your household?

Generally one bag, mostly produce. Maybe a meat I’ll cook that day.

House size ranges from one to five. The only time I wind up with a full fridge is around holidays or when I have houseguests with food anxiety.


> If people were legally allowed to live near grocery stores

What are you talking about? What backwaters country is this? In many places in the world, people live literally on top of grocery stores, such law would be ridiculed until the law makers have to socially isolate themselves if they tried to come up with something so stupid.


I assume OP is talking about US zoning laws which separate residential zones from commercial ones.


But in cities and towns you must have mixed zoning like the rest of the world?


The great majority of development in American cities over the last 75 years has been single-use, with neighborhoods of exclusively single-family houses separated from nearby commercial strips with big parking lots along wide roads.

The downtown/center of older cities may still have mixed use, and there have been changes happening in recent years to allow/build more apartments and mixed use areas, but, generally outside of the densest parts of the largest cities commercial and residential areas are required to be separate, with personal cars as the primary/only way to get between them.

This has been a bit of a self-reinforcing phenomenon, IMO, as car-first infrastructure puts people at the mercy of traffic congestion, and means that any apartment building or business in their vicinity will result in more cars passing through, more congestion, more competition for parking, as well as the presence of the large parking lots that cities mandate for any new construction, which themselves make it unpleasant to get around in any other way.


> the median distance to the nearest food store for the overall U.S. population was 0.9 miles, with 40 percent of the U.S. population living more than 1 mile from a food store. The median distance to the third-nearest food store for the overall population was 1.7 miles. When the ERS researchers looked at rural food store access, they found that the median distance to the nearest and the third-nearest food store was 3.1 miles and 6.1 miles, respectively.

https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2019/june/u-s-shoppers-...


In older areas, some. But practically anything after WW2, not nearly as much.

It's somewhat misleading to talk about distance-to-X in a lot of American places. I live less than a mile from the nearest grocery as the crow flies, but if I wanted to walk there I have to traverse my entire street to get to an exit road (as opposed to walking out my back gate; the whole back is fenced because the exit road is directly behind my house). Then I have to walk down a fairly busy one-lane-each-way road with no sidewalks or shoulders present (i.e., you're going to be walking in a shallow drainage ditch - hope it's not raining!) for a few hundred meters, cross two busy multilane roads, and walk across an unshaded parking lot.


The US, which is where Phoenix is. And yes, my point is that we (in the US) should have walkable (and bikeable) cities, like much of the rest of the world.


100 yards isn't a walkable distance in Phoenix in the summer.


Yes it is.


I wouldn't want any elderly person I knew walking that distance in any of the 3 weeks Phoenix typically spends over 100 degrees (even hotter over pavement).


100 yards is less than a block. Did you mean to say a longer distance?

And yeah, walkable cities includes infrastructure that does not magnify the sun at pedestrians (see: shade, plants)


You know what desert cultures around the world do to avoid this phenomenon? They just go outside in the mornings and evenings.


They are talking about US suburbs. For example, the house I grew up in is over a mile to the nearest grocery and you have to cross two large intersections on the way.


The intersection stuff sucks, but "over a mile" seems to be between 1.5 to 2km, is that considered far to walk in the US? Measuring where I go to have my morning coffee at a cafe each day, it seems to be 1.3km away, and I walk there and back every morning...


Go to Google Maps, drop the StreeView person anywhere in the US 10 times and count how many times you find yourself in a place where you would be happy to be walking right now. Try and look for sidewalks and pedestrian crossings. It's hard to understand the layout of American cities for the European and Asian mind.

I've been to the US many times and I'm still shocked when I need to drive from this parking lot to that parking lot across the street because it would be dangerous and possibly illegal to just walk there.


Are you carrying your groceries to the coffee shop? Also, walking places in US suburbs is a miserable experience, especially in the Southwest where it gets hot. Everything is spread out with large parking lots, sidewalks are a maybe, the roads are busy and there is no shade or sound dampening.


> Are you carrying your groceries to the coffee shop?

Obviously no. But where I lived ~20 years ago the nearest grocery was a 20 minute walk there and then 20 minute walk back with two or four shopping bags with stuff, and I wasn't the only one walking there when needing to do shopping.

