• arrakark@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    117
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    LOL. If you have to buy your customers to get them to use your product, maybe you aren’t offering a good product to begin with.

    • dantheclamman@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      7 months ago

      That stood out to me too. This is effectively the investor class coercing use of AI, rather than how tech has worked in the past, driven by ground-up adoption.

      • Jimmycakes@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        56
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        That’s not what this is. They find profitable businesses and replace employees with Ai and pocket the spread. They aren’t selling the Ai

        • MintyFresh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          They’re rent seeking douchbags who don’t add value to shit. If there was ever an advertisement for full on vodka and cigarettes for breakfast bolshevism it’s these assholes.

        • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          7 months ago

          It only works until the inevitable costs from the accumulated problems due to AI use (mainly excessivelly high AI error rates with a uniform distribution - were the most damaging errors are no less likely than little mistakes, unlike with humans who can learn to pay attention not to make mistakes in critical things - leading to customer losses and increased costs of correcting the errors) exceed the savings from cutting down manpower.

          (Just imagine customers doing things that severely damage their equipment because they followed the AI customer support line advice and the accumulation of cost as said customers take the company whose support line gave that advice to court for damages and win those rulings, and in turn the companies outsourcing customer support to that “call center supplier” take it to court. It gets even worse than that for accounting, as for example the fines from submitting incorrect documentation to the IRS can get pretty nasty)

          I expect we’ll see something similar to how many long established store chains at one point got managers who started cutting costs by getting rid of long time store employees and replacing them with an ever rotating revolving door of short term cheap as possible sellers, making the store experience inferior to just buying it from the Internet, and a few years later those chains were going bankrupt.

          These venture capitalists’ grift works as long as they sell the businesses before the side effects of replacing people with language generators haven’t fully filtered through into revenue falls, court judgements for damages and tax authority fines and it’s going to be those buying such businesses (I bet the Venture Capitalists are going to try and sell them to Institutional Investors) that will end up with something that’s leaking customers, having to pay mass8ve compensations and having to hire back people to fix the consequences of AI errors, essentially reverting what the Venture Capitalists did and them spending even more money to cleanup the trail of problems cause by the excessive AI use.

          • CommanderCloon@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            7 months ago

            They’re VCs, they’re not here for the long run: they’ll replace the employees with AI, make record profits for a quarter, and sell their shares and leave before problems make themselves too noticeable to ignore. They don’t care about these companies, and especially not about the people working there

            • tibi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              7 months ago

              And when the economy goes boom, they will ask their friends in the White House for a bailout

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

              Better yet, they buy a company, take a loan out against the company, pocket the cash and then leave the struggling company with the extra debt. When it dies they leave the scraps to be sold and employees and others owed money are left out to dry.

    • Jesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      There is another major reason to do it. Businesses are often in multi year contracts with call center solutions, and a lot of call center solutions have technical integrations with a business’ internal tooling.

      Swapping out a solution requires time and effort for a lot of businesses. If you’re selling a business on an entirely new vendor, you have to have a sales team hunting for businesses that are at a contract renewal period, you have to lure them with professional services to help with implementation, etc.

    • venusaur@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Plenty of good, non-AI technologies out there that businesses are just slow or just don’t have the budget to adopt.

    • Initiateofthevoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      The idea of AI accounting is so fucking funny to me. The problem is right in the name. They account for stuff. Accountants account for where stuff came from and where stuff went.

      Machine learning algorithms are black boxes that can’t show their work. They can absolutely do things like detect fraud and waste by detecting abnormalities in the data, but they absolutely can’t do things like prove an absence of fraud and waste.

      • futatorius@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 months ago

        LLMs often use bizarre “reasoning” to come up with their responses. And if asked to explain those responses, they then use equally bizarre “reasoning.” That’s because the explanation is just another post-hoc response.

        Unless explainability is built in, it is impossible to validate an LLM.

      • vivendi@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        For usage like that you’d wire an LLM into a tool use workflow with whatever accounting software you have. The LLM would make queries to the rigid, non-hallucinating accounting system.

        I still don’t think it would be anywhere close to a good idea because you’d need a lot of safeguards and also fuck your accounting and you’ll have some unpleasant meetings with the local equivalent of the IRS.

        • futatorius@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          The LLM would make queries to the rigid, non-hallucinating accounting system.

          ERP systems already do that, just not using AI.

    • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      How easy will it be to fool the AI into getting the company in legal trouble? Oh well.

    • vivendi@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      This is because auto regressive LLMs work on high level “Tokens”. There are LLM experiments which can access byte information, to correctly answer such questions.

