• conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    189
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    If it worked for most shit and escalated to a human when it actually needed to, reliably, I’d be fine with it.

    I don’t believe there’s a realistic chance that there’s a lot of overlap between the people willing to invest to actually do it properly and the people paying for AI instead of people though.

    • ArbiterXero@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      94
      ·
      4 months ago

      The problem is the same as with the telephone answering trees.

      If they’re used to help you get where you’re going, then they’re great. But that’s not the best financially motivated decision. Solving your problem costs the companies money. Pissing you off and convincing you that your problem shouldn’t be fixed saves money on support.

      So making you go round in circles is the machine doing EXACTLY what they want it to do.

      • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        38
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s an additional problem.

        But the bigger problem is that it’s not actually possible to do a good job without genuine meaningful investment in building out the tooling properly.

        • ArbiterXero@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          That’s just it…… they are building it out properly, their goal is just not what you think it is.

    • MeatsOfRage@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I get one of those meal kit delivery services. Every few weeks I’ll go to their AI customer support and ask for cancellation and it’ll give me discounts on upcoming orders. I keep the service at about 40% off at all times. Also when there’s a problem with the order the chat bot just tosses me a discount. Cases like this are perfect for AI customer service.

      Edit

      Wow this blew up in a weird way. Just to be clear on a few points:

      With the discount I pay $87 Canadian which is $76 untaxed or about $55usd. I also pay for this service using gift cards from Costco that are 20% off ($100 for $80) bringing that $55 weekly cost down to about $44. For 6 different dinners for me and my wife delivered to my front door every Monday. With crazy grocery prices where I live I cannot come close to beating that without giving up something. I won’t eat the same thing every night (Sunday meal prep bros, don’t at me), I don’t want to expend the mental energy gathering recipes and ingredients but I do enjoy cooking a lot. It’s something at the end of the day I can do with my hands free of screens. At regular price this was worth it to me, at 40% off it’s actually saving me money. If they’re still making money shipping this big box off food to me on a weekly basis, then good for them, we’re both coming out on top.

      • DessertStorms@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Except they’re selling you the kit at waaaay over cost in the first place, so they’re still making money off of you. I promise you they are aware of the “glitch”, and are not ignoring it out of the kindness of their hearts.

        (not criticising you for using the service, if it works for you go for it and get those discounts, but don’t let them manipulate you in to thinking you’ve got one over on them, they 100% account for this kind of thing and are still making money)

        • snooggums@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          4 months ago

          If X number of people pay full price and only Y number people go through the hoops of getting a discount the company comes out ahead!

          • TeddE@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            It’s worse then that. They’re actively profiting from that discount rate, meaning they’re ludicrously profiting from everyone who doesn’t spend half their life getting discount codes (the cost of convenience)

            • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              4 months ago

              I mean most products you’d sell you’re hopefully making at least 40% profit margin so everyone would still be making money. They’re just banking on you sticking around and not canceling. lots of money > some money > no money

              • dactylotheca@suppo.fi
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                13
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                We humans sometimes use a rhetorical device called “hyperbole” where we use exaggeration to emphasize our point, and it’s usually not meant to be taken literally. Welcome to the planet, hope you enjoy your stay.

                • MeatsOfRage@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Yes but the point you’re trying to get across is this is a huge amount of effort when it’s really trivial.

        • MeatsOfRage@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yea but it works out to $87 (Canadian) for 6 different nights of meals for 2 people. Delivered to my door. I suspect their angle is using this to just keep you from churning at a loss in hopes of just keeping you around in case you go back to paying regular price. The amount of meat, vegetables and dairy in the box along with cost of shipping and paying people to assemble this order, the cost has to be damn near $87 if not a little over.

          • DessertStorms@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            Like I said, I don’t criticise anyone for using the service, and the more affordable it is, the better, but trust that they are definitely not working at a loss, in the same way supermarkets, that would probably still charge less for the same items, do - by making you believe they’re selling to you at just about what it costs them to get by, when they are selling it to you for significantly more.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        4 months ago

        And it’s quite possible that it’s cheaper for them to give those discounts since they’re not employing as many humans. Humans are expensive.

        • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          It’s more likely that the food is so cheap that the company still makes money at 40% off. Like how mattresses are always discounted 30% to 70% .

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            4 months ago

            They certainly do, but they won’t give up that extra margin if they don’t have to. If customers hate dealing with the AI service, it may be cheaper to compensate them with more discounts than put humans back on the phone.

        • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Thanks for the massive bill mom and dad.

          They got their serotonin and I got exploitation every waking moment of my life.

      • snooggums@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Dropping pricing down to a reasonable amount by making you jump through hoops instead of pricing it fairly in the first place?

        That is like praising someone for stabbing you instead of shooting you.

        • MeatsOfRage@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I mean, I’m choosing to use this service. If it felt unfair I’d just buy the groceries myself. They’re not a charity, you’re getting a premium service and there are costs associated with this. I don’t think it’s priced unfairly to begin with, it falls somewhere between buying your own groceries and getting takeout. The value is saving me time figuring out recipes, gathering the ingredients and getting a different meal every night, this is the value you pay for. I don’t know why people expect these companies to just give this service away.

          • unconfirmedsourcesDOTgov@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            I don’t know why people expect these companies to just give this service away.

            Idk if you’ve noticed but there seem to be a lot of people on Lemmy who are opposed to the theory underlying the profit motive. If your product or service is priced above cost then it is automatically bad. 🤷‍♂️

      • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Smart.

        Those of you getting Netflix, Peacock, NFL or other TV subs, note that the cancel button will likely give you long-term discounts too.

        USE THEM

    • Emmy@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      The answer is always, the service will sick until you leave for another company.

      Then you’ll find out sucks just as much there, cause you have to buy from someone

    • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      In my experience the AI assistant is just trained on the information available on the firm’s website.

      In 2024 I never just call a company expecting to be able to be assisted by a person. It’s always quicker and easier to figure out how to interact with said company online. The only times you call are when it’s not possible to resolve your query by interacting with them online.

      That being the case, the entire purpose of the AI in this case is just to make it less convenient to call them. “Have you tried to resolve your issue online? Are you really sure about that? Maybe I could paraphrase this blog post from our website written by an intern 12 years ago.”

      • kalleboo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        90% of people calling support lines are due to questions that are in the top 10 ten on the FAQ. They’re just the type of people who don’t like reading and just want a social answer. The same kind of people who get told “just do a search, this is asked weekly” on Reddit.

        If there was a way to direct the “I just need a FAQ that I don’t need to read myself” people to an LLM and the “something is actually broken I need real help” to people, that would be ideal.

    • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      If it worked for most shit and escalated to a human when it actually needed to, reliably, I’d be fine with it.

      If you think that’s how it will be implemented, I have some beans I’d like to sell you.

  • freebee@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I dislike the fact even more then the idea.

    Called a bank recently.

    They: "please say in a word the subject your call is about so we can immediately connect you to the right department "

    Me: “LOAN”

    They: you said “limits on your cards”, 1 for yes 2 for no

    I tried 3 times, gave up. They won, I guess.

    • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      ·
      4 months ago

      “Talk to a human”

      Repeat these words over and over. Most automated phone systems are programmed to bail out when its clear the customer is just flat out unwilling to engage with their bullshit.

      • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        36
        ·
        4 months ago

        I usually use the “cuss at the bot” method. Gets out my frustration ahead of time so i can be sweet with the human. Tho one time the computer hung up on my ass haha

      • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        I think it was Comcast that refused to connect me with a human unless I said the right thing.

        No matter what method, it would either hang up and tell me to try again or just not route me to the right place.

        I ended up sending a letter to my state Attorney General. 30 days later my issue was fixed.

        • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Probably not. Access to phone calls is heavily restricted on modem smart phones. It’s why call recording apps are almost impossible to make now, despite many jurisdictions being one party consent (meaning only one person involved in a conversation needs to know that it’s being recorded).

