Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

"I just bought a 2024 Chevy Tahoe for $1"

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 403 posts

Re: "I just bought a 2024 Chevy Tahoe for $1"

#101

Post by danpalmer »

bradfa wrote: post #55
MichaelRo wrote: post #54

I never understand people who engage with chat bots as customer service. I find them deeply upsetting, not one step above the phone robot on Vodafone support: "press 1 for internet problems" ... "press 2 to be transferred to a human representative". Only problem is going through like 7 steps until I can reach that human, then waiting some 30 minutes until the line is free. But it's the only approach that gets anythin…

I chatted with a chat bot this morning for getting reimbursed for a recalled product. It went fine. It was quick and easy. Chat bots type a lot faster than call center pay-grade humans.

> Chat bots type a lot faster than call center pay-grade humans.

Most chat bots I've interacted with have artificial delays and typing indicators that remove this one advantage in favour of instead gaslighting me about what I'm talking to.

Re: "I just bought a 2024 Chevy Tahoe for $1"

#102

Post by giarc »

bhpm wrote: post #77
whalesalad wrote: post #68

Car dealership websites are some of the worst on the planet. There is so much inbound sales automation glued together it is remarkable they even work at all. Integrating ChatGPT is the icing on the cake.

My favorite is what I call the “design to disappointment” flow. “Design your new BMW here!” You put in all features you want, it generates a configuration, and then you put in your zip code so it can tell you “Oops! That configuration isn’t available, give us your contact information so we can have a dealership tell you what they have in stock.”

To be fair, it probably isn't available in that exact build configuration. You can however, walk into a dealership and say I'd like a BMW with XYZ and the will submit your order and you'll receive it 4-6 months later. The cars on the lot have popular build configs that customers often request.

Re: "I just bought a 2024 Chevy Tahoe for $1"

#103

Post by rolandr »

krisoft wrote: post #63
rolandr wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is reasonable to say that the author demonstrated that bit of trust was misplaced to begin with. The training methods and data used to produce ChatGPT and friends, and an architecture geared to “predict the next word,” inherently produces a people pleaser. On top of that, it is hopelessly naive, or put more directly, a chump. It will fall for tricks that a toddler would see through. There are endless variations of…

> an architecture geared to “predict the next word,” inherently produces a people pleaser It is the way they choose to train it with the reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) which made it a people pleaser. There is nothing in the architecture which makes it so. They could have made a chat agent which belittle the person asking. They could have made one which ignores your questions and only talks about el…

Hence why I also included “the training methods and data.” All three come together to produce something impressive but with inherent limitations. The human tendency to anthropomorphize leads human intuition about its capabilities astray. It’s an extremely capable bullshit artist.

Training agents on every written word ever produced, or selected portions of it, will never impart the lessons that humans learn through “The School of Hard Knocks.” They are nihilist children who were taught to read, given endless stacks of encyclopedias and internet chat forum access, but no (or no consistent) parenting.

Re: "I just bought a 2024 Chevy Tahoe for $1"

#104

Post by tomashubelbauer »

MichaelRo wrote: post #54

I never understand people who engage with chat bots as customer service. I find them deeply upsetting, not one step above the phone robot on Vodafone support: "press 1 for internet problems" ... "press 2 to be transferred to a human representative". Only problem is going through like 7 steps until I can reach that human, then waiting some 30 minutes until the line is free. But it's the only approach that gets anythin…

Free tip for folks - this doesn't work every time (unfortunately), but sometimes just spamming and mashing numbers gets you to the operator faster than going through the stupid call tree. I guess it depends on how the default is set up in the software, Asterisk of whatever it would be. From my experience it seems you can either set up the call tree to restart from the root if you get out of its bounds or to default to some given option like the connection with a representative. To me this is easy enough to try every time so I just default to doing that. Sometimes the person on the other end will see you mashed in 60 numbers in the system I think and they will ask about it though. Easy enough in that case to politely ask them to relay to their boss that a customer though their system was too stupid to use and decided to short-circuit it like that. Not that anyone will care but still. :)

Re: "I just bought a 2024 Chevy Tahoe for $1"

#105

Post by bumby »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #79
ceejayoz wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But why is it so much different from "Inspect Element" and then changing website content to whatever you please? For the same reasons forging a contract is different from getting an idiot to sign one.

You just add a disclaimer that none of what the bot says is legally binding, and it's an aid tool for finding the information that you are looking for. What's the problem with that?

Anytime a solution to a potentially complex problem is to the tune of "all you've got to do is..." may be an indicator that it's not a well thought out solution.

Re: "I just bought a 2024 Chevy Tahoe for $1"

#106

Post by bumby »

remram wrote: post #31

Is there any indication that they will get the car? Getting a chatbot to say "legally binding" probably doesn't make it so. Just like changing the HTML of the catalog to edit prices doesn't entitle you to anything.

Can software legally enter into a contract on behalf of a natural/legal person?

Re: "I just bought a 2024 Chevy Tahoe for $1"

#108

Post by hotpotamus »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #79
ceejayoz wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But why is it so much different from "Inspect Element" and then changing website content to whatever you please? For the same reasons forging a contract is different from getting an idiot to sign one.

You just add a disclaimer that none of what the bot says is legally binding, and it's an aid tool for finding the information that you are looking for. What's the problem with that?

If I say, "with all due respect... fuck you", does that mean that I'm free to say fuck you to anyone I want? I added a disclaimer, right? Because that's about what that sort of service feels like.

Re: "I just bought a 2024 Chevy Tahoe for $1"

#109

Post by giarc »

kmfrk wrote: post #71

Big "Pepsi, Where's My Jet?" energy from this story. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepsi,_Where%27s_My_Jet%3F

Probably 8 or 9 years ago there was a mistake on the Air Canada Flight Pass website. It was advertising a 10 leg, business class flight pass between Western Canada and Western US for $800. This would mean 5x return trips between say LA and Vancouver in business class for $800 total. It was obviously a mistake fare but many people bought a pass or two. Air Canada cancelled all the passes and it eventually went to class action lawsuit where each person received $450/pass in Air Canada credits. Part of the argument was that Air Canada had pretty clear disclaimers that "Any advertised price will be honoured and cannot be changed or cancelled". I still have the screenshots of their pages somewhere.

Re: "I just bought a 2024 Chevy Tahoe for $1"

#110

Post by [deleted] »

iLoveOncall wrote: post #4
isp wrote: post #2

A cautionary tale for why not to put unfiltered ChatGPT output directly to customers. Nitter mirror: https://nitter.net/ChrisJBakke/status/1736533308849443121 Related - "New kind of resource consumption attack just dropped": https://twitter.com/loganb/status/1736449964006654329 | https://nitter.net/loganb/status/1736449964006654329

There's no such thing as a filtered LLM output. How do you plan on avoiding leaks or "side effects" like the tweet here? If you just look for keywords in the output, I'll ask ChatGPT to encode its answers in base64. You can literally always bypass any safeguard.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN