3 ms·

Amazon and others already claim they use AI to handle customer support and marketing copy (https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/innovation-at-amazon/how-amazon-uses

Amazon and others already claim they use AI to handle customer support and marketing copy (https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/innovation-at-amazon/how-amazon-uses-generative-ai https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/innovation-at-amazon/how-am...). Air Canada got burned when an AI chatbot made a mistake (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39378235 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39378235). Legal firms have been fined for hallucinated precedent citations (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39491510 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39491510). The technology is clearly flawed. Regardless, a lower cost option (AI) is replacing a higher priced option (human labor). Ten years ago these tasks would have been handled by human employees or specialists. There is certainly a history of this in the corporate world, when expensive union labor in Detroit is replaced by lower cost workers in Mississippi, manufacturing experts are forced to train their replacements in lower-cost countries, or entire engineering and customer service departments are shifted overseas.

Tagbert 3y ago
We use some AI for the first level of customer support. It can provide standard answers to common questions and help with routine action requests, but it is backed up by human operators for anything more complex and customers can opt out of the AI whenever they want. From customer surveys, they tend to like using the AI for simple things because it is faster and they get what they need. The like that they can get a human when they need too. If you aren't providing a human fallback, you aren't doing it right.
- cogman10 3y ago
  Bingo, and that's the part of AI that I think is overlooked. It might kill some jobs, but it'll never kill an entire sector like the web killed travel agencies. And the thing is, the more the risk the less likely an LLM is going to be trusted to just make a decision. For example, do you think an insurance agency would want an LLM to decide, on it's own, claim approvals? Can you imagine the headache for the insurance agency if the LLM approves the wrong claims or denies the wrong claims? Or for a doctors office, Imagine AI diagnostics without a human. Can you imagine the headache for a hospital when an AI misses cancer? Or diagnoses a false cancer? It's bad enough when humans get that wrong, but now you have to explain to your legal team "We just left up the practice to the stats gods!"
  - notpachet 3y ago
    Can you imagine a lawyer using ChatGPT to draft legal briefs and find relevant case histories? Well...
  - mattgreenrocks 3y ago
    > For example, do you think an insurance agency would want an LLM to decide, on it's own, claim approvals? Can you imagine the headache for the insurance agency if the LLM approves the wrong claims or denies the wrong claims? You say this, but I sometimes worry that these issues are hand-waved away by decision-makers with, "oh we'll just have another LLM doing frontline claim support to verify these issues." It's the whole XML/violence thing, where the solution to XML-induced pain often ends up being more XML.
    - spyke112 3y ago
      I’m not saying my insurer uses AI, but I recently had two dental claims processed entirely automatically by just providing invoices, and answering some questions online. This is in Denmark. Really nice experience.
      - mattgreenrocks 3y ago
        That sounds fantastic. In the US I usually have to sit on hold for 20m, then explain what I see vs what I expect, have them check with their supervisor, get word that they they agree with me and will pass it back to underwriting, wait a few more days for underwriting to look at it, and then wait to make sure it actually went through.
  - milanhbs 3y ago
    In both of your examples I could see the model becoming the default, with humans double-checking, if even that. If things go wrong as you describe, humans are pulled into the loop by the humans wronged (unless they give up before). There is a company making money with auto insurance claims: https://tractable.ai/en/products https://tractable.ai/en/products
  - 3y ago
- daveguy 3y ago
  Say customers only fall back to a human for 10% of more difficult questions.Then one support agent can field as many customer service questions as 10 employees could before. 90% layoffs is great depression numbers. Maybe only one sector, but the sectors it does impact will be hit hard.
  - bilsbie 3y ago
    Being a consumer myself, I’ve never had a non difficult question. I’m not calling to check my balance or get directions. I’m calling because your system did something wrong and needs to be overridden
    - threecheese 3y ago
      Same. Never once have I selected the “Check my balance” tele-option, though I’ve had to listen to it innumerable times.
      - eitland 3y ago
        It used to be quite handy back in the 90ies :-)

Tagbert 3y ago

We use some AI for the first level of customer support. It can provide standard answers to common questions and help with routine action requests, but it is backed up by human operators for anything more complex and customers can opt out of the AI whenever they want. From customer surveys, they tend to like using the AI for simple things because it is faster and they get what they need. The like that they can get a human when they need too. If you aren't providing a human fallback, you aren't doing it right.

cogman10 3y ago
Bingo, and that's the part of AI that I think is overlooked. It might kill some jobs, but it'll never kill an entire sector like the web killed travel agencies. And the thing is, the more the risk the less likely an LLM is going to be trusted to just make a decision. For example, do you think an insurance agency would want an LLM to decide, on it's own, claim approvals? Can you imagine the headache for the insurance agency if the LLM approves the wrong claims or denies the wrong claims? Or for a doctors office, Imagine AI diagnostics without a human. Can you imagine the headache for a hospital when an AI misses cancer? Or diagnoses a false cancer? It's bad enough when humans get that wrong, but now you have to explain to your legal team "We just left up the practice to the stats gods!"
- notpachet 3y ago
  Can you imagine a lawyer using ChatGPT to draft legal briefs and find relevant case histories? Well...
- mattgreenrocks 3y ago
  > For example, do you think an insurance agency would want an LLM to decide, on it's own, claim approvals? Can you imagine the headache for the insurance agency if the LLM approves the wrong claims or denies the wrong claims? You say this, but I sometimes worry that these issues are hand-waved away by decision-makers with, "oh we'll just have another LLM doing frontline claim support to verify these issues." It's the whole XML/violence thing, where the solution to XML-induced pain often ends up being more XML.
  - spyke112 3y ago
    I’m not saying my insurer uses AI, but I recently had two dental claims processed entirely automatically by just providing invoices, and answering some questions online. This is in Denmark. Really nice experience.
    - mattgreenrocks 3y ago
      That sounds fantastic. In the US I usually have to sit on hold for 20m, then explain what I see vs what I expect, have them check with their supervisor, get word that they they agree with me and will pass it back to underwriting, wait a few more days for underwriting to look at it, and then wait to make sure it actually went through.
- milanhbs 3y ago
  In both of your examples I could see the model becoming the default, with humans double-checking, if even that. If things go wrong as you describe, humans are pulled into the loop by the humans wronged (unless they give up before). There is a company making money with auto insurance claims: https://tractable.ai/en/products https://tractable.ai/en/products
- 3y ago
daveguy 3y ago
Say customers only fall back to a human for 10% of more difficult questions.Then one support agent can field as many customer service questions as 10 employees could before. 90% layoffs is great depression numbers. Maybe only one sector, but the sectors it does impact will be hit hard.
- bilsbie 3y ago
  Being a consumer myself, I’ve never had a non difficult question. I’m not calling to check my balance or get directions. I’m calling because your system did something wrong and needs to be overridden
  - threecheese 3y ago
    Same. Never once have I selected the “Check my balance” tele-option, though I’ve had to listen to it innumerable times.
    - eitland 3y ago
      It used to be quite handy back in the 90ies :-)