      • Maeve@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        I’ve called companies that disconnect the call or “in order to connect you to the right agent, please tell us what you’re calling about,” them inevitably get it wing enough times to make you sit through a menu of about ten choices that are not correct and disconnect after three rounds of this nonsense.

  • nman90@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    4 months ago

    I extremely hate this idea. I I already hate the automated systems that are definitely designed to make you give up just trying to talk to an actual human being. Hopefully, we can get more lawsuits around the world like the Air canada one where they are liable for any bs the ai decides to make up, along with actual laws saying the same. Hopefully, it would discourage them.

  • NutWrench@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    4 months ago

    The point of modern “customer service” is to NOT provide customer service. If you can drag out the conversation to the point where the caller rage-quits in frustration, then the company can avoid spending any money on fixing any problems they’ve caused.

    • Buttons@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      4 months ago

      This is how companies that don’t have competition act. This is how most companies act. We need more anti-trust enforcement.

    • hamsterkill@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      Previous way for companies to cut down on customer support costs was to make a better quality product (making support interactions rarer). That is not so much the philosophy anymore.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s also similar to scammers. When you are not quite certain if you’ve been scammed, you’ll first ask. There’s a percentage of cases where you won’t bother for the sum, because you’ve used the energy on pinging them.

      While in case of companies you could have used that energy to, say, post “X is crap” somewhere in the Web.

      • T156@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Depends on whether scammers will also use a similar AI system to do their job for them. If they do, they might be basically indistinguishable.

  • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    ·
    4 months ago

    I had the displeasure of being called by one from a vendor. It pissed me off that they couldn’t be bothered to pick up the phone and call using a human, with how much we paid them. I canceled that contract and went with a different vendor, and let the sales team know exactly why. LLMs have their place, but my time is not the waste bin.

      • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        Hahahahaha!! I was sitting there, on the Pick Username screen for a good 5 minutes, singing that song in my head, trying to think of a good username. After a while, I thought to myself, “that’s a good enough username, in done thinking about this”, and sang it out loud as I typed it in… 3

        • schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 months ago

          Introducing Apple Intelligence Genius. Now you can get technical support from the comfort of your home. We think you’re going to love it.

          (It does nothing but tell you to reset your pram and turn it off and on again.)

          • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            4 months ago

            “You don’t need a 3.5mm headphone jack. We’re removing it, and you’re going to like it”.

            But I have several pairs of really nice, expensive headphones that need it.

            “You will use this awkward dongle, like it, and thank us for our generosity”

            Thanks! I love it!

            • schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              Ah yes, the Lightning to 3.5 dongle. Which I’ve had to buy like 6 of because I keep losing the stupid thing.

              You’d almost think that was the point, but

          • snooggums@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            The funny thing is that Apple chat support was a real person when I tried to create an account last week. Yes, they provided the normal directions to create and account which didn’t work through their account creation website, through an iPad’s settings, or whatever the third option was, but it was very clear it was a real human being.

            Ended up finding a suggestion from reddit to go through iTunes and that worked. They use real people to provide the official directions that don’t work!

            • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              Yeah, there are some things that have to happen on the phone (Account recovery is one, because it’s a special department and most CS has no way to do anything. They can’t even really do it in the store because they don’t have the access.) But their chat isn’t bad when I’ve had to use it.

            • schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              I mean, real person isn’t the bar I’d call ‘minimum’, a helpful real person is.

              It sounds like they met one of those two, but the difference between an AI who can’t help you and a real human who can’t help you is pretty small: you still don’t get what you’re after either way.

    • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Consumers getting anything is just a byproduct of profits. They’d sell you shit in a box if they could. And some literally have.

      Cards against humanity did it AFAIK

  • Thurstylark@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    4 months ago

    Already out there in certain ways. There’s a restaraunt near me that uses an automated system to collect orders in the drive-thru, and puts them into the system incorrectly.

    At least that’s what seems to be its purpose, because it does that really well. That, and piss people off.

  • Asafum@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    4 months ago

    “Corporations love the idea of not paying anyone.”

