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

231–240 of 403 posts

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

#231

Post by no_wizard »

Pxtl wrote: post #218
b112 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies are going to find that they are liable for things they promise. A company representative is just that, and no ToS on a website will help evade that fact. If someone claims to be representing the company, and the company knows, and the interaction is reasonable, the company is on the hook! