2 ms·

> I'm baffled why the insurance company catching this constitutes being "exploited", and why you think people who oppose this behavior are "boot lickers". Insu

> I'm baffled why the insurance company catching this constitutes being "exploited", and why you think people who oppose this behavior are "boot lickers". Insurance fraud has been a part of the insurance industry and priced-in to plans since insurance became a thing. Somehow, despite insurance fraud being far easier to perform in days gone, the insurance industry has persisted and remained not only viable, but highly profitable. So how is this exploitation, you ask? Because of power imbalance. Will AI be deployed to ensure that insurance companies are paying out on valid, correct claims, on-time and to the correct amounts? Will AI be deployed to ensure that insurance rates are fairly priced among people of different socioeconomic backgrounds? Or will it solely be in the interest of the corporation, and not to potentially undermine that interest, what the insured people who have to fight every damn month to get things covered might call, "what they're fucking paying for?" Or, perhaps, do you think there's even a snowballs' chance in hell, that the reduction of insurance fraud even further which has been an ongoing process for years, will actually mean lower premiums for customers? Hasn't happened yet, so I kind of doubt it. Or, to put it more succinctly: is AI, the expensive technology that's only really available to large corporations, going to be used to fuck over both parties of this, equally, so that both are now doing business more fairly? Or is it going to be deployed as all previous technological advancements have: which is to say, as tools for corporations to fuck over consumers? I have a strong feeling it will be the latter.

gruez 2y ago
>Somehow, despite insurance fraud being far easier to perform in days gone, the insurance industry has persisted and remained not only viable, but highly profitable. This line of argument makes as much sense as "cars were deathtraps in the 60s, yet they still sold like gangbusters and cities were built around them, why should we make them safer?". Insurance fraud being endemic in the past doesn't mean we should accept insurance fraud today. >Or, to put it more succinctly: is AI, the expensive technology that's only really available to large corporations, going to be used to fuck over both parties of this, equally, so that both are now doing business more fairly? Or is it going to be deployed as all previous technological advancements have: which is to say, as tools for corporations to fuck over consumers? >I have a strong feeling it will be the latter. 1. Your claim that AI will be "tools for corporations to fuck over consumers" isn't self evident. Mind explaining why? Technologies like AI are inevitably going to cause false positives. Where do you think is the line between "fuck over consumers" and "helping consumers by fighting fraud"? 2. If you think corporations are just itching to fuck over consumers, what makes you think that they need AI to do that?

gruez 2y ago

>Somehow, despite insurance fraud being far easier to perform in days gone, the insurance industry has persisted and remained not only viable, but highly profitable. This line of argument makes as much sense as "cars were deathtraps in the 60s, yet they still sold like gangbusters and cities were built around them, why should we make them safer?". Insurance fraud being endemic in the past doesn't mean we should accept insurance fraud today. >Or, to put it more succinctly: is AI, the expensive technology that's only really available to large corporations, going to be used to fuck over both parties of this, equally, so that both are now doing business more fairly? Or is it going to be deployed as all previous technological advancements have: which is to say, as tools for corporations to fuck over consumers? >I have a strong feeling it will be the latter. 1. Your claim that AI will be "tools for corporations to fuck over consumers" isn't self evident. Mind explaining why? Technologies like AI are inevitably going to cause false positives. Where do you think is the line between "fuck over consumers" and "helping consumers by fighting fraud"? 2. If you think corporations are just itching to fuck over consumers, what makes you think that they need AI to do that?