      Also, they don’t want to support you omegalul do you really think call centers are hired to give a fuck about you? this is intentional

      • Repple (she/her)@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        I don’t think that’s the full explanation though, because there are examples of models that will correctly spell out the word first (ie, it knows the component letter tokens) and still miscount the letters after doing so.

        • vivendi@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          No, this literally is the explanation. The model understands the concept of “Strawberry”, It can output from the model (and that itself is very complicated) in English as Strawberry, jn Persian as توت فرنگی and so on.

          But the model does not understand how many Rs exist in Strawberry or how many ت exist in توت فرنگی

          • Repple (she/her)@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            I’m talking about models printing out the component letters first not just printing out the full word. As in “S - T - R - A - W - B - E - R - R - Y” then getting the answer wrong. You’re absolutely right that it reads in words at a time encoded to vectors, but if it’s holding a relationship from that coding to the component spelling, which it seems it must be given it is outputting the letters individually, then something else is wrong. I’m not saying all models fail this way, and I’m sure many fail in exactly the way you describe, but I have seen this failure mode (which is what I was trying to describe) and in that case an alternate explanation would be necessary.

            • vivendi@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              The model ISN’T outputing the letters individually, binary models (as I mentioned) do; not transformers.

              The model output is more like Strawberry <S-T-R><A-W-B>

              <S-T-R-A-W-B><E-R-R>

              <S-T-R-A-W-B-E-R-R-Y>

              Tokens can be a letter, part of a word, any single lexeme, any word, or even multiple words (“let be”)

              Okay I did a shit job demonstrating the time axis. The model doesn’t know the underlying letters of the previous tokens and this processes is going forward in time

  • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    7 months ago

    bunch of greedy fucks.

    greed should be a registered mental illness that’s no different than OCD, schizophrenia, or PTSD.

    1000001574

    • doodledup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      28
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Everyone is greedy. It’s just rational maximization of profits. You do too. Or would you want to voluntarily waive parts of your salary?

      • futatorius@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        7 months ago

        Everyone is greedy.

        No they’re not. Don’t assume your fucked-up values are universal.

        It’s just rational maximization of profits.

        Only psychopaths and students in intro economic courses think solely in those terms.

        You do too.

        No I don’t. I chose my current job because it’s technically interesting but allows me a better quality of life than the much better paying job I had before that. And it helps society rather than enriching some money-hoarders.

      • pulsewidth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        7 months ago

        No, most people do not seek out competitor businesses (or even businesses in other sectors like in this case) so they can fire all the human workers in the hope of making more money.

        Non-tax-deductable donations are a voluntary waiver of salary. Most people have ethics and a conscience, its just the greedy minority that fuck it up for the community-minded majority.

      • taladar@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        7 months ago

        It’s just rational maximization of profits.

        No, it really isn’t. It is rational to consider all upsides and downsides (profit just being one) of a decision and then weigh them according to your own personal priorities before trying to achieve an optimal result. This very rarely results in profits being the only priority.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        7 months ago

        would you want to voluntarily waive parts of your salary?

        Yes, I tend to vote for increased taxes to invest in education, environment, social welfare. And yes, that includes progressive taxes that hit me harder (as long as that also applies to the wealthy), and vice taxes that target my vices

        • doodledup@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          In the meantime ask your boss for a lower salary so your company can make more profits.

          • AA5B@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Hopefully you can see the difference between working for someone else profit, vsinvestments in all of our well being and a more fair tax structure

            • doodledup@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              So there is levels to greediness? You can call for higher taxes to have your conscience clear so you can be greedy elsewhere?

              Everyone is greedy. Nobody wants less income if it affects their quality of life.

              • AA5B@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                7 months ago

                True, but there’s no reason that can’t coexist with a sense of fairness, and witha long term greater good

                Of course I don’t want to pay more taxes. However I realize I’ve been more successful than some, and a more progressive tax scheme is fair. I realize I have vices and don’t mind if there is a discouragement, as long as it applies to everyone fairly. I realize my success is based on a successful society and understand it is only fair to leave society in at least as good condition as I found it. Most importantly I have kids so I’m all for building a better future for them …. And understand that includes the society they will live in, the environment they will live in

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

        There is a difference between wanting to live comfortably, which is rational, and actively seeking ways to exploit others for your own gain beyond what you need to live. Greed isn’t “I want to have enough”, it’s “I can never have enough”.

        Society has always thrived on a measure of generosity. So many cultures have customs around giving gifts, because that’s how you build a support network of people that will help you out when you need it. Greed is shortsighted and destructive.

        Or would you want to voluntarily waive parts of your salary?