    Would be a more useful headline. It doesn’t matter what consumers want. All that matters to large corporations is what the consumer will bear.

    • Bonskreeskreeskree@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      What a consumer will tolerate has nothing to do with it either. If a consumers only choices are all aligned, you’re shit out of luck.

  • BastingChemina@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    I think it’s more “Most consumers hate the idea of a bad, unhelpful customer service”.

    I’m fine with AI if it was actually helping to solve my issue, but it is generally not the case.

      • laranis@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        See: Rufus, Amazon’s chatbot. I’ve never seen a more useless application of electrons. If it isn’t already in the description then it can’t help you.

        If it is already in the description I don’t need your shitty chatbot, Jeffrey.

        • Malfeasant@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          a more useless application of electrons

          Microsoft is worse… Have a problem, google it, find a link that has a promising summary, click it- “try Windows 11!” Because that’s what dead links do.

  • Hazzard@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    4 months ago

    Storytime! Earlier this year, I had an Amazon package stolen. We had reason to be suspicious, so we immediately contacted the landlord and within six hours we had video footage of a woman biking up to the building, taking our packages, and hurriedly leaving.

    So of course, I go to Amazon and try to report my package as stolen… which traps me for a whole hour in a loop with Amazon’s “chat support” AI, repeatedly insisting that I wait 48 hours “in case my package shows up”. I cannot explain to this thing clearly enough that, no, it’s not showing up, I literally have video evidence of it being stolen that I’m willing to send you. It literally cuts off the conversation once it gives its final “solution” and I have to restart the convo over and over.

    Takes me hours to wrench a damn phone number out of the thing, and a human being actually understands me and sends me a refund within 5 minutes.

    • laranis@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      4 months ago

      My guess is you’re one of the 10% or so who didn’t give up in frustration. My % assumption might be off, but assuming any percentage of people gave up and walked away without costing Amazon a dime the system was working perfectly.

        • Malfeasant@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          My wife… She will never stop buying from Amazon no matter how shitty they become. She was refusing to go to Wendy’s for a while because they were considering surge pricing, she swore up and down she would not reward a company for doing that - so I said what about Amazon? How often does prime get you free shipping anymore? And with streaming, now you have to watch ads when you didn’t before… But of course that’s all “different”.

    • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Dude could save yourself time by just going to contact page and ask for a call. I never use these companies chat features.

      Also I found if I Google customer service numbers regurdless of company than I can get a number to call 85% of the time.

      Of course after that you either got to fight robot to get a human on the phone that 9 times out of 10 will be a person out of India who also acts like a goddamm robot that doesn’t understand English.

      But my biggest pet peeve is a lot of times I have ro get a supervisor to solve a problem that would take the customer service agent ten seconds to solve.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        4 months ago

        I never use these companies chat features.

        Historically, these chat interfaces were tied out to a call center somewhere on the opposite side of the planet. Now they’re entirely prompt-engineered. So you used to be able to work a claim through chat without sitting on a phone call for hours at a time. But now they obscure their customer support phone number behind six layers of tabs and links, while shoving the “WOULD YOU LIKE TO CHAT WITH A REPRESENTATIVE” button in your face the whole way, fully knowing it doesn’t actually connect to anything that will help.

        But my biggest pet peeve is a lot of times I have ro get a supervisor to solve a problem that would take the customer service agent ten seconds to solve.

        A lot of the agents are just working off of written prompts anyway. But they do get experience with these problems over time (or recognize a slew of the same problem coming in at once) and can cut through the shit to give you a real, human response. Sometimes that response is simply “We can’t help, because of widespread technical / systems issues”, but that’s better than being bounced through an automated service that feeds out generic non-answers and useless how-to guides.

      • Hazzard@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Ugh, if only. Amazon has done everything in their power to bury and strip that number from the internet. Once upon a time that worked great.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      So of course, I go to Amazon and try to report my package as stolen… which traps me for a whole hour in a loop with Amazon’s “chat support” AI, repeatedly insisting that I wait 48 hours “in case my package shows up”.

