4 ms·

> So the problem is not automation, is lack of recourse. The problem is automation, if it exaggerates the "lack of recourse". It means that, without being care

by Faark 7y ago

> So the problem is not automation, is lack of recourse. The problem is automation, if it exaggerates the "lack of recourse". It means that, without being careful, adding automation would screw up most of such systems. Thus such articles to boost awareness and make sure automation is done well. I'm disappointed with what a hard time many on HN seem to have with accepting the need to be cautious. Especially with Gov, were you cannot just find or build a better alternative on the open market. > If you lost your ID, you wouldn't get your benefit even if you walked into a social security branch either. Is that actually the case in the US? The programs (run by the church and heavily supported by german gov) I've come in contact with certainly did not. Never was at a soup kitchen, but would be surprised for them to ask for IDs.

jpindar 7y ago
In the US, "social security branch" is not a soup kitchen. It's a branch office of the Social Security Administration, a government department which provides monetary benefits. They can't sign you up for benefits if you don't have an ID. However, the human beings who work there could give you advice on where and how to get an ID - which might differ depending on your individual circumstances. A computer probably wouldn't give you any more information than you could read on the internet, and if that info doesn't make sense or doesn't apply to you, you're going to have trouble finding better information.
GreaterFool 7y ago
I don't think you need to convince anyone here that automated systems fail. I think many of us have been affected by such systems. Accounts blocked for no reason, etc. Glitch. The problem is not the automated systems. The problem is zero recourse. If nothing was automated then we'd have to wait hours on the phone to get to an actual human to do something trivial. Or make an appointment, travel somewhere, spend few hours to get something simple done. In an automated world most of the time things work out. The situation becomes despicable where there's no one to complain to and no way to seek redress. In the tech world it became pretty common to seek support by Twitter shaming. Often there's no other route. Still, it's not the automation that is at fault. It's the greedy humans. They could save 80% of the cost while keeping everyone happy but they'll chose to save 90% of the cost at the price of making many miserable. Can't change the human nature?

by Faark 7y ago

jpindar 7y ago

In the US, "social security branch" is not a soup kitchen. It's a branch office of the Social Security Administration, a government department which provides monetary benefits. They can't sign you up for benefits if you don't have an ID. However, the human beings who work there could give you advice on where and how to get an ID - which might differ depending on your individual circumstances. A computer probably wouldn't give you any more information than you could read on the internet, and if that info doesn't make sense or doesn't apply to you, you're going to have trouble finding better information.

GreaterFool 7y ago

I don't think you need to convince anyone here that automated systems fail. I think many of us have been affected by such systems. Accounts blocked for no reason, etc. Glitch. The problem is not the automated systems. The problem is zero recourse. If nothing was automated then we'd have to wait hours on the phone to get to an actual human to do something trivial. Or make an appointment, travel somewhere, spend few hours to get something simple done. In an automated world most of the time things work out. The situation becomes despicable where there's no one to complain to and no way to seek redress. In the tech world it became pretty common to seek support by Twitter shaming. Often there's no other route. Still, it's not the automation that is at fault. It's the greedy humans. They could save 80% of the cost while keeping everyone happy but they'll chose to save 90% of the cost at the price of making many miserable. Can't change the human nature?