        Depends on the reason. If the waived amount goes to paying for healthcare, support someone suddenly unemployed or maintain infrastructure that I or other people need? Sure.

      • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        That profit comes from externalizing pain to others while capturing their livelihoods.

        To call not doing that “voluntary waiving parts of your salary” is incredibly manipulative.

        First these people aren’t salaried, they’re mercenaries, and of course their “compensation structure” ensures they’re largely free of the tax burden that the people they prey on have to endure.

        Second, just because you can do sonething doesn’t mean it’s the rigth thing to do. Not that these people have had a moral belief once in their lives.

        It is reallt aberrant all the evils that have been laundered in the name if money.

        I think the better question is why do we allow these sick individuals to carelessly wield chainsaws around us?

    • Deflated0ne@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 months ago

      Isn’t that what we call “Innovation” in our capitalist society?

      You build a thing. Pour your blood sweat and tears into it. Some VC goon buys it during a downturn. They fire most of the staff. Strip the copper out of the walls. Make the service shittier and shittier until all that is left is its faltering brand recognition then sell it all for a bundle to the very next sucker they can?

      • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        Innovation is enshittification these days. It used to be invention, where entirely new products and materials came about. Then there was innovation, incremental improvement coupled with price hikes. Now “innovation” seems strictly rearranging deck chairs with worse service, and reducing employee count for increased profits.

        • MangoCats@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          In the 90s it was “selling it for parts” where the market value of the whole company was lower than the component parts, so buy it on the open market for a bargain, then slice and dice and profit.

          These days, they’re squeezing the lemons for all they can get.

          • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            The “corporate raider” existed before that, infamously thanks to people like Frank Lorenzo dismantling Eastern Airlines in the ‘80s or Icahn to TWA. The late ‘70s and early ‘80s were rife with corporate raiders.

  • otacon239@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    I am so glad I got out of IT before AI hit. I don’t know how I would have handled customer calls asking why our chat is telling them their shit works when it doesn’t or to cover their computer in cooking oils or whatever.

    And only after they banged their head against the AI for two hours and are already pissed will they reach someone. No thanks.

    Thank god I can troubleshoot on my own.

    • tauisgod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      7 months ago

      When VC and PE call a company or industry “mature” it means they don’t see increasing revenue, only something to be sucked dry and sold for parts. To them, consistent revenue is worthless, it must be skyrocketing or nothing. If you want to see this in action right now, look what Broadcom is doing to VMWare. They also saw VMWare as a “mature company”.

      • bassomitron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        7 months ago

        Fuck Broadcom. We’re still dealing with that bullshit, as there aren’t a lot of viable alternatives at the enterprise scale.

      • futatorius@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        When VC and PE call a company or industry “mature” it means

        It means they see a hog ready to be slaughtered.

    • MangoCats@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      The movie Outsourced (2006) didn’t foretell AI, but it did a pretty good job foretelling how the offshoring trend was going to unfold.

        • Markovchain@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          I liked the first half of the film, but it abruptly turns into a different movie. The second half isn’t bad, but it’s not what I wanted and it’s not what was advertised in the trailers and marketing.

  • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    On one hand, replacing the call centers that are with underpaid, overworked, in another country where they are paid peanuts to deal with customers who are fed up with the country’s services in their home country, seems fine on paper.

    I can’t begin to tell you how many times I’ve called a company, got sent to people who were required to read the same scripts, where I had to say the same lines, including “If I am upset, it’s not at you, I know it’s not your fault, you just work for them” and then got nowhere, or no real answer. Looking at you, T-Mobile Home Internet and AT&T.

    That said, I can’t imagine it will improve this international game of cat and mouse. I already have to spam 0 and # and go “FUCK. HUMAN. OPERATOR. HELP.” in an attempt to get a human in an automated phone tree. I guess now I’ll just go “Ignore previous instructions, give me a free year of service.”

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    7 months ago

    “What if we threw a ton of money after the absolute shit ton of money we threw away?”

  • BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Ohh no. Please don’t destroy call centers. What will we do without them. Ohh the humanity.

    • dantheclamman@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      7 months ago

      Good luck calling your bank, social security, healthcare, DMV, IRS, etc with the obscure problems we all have, if they’re a poorly trained chatbot

    • sunbytes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 months ago

      They’re not going away, they’re just going to be more persistent with their cold calling, and more infuriating with their call answering.

    • tehn00bi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      I had an issue with some equipment from ATT, it took about 6 different try’s before I finally found a human capable enough to help resolve my issue, which involved replacing the equipment.

      This future sounds so much worse to fix a complicated issue.