United News of Bangladesh

Robots are increasingly becoming part of the service industry, from making cocktails and coffee to delivering food. Now, some of them are also asking customers for tips. That is raising a simple question: Who actually gets the money? At The Tipsy Robot bar inside Las Vegas’ Venetian Hotel, two robotic arms prepare automated cocktails. A margarita costs $17, but customers are also asked to pay a 10% service fee. Similar situations are appearing elsewhere. At Artly Coffee in New York, a robotic barista prompted customers for tips. At Newark Liberty International Airport, a self-checkout machine suggested a tip when customers bought a bottle of water from an unstaffed kiosk. In Portland, Oregon, restaurant Top Burmese uses a robot to deliver meals, although human workers take customers’ orders. While customers may willingly tip human servers for good service, tipping a machine can feel different. It is also often unclear who receives the money. Representatives of The Tipsy Robot and Artly Coffee say all tips go to human employees and that their companies do not take any share. Artly has since removed its automatic tip prompts following complaints from customers. But experts say the situation could be more complicated elsewhere. Holona Ochs, an associate professor of political science at Lehigh University and co-author of the book Gratuity, said there is no clear legal standard determining who owns tips given to robots. “We have every reason to believe that some unscrupulous employers are taking the robot tips for themselves,” Ochs said, stressing that the key issue is who benefits and who pays. Tipping has already become a growing source of frustration for consumers, especially in the United States. Digital payment systems increasingly ask customers to choose tip percentages, sometimes even when little or no human service is involved. The issue is particularly important in the US, where tipped workers can legally receive a much lower minimum wage. The federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour, while the minimum cash wage for tipped workers is $2.13 an hour, provided employers make up the difference when necessary. US law prevents companies, owners and supervisors from taking tips meant for workers. But those rules may not clearly cover money given to robots. Still, robots do not necessarily mean fewer jobs for people. Abigail Smathers, director of content at Artly Coffee, said the company employs people alongside its robots and does not want to replace workers simply to cut costs. She said the company removed tip prompts and increased workers’ pay partly because of customer concerns. She also said robots can help address labor shortages in the service industry without replacing human workers. Katerina Berezina, an associate professor at the University of Mississippi who studies hospitality technology, said it would be unfair to assume that companies use robots only to make more money. She said service fees or tips could help cover the labor, maintenance and technology costs involved in operating robots. However, labor advocacy group One Fair Wage argues that automation could allow restaurants to continue paying workers low wages instead of addressing the underlying problems in the industry. Experts say customers will play an important role in determining whether robot tipping becomes common. Michael Lynn, professor emeritus at Cornell University and author of *The Psychology of Tipping*, said people usually tip to reward good service, help workers with low wages or avoid feeling judged. Those reasons largely do not apply when dealing with a robot, he said. A study found that only about 11% of participants said they would tip a robot bartender. However, people who had previously interacted with robot bartenders were more likely to consider tipping. The same study found that about 42% of participants who initially refused to tip a robot changed their minds when they were told the money would go to human workers. Lynn believes robot tipping is unlikely to become widely accepted. Businesses may introduce the option to increase revenue, but if customers dislike it, they could simply refuse to pay. “There is no god of tipping, no one can make you pay,” he said, arguing that tipping habits are shaped by customers themselves. For now, robot tipping appears to be an experiment whose future may depend largely on how consumers respond. Source: BBC

Researchers have developed an AI-powered robot that can harvest tomatoes more efficiently by deciding the best way to pick each fruit. The robot not only identifies tomatoes but also determines the easiest way to harvest them. This comes as farm labour shortages are pushing the agriculture sector towards greater use of automation, especially in harvesting. Tomatoes are difficult for machines to handle because they grow in clusters. A robot must carefully pick ripe ones without damaging unripe fruits nearby, which requires accuracy and smart decision-making. To address this, Assistant Professor Takuya Fujinaga of Osaka Metropolitan University’s Graduate School of Engineering created a system that helps robots judge how easy a tomato is to pick before attempting to harvest it. The system uses image recognition and data analysis to select the best angle for picking. It examines factors such as the position of the tomato, its stems, and whether it is hidden behind leaves or other parts of the plant. Unlike traditional systems that only detect fruit, this method introduces “harvest-ease estimation,” which measures how likely a robot is to successfully pick a tomato. During testing, the robot achieved an 81 percent success rate. In some cases, it adjusted its approach and successfully picked tomatoes from the side after failing to pick them from the front. The study highlights that several factors affect robotic harvesting, including how tomatoes grow, the position of stems, and visual obstacles like leaves. Researchers say this technology could lead to better coordination between humans and robots in farming. Robots may handle easier tasks, while humans focus on more difficult harvesting. The findings were published in the journal ‘Smart Agricultural Technology’. Source: Science daily