111–120 of 146 posts
Meanwhile HR departments have started using Pangram like tools to detect and remove AI written job applications. The flood of nonsensical AI slop applications that HR is facing has forced this.
This goes for HR, education, code review, on and on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing is this was the pitch for buying clothes online: worried it won't fit? Just return it. No questions asked! We'll even pay return shipping! It's interesting how companies are now redefining things they explicitly encouraged their customers to do as "abuse."
The few cases where this is an advertised arrangement should be excluded from the usual situation where returns are meant for defects/errors. Even then, the one clothes example (shoes - which had been returned stained and with socks in the box) mentioned in the above still wouldn't seem like a valid return by any stretch.
They sell clothes and also shoes.
Zalando very much is operating on the principle that you order things to try them out at home and return whatever doesn’t fit or whatever you end up not liking. Just like in a physical store you try out clothes and shoes inside the store to see how it fits and how it looks on you.
That being said, there are limits to what they consider reasonable:
> One key part of that experience, and something our customers deeply value, is the ability to make an order, try the items at home, and, if needed, easily return those they don’t want to keep. In short: bringing the fitting room to your home.
> […]
> Customers whose return activity reaches disproportionately high levels will receive an email warning. This proactive step gives them the opportunity to reflect on their behavior, discover the solutions we provide to avoid returns, and adjust before further measures are taken.
https://corporate.zalando.com/en/convenience/bringing-transp...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> On the other hand, Claude is calling out her BS and delays, which have been atrocious—so much so that Claude is now adamant that she has gone too far and that I should be filing a complaint with the state insurance bureau. My first guess: She is wildly overworked and that is an insurance company strategy. This is an interesting customer strategy. Have you escalated your concerns to her management? Have you explaine…
Of the two options you presented, escalating to management or filing a complaint, which is the carrot?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should do some reading on the birth of ecommerce. This was a very explicit tradeoff that these businesses decided to make. That's why free returns are pervasive. Now whether it's a good thing wrt the environment etc...
I'm aware of how ecommerce got started. The fact that some businesses did the math to estimate that only a small percentage of customers are assholes, doesn't mean they aren't assholes. With apologies to patio11, "The optimal amount of return abusers is non-zero." Buying 3 new-in-box $1000 cameras and returning 2 of them covered with your smudgy fingerprints is abuse, no matter how you slice it. If everyone did it, t…
I agree. What percentage of online returns do you think is similar to this scenario?
What percentage of "buy N and return N-1" return patterns (which you believe to be abusive) is people buying multiple $1,000+ pieces of electronics equipment, versus say 3 sizes of shoes or 3 colors of a dress?
My guess is the former case, which I agree is abusive, is <1% of such return patterns. Partially because it's a legitimately stupid way to shop for those types of items and requires significant credit, while buying multiple sizes/colors of items like clothing is a completely sensible way to shop.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know, it feels like "reading a claims summary and classifying the type of claim" should be the bread and butter LLM use case? Not that executives are blameless for pushing AI everywhere, but we should also be able to "blame" AI for doing poorly at a task it's supposed to be good at.
A computer can never be held accountable, therefore a computer must never make a management decision. You can't 'blame' the AI, as it can't be held accountable.
Seems like more of a semantic distinction IMO. Yes, I can't technically "blame" the AI because it's not accountable. But what word would you suggest for "I had [X technology] handle [Y task] and it failed to perform that task?" I can't "blame" my router if I lose internet and it prevents me from jumping on a Zoom call, but it's also true that the router failed to do the thing it was supposed to do.
Ultimately this isn't "AI's fault". As the article points out, clueless executives who don't understand the capabilities and limitations of specific LLMs push the technology on workers so they can say they are "using AI to improve efficiency".
Which clueless executives are we blaming? The ones who purchase products from vendors like OpenAI or AI-powered products that run API calls through OpenAI et al., or the vendors themselves who make bombastic claims about capabilities? As an analogy, I don’t know if I fully blame my executives for buying Microsoft Teams when Microsoft Teams turns out to suck. Microsoft promised to my company’s executives that Microsof…
If so, yes, they are to blame, either for not being able to evaluate the stuff they buy or for deciding on questions they are not qualified for. Either one is incompetence.
You can also blame them to continue renting the thing (because it's not brought) after it's shown to be defective. And if they decide to do irreversible transformation to your business before verifying that the thing even works, than yes, that's bare incapacity of running a company.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing is this was the pitch for buying clothes online: worried it won't fit? Just return it. No questions asked! We'll even pay return shipping! It's interesting how companies are now redefining things they explicitly encouraged their customers to do as "abuse."
The few cases where this is an advertised arrangement should be excluded from the usual situation where returns are meant for defects/errors. Even then, the one clothes example (shoes - which had been returned stained and with socks in the box) mentioned in the above still wouldn't seem like a valid return by any stretch.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should do some reading on the birth of ecommerce. This was a very explicit tradeoff that these businesses decided to make. That's why free returns are pervasive. Now whether it's a good thing wrt the environment etc...
I'm aware of how ecommerce got started. The fact that some businesses did the math to estimate that only a small percentage of customers are assholes, doesn't mean they aren't assholes. With apologies to patio11, "The optimal amount of return abusers is non-zero." Buying 3 new-in-box $1000 cameras and returning 2 of them covered with your smudgy fingerprints is abuse, no matter how you slice it. If everyone did it, t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The behavior described in the immediately above comment (ordering multiples and returning ones you don't like) is not abuse. The behavior described above that (lying about a defective item) is abuse. Dealing with returns is the tradeoff that online sellers make in order not to put a store in every city or to deal with retail arrangements.
> The behavior described in the immediately above comment (ordering multiples and returning ones you don't like) is not abuse. Oh yes it is. Buying something you know you don't plan to keep is abuse. If you ran a store, would you be fine with 2/3 of your orders being returned? A good litmus test for "am I being an asshole" is "what would the world look like if everyone behaved like me?"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A computer can never be held accountable, therefore a computer must never make a management decision. You can't 'blame' the AI, as it can't be held accountable.
>You can't 'blame' the AI, as it can't be held accountable. Seems like more of a semantic distinction IMO. Yes, I can't technically "blame" the AI because it's not accountable. But what word would you suggest for "I had [X technology] handle [Y task] and it failed to perform that task?" I can't "blame" my router if I lose internet and it prevents me from jumping on a Zoom call, but it's also true that the router fail…
When my internet goes down, I blame either my ISP for having an outage, or the manufacturer of my router (assuming it's a router issue? Haven't had that happen personally but I'm certain it exists) (Or i did something dumb with my ufw again but that's on me)
If you create an autonomous system and it fails, blame should be on you, imo.
The word is still 'blame', it just needs to be applied correctly.