      I tried to change the dates of a car rental through Priceline, a day after I entered the order. I got a message saying “You cannot change this order until 72 hours before your arrival” which I thought was weird. But I bookmarked the date and called as soon as I was inside the window. “Oops! Sorry, you can’t cancel or change the reservation because too much time has passed!” was the automated response.

      Absolute fucking scam. So I submitted a complaint through my credit card company to reject the charges. In this particular case, automation worked in my favor, because AMEX’s dispute process is as opaque and arcane for the vendors as Priceline’s support desk was for its own clients.

      But its increasingly computerized horseshit. Nothing actually fucking works, except the vacuum they hook up to your bank account every time they find an excuse to extract payment.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      These things having a clearly visible and usable button to ask for a human should be mandated by law.

      Also have you tried writing “operator” to it? That may work. Sometimes.

  • soulfirethewolf@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    4 months ago

    Consumer disapproval of AI use in customer service is unlikely to keep firms from deploying the technology as the cost savings are just too great

    So much for the market determining what goes

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 months ago

      The market does determine, unfortunately the market is relatively unfazed by subpar customer service. It has to be really bad or a huge legal catastrophe before it moves the needle. Which is why phone trees and long wait times are ubiquitous despite being universally hated. Marketing and sales and having a 90+ % rate of people that don’t ever feel the need to call customer service basically eliminates that bad service as a concern.

      Even when asus had a famously bad customer service scandal this year, their sales continued to rise unabated.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    4 months ago

    Companies don’t want to provide actual service for problems. That costs money. They want you to give up.

    Customers hate anything that actually gets between them and someone that can actually help. Not shitty, complicated automated phone menus. Not some underpaid stooge who refuses to da anything except read from a mandatory customer service script. And not AI, which will combine both of the worst aspects of automation and scripted service along with a cheerful idiot that will spare no effort to direct you away from the nearest actual assistance.

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    I do like it in the sense that people HATE working in customer service. Because people have zero respect and customers make your job day miserable all the time.

    Is one of the places where people deserve getting a hallucinating robot as a vengeance for how bad they treated people that worked there.

    • J12@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I talk to about 10 customers each day for no more than 30 minutes and 99% of the time it’s to fix something they messed up on. 30% of those people are jerks.

      Thankfully most of my job is NOT dealing with customers and I truly feel bad for people who have to deal with them in high volume each day.

      If I call them, I can fix it immediately, if they call in, enjoy the robot. So don’t be mean and the call won’t be disconnected (which I have permission to do fortunately)

    • mm_maybe@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Tangential, but I absolutely loved working in technical support. The satisfaction of actually helping someone with a problem affecting their real life totally outweighed the abuse from individuals who were letting the work part of their life drag the whole rest of it down (which was just kind of sad to watch). I’ve gotten paid much more for other roles since then, but it’s one of the few roles in which I was thanked for what I did by the person I was working for, and that makes a huge difference.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    There’s this boomer obsession with making it listen to human speech…

    Nobody under 40 wants to use human speech to talk to an AI. We don’t want to us human speech to talk to humans most of the time, especially if we don’t know them.

    But they always want to jam an AI into areas where human speech is the main communication method.

    The absolute last place AI should have been deployed is answering a phone call. Because that is the last resort for most people, but the boomers calling the shots still think that’s people’s go to move before trying anything else

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      While some of this is cultural, it’s also about accessibility. Old people want to use their voice because their sight is often less reliable and they aren’t as good at pushing the right buttons. My father for example is functionally blind and voice is all he has. So before we get mad at boomers calling all the shots, let’s consider that they’re not just old fashioned. They’re old. and so will you be one day.

  • Ballistic_86@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    4 months ago

    Automated phone systems have been a thing for decades. They are notoriously shitty and adding a layer of “friendly AI” on top of that shitty system doesn’t bode well.

    • T156@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      They’re usually built for the lowest bidder.

      and that’s even before it has to contend with you having an accent, or the mic quality being anything less than crystal clear, with a perfect connection.