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

21–30 of 403 posts

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

#21

Post by DoctorMckay101 »

Devasta wrote: post #11
cedws wrote: post #5

[flagged]

This is very interesting, as it shows what the future of customer support looks like. I worked for 5 years in an insurance call center. Most people believe call centers are designed to deliberately waste your time so you just hang up and don't bother the company; there is nothing I could say that would dissuade you of this, because I believe it too. In the future, we're all going to be stuck wrestling with AI chatbot…

Not gonna lie. The moment a company refuses a refund or a return that complies with their policies, or just stalls me for more than 30 minutes, I'm calling a governmental customer protection agency and issuing a "comply or get sued" through them.

Had to do it once with Sony and another time with an electronics insurance company. Money was back in my account in less than 24h.

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

#22

Post by pacifika »

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

The only correct user of generative ai is one that can evaluate the results. Which is why it’s not a tool for non subject area experts.

That’s the conclusion I’ve drawn anyway. So it’s a good tool for the customer service team not a replacement for it

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

#23

Post by Zetobal »

pacifika wrote: post #16

So next time there will be a disclaimer on the page that the non human customer support is just advice and cannot be relied on. And collectively we lose more trust in computing.

Which is fine if it's gobbled together like this chatbot. The whole of Reddit has fun with it and tbh it's properly a guerilla marketing campaign.

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

#24

Post by muser8 »

navaati wrote: post #6

Putting aside the (very) funny aspect... If it worked somehow, would that fall under Computer Fraud and Abuse Act ?

This could easily be viewed as 'Computer Fraud and Abuse' by Team Watsonville.

IMO, the provider of such services will need to be held to account for misbehavior and not be able to fall back on bug/black-box defenses, particularly for more damaging scenarios versus this amusing toy example. Scaling this to quickly and w/o culpability would be dystopian.

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

#25

Post by tomrod »

pacifika wrote: post #16

So next time there will be a disclaimer on the page that the non human customer support is just advice and cannot be relied on. And collectively we lose more trust in computing.

I'd argue this puts trust about where it should be. The utopian business vision of firing all customer service employees because you've replaced them with an AI won't work under GPT-type models without a state of the world. Yann LeCunn proven true again.

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

#27

Post by geuis »

mikecoles wrote: post #3

Was it FL that allowed for price negotiation via values placed in HTML forms? This was decades ago. Websites would send the $-values of products via html elements that the frontend designer wasn't expecting to be modified before the order was sent back from the client. The order system read the values back in and calculated the amount owed using these manipulated values. The naive, fun days of the adolescent web.

I vaguely remember something about that.

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

#28

Post by jeroenhd »

pacifika wrote: post #22
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

The only correct user of generative ai is one that can evaluate the results. Which is why it’s not a tool for non subject area experts. That’s the conclusion I’ve drawn anyway. So it’s a good tool for the customer service team not a replacement for it

I still think it's a great tool for when truthfulness and accuracy don't matter. It's not exactly creative, but it can spew out some pretty useful fiction for things like text adventures and other fictional filler text.

I'm personally using it because SEO bullshit has ruined search engines. AI can still sift through bullshit search results, for now. The key is assuming the AI lies and actually reading the page it links, because it'll make up facts and summaries even if they directly oppose the quoted source material.

I fear AI tools will soon befall the same faith as Google (where searching for an obscure term will land you a page of search results that's 75% malware and phishing links), but for now Bard and Bing Chat have their uses.

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

#29

Post by mrtksn »

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.

You can put another LLM agent that checks on the request and generated outputs to confirm that the interaction is within the limits of your objective.

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

#30

Post by wildrhythms »

jeroenhd wrote: post #28
pacifika wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only correct user of generative ai is one that can evaluate the results. Which is why it’s not a tool for non subject area experts. That’s the conclusion I’ve drawn anyway. So it’s a good tool for the customer service team not a replacement for it

I still think it's a great tool for when truthfulness and accuracy don't matter. It's not exactly creative, but it can spew out some pretty useful fiction for things like text adventures and other fictional filler text. I'm personally using it because SEO bullshit has ruined search engines. AI can still sift through bullshit search results, for now. The key is assuming the AI lies and actually reading the page it lin…

The problem is tech illiterate know-nothings I encounter daily in management (at a tech company no less) have been told or fooled into thinking these LLMs are some sort of knowledge engine. I even see it on HN when people suggest using a LLM in place of a search engine. How did we get to this point?
Post reply on HN