Pissing off an enormous number of customers in the process. You will run out of customers at the store willing to use such a useless app before the thing learns where the pasta is.
Your stock person idea makes sense if they keep the shelves stable, but "gut feeling" organizations tells me that things can shift around over time.
and you can give an incentive to customers. give them a 10% discount on their total order when they checkout, if they've reported the correct location of an item. don't tell them about it until they checkout, to avoid gaming.
there's many more ideas here, i don't need to iterate through them all. i'm impressed by the lack of creativity on this subject.
> things can shift around over time.
not just that, but products come and go. it should be obvious that this is an ongoing task when stocking, not a one time inventory location task.
In other words, nobody has an idea how it will work. ML doesn't generate essential data for you, or solve problems which you cannot reasonably describe a solution for.
i actually do think that customer-finding is a good approach, but it's up to the client to decide isn't it. the comment i'm replying to was about impossible requests by clueless clients, not about bad but possible implementations.
even if the idea is in fact bad, which again i dispute, it's always good to give a client an alternative that stinks, so that the idea you want them to accept seems "obviously" good. i forget what this technique is called.
EDIT: after an hour of searching, I believe it's called a "duck". based on the legend of Battle Chess, but of course the technique has existed long, long before Battle Chess.
i get it, you're trying to give an example of an impossible request, of which there are many, but this just isn't one of those.