I think it's more common than not out in the world that things are far away so you need to spend awful amount of time on just getting places. Unless you live in a city of course.


My grocery store is 3 miles (~5km) away with nearly zero sidewalks, and I live in the capital city of my state. America is a hellscape in that respect.


Counterpoint: my family in New Delhi regularly gets groceries (and booze and cigarettes and pet food) delivered. Convenience comes in many forms, and not everyone values the same elements similarly.


Bless your non-merican heart :_)


The solution is walkable towns/cities. Not deliveries hahaha.


Sure, how has that worked over the past fifty years? Let’s try deliveries now and see if that helps


It mostly hasn't worked in the US because cities mostly haven't been doing it. It seems to work great in other places.


A lot of problems are easy if you can get everyone to coordinate. Wishful thinking is not a plan though.


You don't need to get everyone to coordinate. You need politicians to not listen to the lobby of home owners and real estate companies worried about their investments (in other words, ignore the NIMBYs). Change the zoning laws, incentivize developing mixed use, prioritize pedestrian and cycling infrastructure and stop prioritizing cars and parking.


Walkable cities have been working great since the dawn of cities. They continue to work fine where they are allowed to exist.


They've always been allowed to exist in the US.

But the US also allows suburbs, and it turns out a ton of people prefer those, having backyards for their kids.

I love cities but I'm also well aware that tons of people don't want to be stuck in cities.


Walkable cities are actually illegal in much of the US due to zoning laws right now. The reason you don't see shops in residential suburban developments is not because there is no demand, it's because it's literally illegal.

Having walkable and bikeable destinations is compatible with back yards. It just needs to be legal to build it.


its illegal because the voters dont want it


To me it looks like lobbies have more power than voters.


There really is no NIMBY lobby. NIMBY laws exist because NIMBY voters demand them.


In general, I believe that it's the highway lobby who shaped the US into what it is today, not the NIMBY people. I think they have much more power than nimby, even if in certain situations, they seem to be on the same side. So what I say is that industry interest weighs more than voter interest.


Works completely perfectly in Japan.


Outside of big cities in Japan, car ownership is quite high (usually 2 cars per household).


I live in Japan, so I know how it works.

You have to get pretty damn rural before you need anything more than a bike to access a convenience store.

Obviously the absolute overwhelming majority of Japanese live in cities anyway, so it's not really comparable to the US.


Ah, so many ways I wish the US was more Japan-like. And I really mean it. But I also sadly know it will never happen.


I agree, but changing zoning is more difficult


Just rebuild society. Easy!


Grocery delivery services are already ruining the regular supermarkets. My local grocery store used to always have fresh stock and full shelves. For the past year or two I've noticed a rapid increase in delivery shoppers who typically have 2-3 hand baskets or 2 full carts with them in aisles and clearing out shelves of food.


That doesn't make any sense.

People aren't eating more food. Before they just had to go themselves.

And supermarkets restock constantly throughout the day from the back.


Grocery shopping done by task rabbits / etc leaves things to be desired. Quality of choices on things. Maybe its good for staples and saving you time there.


Walmart will apparently delivery groceries to me for free under the right incantation. I don't know how much advantage autonomy will add to that.


Funny that you think the autonomous offerings pass the savings to the human customer.


“… but it's expensive due to the drivers.“

Really? Drivers only get paid 2 to 3 dollars per delivery from DoorDash and UberEats. These companies are predatory and pay the drivers less than it cost the drivers to deliver. So now these companies will assume all the costs instead of passing the cost down to the drivers? How does that make them more profitable? Maybe there’s some DoorDash or Uber eaters here that can explain my confusion.


Right, unless the drivers are using ebikes or scooters, they're paying more in vehicle maintenance and gas than they're making in fees.


Don’t forget depreciation of the vehicle and the risk of an accident as well.

Why would DoorDash want to assume all that responsibility when they have such a good legal scam against all their drivers right now? I call it a scam because DoorDash claims to not be taking the tips of drivers, but given the puny payouts per delivery the drivers lose money and time without the tips, so how can they claim they’re not taking the tips.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: