But that's not even the issue at hand. The actual technological change — aggregating restaurant menus and allowing consumers to order from them via one interface — is orthogonal to the discussion here. We're talking about the specific business practices that companies implementing that technology have settled upon.
I'm putting the blame on platforms because the change they're pushing involves predatory behavior without consent of the restaurants. That wasn't inevitable in any way — it was a deliberate choice made by delivery platforms to redirect money from restaurants to their investors.
> Who are you to decide that this is wrong and that people should not be able to order food for home delivery?
> You are also ignoring another already stated point: Restaurants are not required to offer takeaway.
These are both straw men. No one is saying that people shouldn't be able to order delivery. No one is saying that restaurants are forced to offer takeout. No one is even saying that delivery platforms shouldn't exist!
The point is that the onus should be on delivery platforms to get restaurants to opt in, not on restaurants to be vigilant against predatory middlemen moving in without warning. That's where this starts and ends.
I am puzzled by you putting the blame on these platforms. As said consumers like the service, if they didn't these platforms would have been forgotten failed experiments by now.
Who are you to decide that this is wrong and that people should not be able to order food for home delivery?
You are also ignoring another already stated point: Restaurants are not required to offer takeaway. They do it if they so decide. If you're a restaurant owner and don't like takeaway then just don't offer it and focus on the 'traditional' experience.
It is quite neutral, really. Different, but not inherently better or worse than it was.
We should be careful not to make this an emotional and ideological issue.