When self-service checkout kiosks started appearing in stores, I gave them a shot but quickly decided they weren't for me, especially when I had a full cart or a less-than-pleasant mood.

I am quite literally the person who will stand in line behind shoppers with overflowing carts, waiting patiently for a human cashier to ring up my items.

“Place your item in the bagging area?”

Absolutely not.

I’m aware enough not to ruin my day by choosing to engage with a machine instead of a person.

That said, I do enjoy using the “Scan-It” feature at Stop & Shop, which allows me to bag my groceries as I shop and track my total in real time.

This way, I avoid the rush of bagging my items while other customers impatiently glance my way.

Using “Scan-It” is the least stressful way for me to shop for groceries, and I welcome that whenever possible.

However, that small joy is overshadowed by the presence of a friendly robot named Marty that seems to follow, block, and pursue me during my shopping trips.

Reportedly, the robots used by Stop & Shop are designed to identify spills and safety issues on the floor, alerting human staff to keep the store safe and clean.

I can’t shake the feeling that they might be surveilling us for theft.

Perhaps that’s just my impression of a society that feels increasingly monitored, but nonetheless…

When I mentioned that Stop & Shop has “employed” these robots, it’s worth noting that each one costs about $35,000 to operate in a store.

Wait a minute.

The federal minimum wage remains at $7.25.

So, instead of deploying a robot, Stop & Shop could pay two human workers the federal minimum wage for an entire year, provide them with paid leave, and still have funds left over.

That robot earns more annually than a worker in Washington D.C., where the highest minimum wage is $17.00.

Something is definitely amiss here, right?

Quick aside:

The reason I'm even discussing this topic is that earlier today, my boyfriend asked if I had heard about the robot that allegedly became so fed up with serving humans that it ended its own life.

No, I hadn’t heard, but naturally, I looked it up and found a lack of credible information.

Perhaps the story of the suicidal robot was never true.

It might have been “fake news” or fabricated to provoke reactions from people like me, who will now ponder:

“Is this even real?”

Because this is how it begins, in my humble and unsolicited opinion.

First, we have self-service machines removing low-wage, “unskilled” jobs from individuals who are barely surviving below the poverty line.

In 2023, there were about 1.2 million cashiers in the U.S., down from roughly 1.4 million in 2019.

That may not seem alarming, but consider the broader implications of self-checkout machines on society, as noted by AP News:

> “...Customers complaining about clunky technology that produces confusing error messages, staff having to oversee both human customers and machines, and retailers grappling with theft…”

Cindy Whittington, 66, from Fairfax, Virginia, stated, “Shopping used to be straightforward, but now it’s frustrating. You’re spending more and struggling to pay for items at their store. Checking out has become a hassle. I should get a 5% discount.”

Cindy, you are absolutely right.

We should receive 5% discounts.

Instead, we're constantly prompted to tip or donate whenever we make a purchase, regardless of the context.

Stop & Shop generates $15.2 billion annually, while their starting salary is only $24,000 per year.

So, no.

I will not round up my change to donate to charity so that you can use my contribution as a tax write-off, you morally questionable, capitalistic individuals.

Apologies, I’m letting my frustration show again…

But first, it was the self-service checkout machines.

Then it transitioned to companies replacing contact numbers with chatbots on their websites.

Next came those intriguing (but pricey) applications that can transform your photograph into a dreamlike, surreal portrait using AI.

Then, instead of utilizing ethically sourced artwork for personal projects, AI provided a means to misappropriate others' art and blend it into something we lower ourselves to call our own.

But it isn’t ours.

It’s stolen art from someone else.

Following art appropriation, we witnessed the theft of written content.

Millions of books were scanned without permission—words taken and utilized without the authors’ consent—to train AI.

What was the purpose of training AI, you might wonder?

So that people no longer feel the need to write books or articulate their own thoughts.

So that the internet becomes a repository of all knowledge.

So we reach a stage where formal education becomes obsolete because all we’ll need is to know how to pose the right question to an AI.

Now, our voices are at risk of being appropriated.

AI can imitate your voice and manipulate it against you or your loved ones.

Consider this scenario:

You might receive a call from your daughter, pleading for you to send her money because she lost her passport while traveling.

But what if it isn’t your daughter?

Regrettably, it may be too late before you realize you’ve been duped.

This is the reality we currently inhabit.

A reality where the news is filled with what the White House calls “cheap fakes,” which are so shallow, they lack depth.

The media has been distorting information for centuries, but we are reaching a point where even the most discerning thinkers question whether they can trust anything they see or hear.

You might think I'm exaggerating, right?

You could label me as overly dramatic for believing the robot uprising is imminent, and in that case, you wouldn’t be wrong.

It’s not merely coming.

The robot uprising is already here.

AI has the capability to read and rewrite our books and generate new content.

AI can hijack our voices.

AI can appropriate our likenesses.

AI is swiftly replacing every human-generated website that took years of SEO content creation to climb the ranks and generate revenue, with subpar alternatives like this:

Notice the message at the bottom?

That ominous warning we shouldn’t overlook?

While it may claim (and might even be accurate) that AI is unlikely to replace websites, it raises a question about the future necessity of human web designers.

The AI-generated conclusion?

“At least for now…”