You'll need to get legislation passed, then.
When a market decides something isn't worth providing, but the public good needs it, legislation is the answer.
Tell HN: There needs to be a “right to speak with a human”
151–160 of 348 posts
Re: Tell HN: There needs to be a “right to speak with a human”
#152I hope we'll see a return of libertarian values in tech culture in the future. There's been a ton of push to force every rule into law in the past few years. Not everything should be backed by force of violence. I hope this authoritarian trend reverses sooner rather than later.
Interesting. I feel the exact opposite. The tech industry’s fascination with libertarian values have brought about the disastrous consequences of putting free speech on a pedestal, with utter disregard for the harms it has caused. And libertarianism has always required choice. Choice requires a free and vibrant marketplace. But that market place requires regulation to keep it free and vibrant. The circle cannot be sq…
Well, can you point to any big tech company or otherwise tech industry segment that actually practices “libertarian“ principles?
Because to me it seems they have been authoritarian left for at least the past ten years.
The model seems to be come up in an unregulated market, take advantage of it to build a monopoly, desire regulation or actively influence politics to keep small competitors out.
Well some of the people who started these companies may have originally talked about libertarian themes, I’m not seeing it.
Re: Tell HN: There needs to be a “right to speak with a human”
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
A "right to speak with a human" makes sense to me on an industry-by-industry basis, in the same way that construction companies and restaurants have different regulatory agencies and checks. Applying it to all businesses sounds like a bad idea, however. Financial institutions? Certainly. Healthcare companies? Makes all kinds of sense. But I don't see an ethical imperative for, say, Giphy (pre-acquisition) to provide…
> But I don't see an ethical imperative for, say, Giphy (pre-acquisition) to provide that kind of support. Giphy hosts user-generated content and encourages sharing. Imagine someone uploads a gif of you and fake subtitles of racial slurs and calls to violence. It starts trending. Your friends and families are asking you about it. You've submitted a request to remove it, but got no response yet. You can't get hold of…
Has this actually happened?
Additionally, you are not a customer of giphy. So now giphy has to reasonably have the amount of human customer support for non-customers? So, essentially everyone on earth?
Re: Tell HN: There needs to be a “right to speak with a human”
#154My two cents. Why does this have to be a regulated force-fit? Companies can choose to offer a basic support tier (eg: kb forums, email) and a higher paid support tier or could bundle this as part of their pricing tiers. I don't see why this needs to be a customer right to be able to speak to a human when a customer has explicitly exercised the choice of a low touch support option at the point of purchase. Forcing this just makes it more expensive for everyone.
Re: Tell HN: There needs to be a “right to speak with a human”
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is fundamentally about not being undercut by competition which means the costs a business can absorb are fundamentally relative to competitors' costs (especially so in high margin SAAS businesses). If everyone has to offer support and there's no way to cheat, the market will find a way to meet demand efficiently under new circumstances
At a higher price level! It's important to write out and acknowledge that people cost money.
People cost money, yes. But when you're distributing that cost across thousands (or tens of thousands) of customers every year, those costs are a pittance. Single digit dollars per year on the outside.
Not exactly a bank breaker for a vast majority of businesses.
Re: Tell HN: There needs to be a “right to speak with a human”
#156The bar for "rights" isn't "I wish this was more common". Should there be a right to avocado on your burger, or a fifteen-second response time from waiters, or boiling-water taps in every home? Does it sound ridiculous to push those costs into prices for things that are unnecessary? What makes phone support so different?
Agreed. Rephrase this “rights are never anything someone should be forced to provide”.
Rights are naturally given and cannot be taken away.
You have the right to life and education and defense. no one can take those things from, but no one else to provide them either. because that would be infringing on their rights.
Do I think it would be nice for companies to provide human assistance? Yes of course. But I could never support any policy that forced the company to do that. much less would I ever call it a “right”.
Re: Tell HN: There needs to be a “right to speak with a human”
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I put people on indefinite holds, I let the phones ring a little more than I should hoping they would give up and hang up etc. The people who call into customer service are those with issues they want to have addressed. By throwing up roadblocks, you're making it even harder for them to get to a solution. They expect the people on the line to provide help, but this behavior puts them in an adversarial mindset by th…
I think they understand that logically. But they are put in a position where that is their least painful move. The incentives are wrong due to poor management.
Yeah I was in the wrong for sure, I am not qualified to be a customer support rep and I was a web dev at that job who picked up the slack for an infilled position. I was just trying trying to explain that dehumanization goes both ways and that is why CS is such a crappy field in almost every aspect.
As frustrated as we get with these systems we have to remember there’s a human on the other side and no one wants to be engaging with each other + most companies don’t have CS to actually help anyone they do so to check of a box and prevent any potential legal issues from popping up. In a lot of places, especially commerce related, those you speak to don’t even have many/any tools to resolve your complaint. The job is quite literally being a punching bag, if you manage to help someone that’s little more than a nice to have.
Re: Tell HN: There needs to be a “right to speak with a human”
#158You don't have the right to tell others how to run their business. You do have the right to take your business elsewhere.
In a free market people vote with their wallet and there's plenty out there that accept the zero support model with a lower price, whether they understand what they are getting or not. That's assuming they even bother to ask about support options up front.
Re: Tell HN: There needs to be a “right to speak with a human”
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are the criticisms accurate? That should be the main concern. This is a free speech country after all.
Can you elaborate on that? How would it be different in a non-free speech country? Is there a country I can go to make someone legally disappear due to an online review they posted, I have a list. Let me know
We aren’t talking about law, we are talking about spirit. It’s perfectly legal for you to ask Google to take it down and for them to take it down. The point is, that goes against the spirit of this culture, which is that you really can’t and shouldn’t silence someone in general.
Again, I ask, are they lying or do they have accurate points? This is best taken as a learning experience because treating it as a battle is going to get you nowhere.
Re: Tell HN: There needs to be a “right to speak with a human”
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
At a higher price level! It's important to write out and acknowledge that people cost money.
exactly! I think the right should be there - but the cost must also be associated with it. For example, there should be a plan for which you pay an upfront cost and get a human.
Cool. What, about $5 a year? Totally worth it.