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

Customers don't want chat bots

creativegood.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 473 posts

Re: Customers don't want chat bots

#181

Post by melvinmelih »

nehal3m wrote: post #103

Typically I call customer service because I'm trying to tackle a problem that cannot be solved by using their normal interface. There is usually some subtlety or exception that requires an agent capable of understanding them at the other end, otherwise I wouldn't have bothered calling. Chatbots almost by definition cannot deal with that, at least I've never experienced one ever. And I imagine that if they can underst…

In my experience, customer service are not that much more helpful than a chatbot (heavily undertrained or no privileges to do anything at all).

Re: Customers don't want chat bots

#182

Post by im_down_w_otp »

> "The tech industry continues to push forward with chat bots, even though customers don’t want them"

The same was true for the previous explosion of AI. Autonomous driving. That was, and remains being, an almost entirely industry-side push to the marketplace.

Re: Customers don't want chat bots

#183

Post by mschuster91 »

nfriedly wrote: post #163
LeafItAlone wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> She did things like send the hospital a letter that said in essence "give me a single bill with a total for all services provided at your hospital. If it's not on this bill I'm not going to pay it." That is a great thing to say, but does it actually hold any weight? Or is it like the construction trucks that have signs saying they are not responsible for damage from items blown off them?

Well, it worked in the case of my dad's estate. I think the fact that it was from a lawyer made a difference. I had a different situation with Wells Fargo where I quoted their own document back to them and they still denied me. When I got a lawyer to send essentially the same letter, but with his letterhead, they suddenly bent over backwards to help me out, going above and beyond their obligations.

That's because most companies operate their customer support at extremely basic level and hope that those with complex needs will simply give up in frustration.

A lawyer letterhead short-circuits that because companies fear that someone who is actually willing to pay upfront for a lawyer is also going to follow through with a lawsuit or, worse, a complaint to the regulatory agency so they'll kiss asses beyond belief just to prevent a case from ever reaching public record and a resulting bad image in the eyes of the regulator who can actually impose pretty expensive fines.

Re: Customers don't want chat bots

#185

Post by itslennysfault »

charles_f wrote: post #180

Completely agree with the content. Side note on that: > Customer service is one category where I expect a lot of these jobs, honestly, to just go away. For long I have, and in normal conditions, I would have said hurray. Humanity invented a technology that automated some of its bothersome tasks, one thing less to do, we're collectively all for the better, freed to enjoy life or spend our time in a more productive way…

Yeah, lots of people think rich capitalists like exploiting people for their labor to enrich themselves, but the truth is they hate it. It's is an unfortunate necessity. If they can replace bothersome employees with a system that does the job "well enough" they'll do it over night and won't lose a wink of sleep over those who were displaced.

Re: Customers don't want chat bots

#186

Post by JohnFen »

tetha wrote: post #70
mduggles wrote: post #32

Typically chatbots that I interact with are just attempting to steer me back towards FAQs. I don’t need a different interface to search your documentation in an attempt to keep me on the cheap customer service path and away from the expensive customer service path. Which isn’t to say they can’t be helpful. I’d much rather chat with a bot than call a person, if the bot is capable of doing the things I need. The thing…

I like the vision our chatbot team at work has there. They want their bot to have 2, maybe three tasks. First, it's supposed to be a neater way of presenting that initial phone choice of "Press 1 if you have an internet issue. Press 2 if you have a telephone issue". It's easier for some people to say "My phone is dead and has no free tone when picked up" and have the system recognize this as a phone issue. And second…

> Once it has those (or it gives up after 1-2 tries without progress) it hands over to an actual agent.

And that human will immediately ask you to repeat all of the information you just gave to the screening bot.

Re: Customers don't want chat bots

#187

Post by Karunamon »

kristopolous wrote: post #127
nehal3m wrote: post #103

Typically I call customer service because I'm trying to tackle a problem that cannot be solved by using their normal interface. There is usually some subtlety or exception that requires an agent capable of understanding them at the other end, otherwise I wouldn't have bothered calling. Chatbots almost by definition cannot deal with that, at least I've never experienced one ever. And I imagine that if they can underst…

Right. You contact a human because you want a guarded administrative action to be taken. For all the impressiveness of these chat bots, I think people are still skeptical and hesitant to give it levers that are actually connected to things. It's hard to hold a computer program accountable in any nuanced way when it starts misbehaving other than kicking it to the curb

For your average customer support case, there is nobody to hold accountable either when they screw up and cost you time or money. It's just another faceless agent of the company.

Re: Customers don't want chat bots

#188

Post by JohnFen »

itslennysfault wrote: post #185
charles_f wrote: post #180

Completely agree with the content. Side note on that: > Customer service is one category where I expect a lot of these jobs, honestly, to just go away. For long I have, and in normal conditions, I would have said hurray. Humanity invented a technology that automated some of its bothersome tasks, one thing less to do, we're collectively all for the better, freed to enjoy life or spend our time in a more productive way…

Yeah, lots of people think rich capitalists like exploiting people for their labor to enrich themselves, but the truth is they hate it. It's is an unfortunate necessity. If they can replace bothersome employees with a system that does the job "well enough" they'll do it over night and won't lose a wink of sleep over those who were displaced.

> and won't lose a wink of sleep over those who were displaced.

So then they don't hate it after all.

Re: Customers don't want chat bots

#189

Post by ilaksh »

seanhunter wrote: post #69

A big part of the problem isn’t actually chat bots even though it may well seem to be. It’s that you can’t pop some system atop a teetering ziggurat of shitty data from mutually incompatible systems and think the fundamental problems are going to just disappear. Example: I am currently executor of my dad’s estate and trying to get various policies and pensions and whatnot transferred into my mother’s name. One compan…

But GPT-4 100% could have looked that up and given you that information. It's clearly not a unique situation.

Re: Customers don't want chat bots

#190

Post by charles_f »

itslennysfault wrote: post #185
charles_f wrote: post #180

Completely agree with the content. Side note on that: > Customer service is one category where I expect a lot of these jobs, honestly, to just go away. For long I have, and in normal conditions, I would have said hurray. Humanity invented a technology that automated some of its bothersome tasks, one thing less to do, we're collectively all for the better, freed to enjoy life or spend our time in a more productive way…

Yeah, lots of people think rich capitalists like exploiting people for their labor to enrich themselves, but the truth is they hate it. It's is an unfortunate necessity. If they can replace bothersome employees with a system that does the job "well enough" they'll do it over night and won't lose a wink of sleep over those who were displaced.

Note that I didn't talk about the motivation, but just observed that this is how the system works.

> but the truth is they hate it

They hate having to rely on other people, or the exploitation part? Because if your thesis is the latter, go explain union busting, benefits stripping, or pretty much the entire state of the social system in the US.

Post reply on HN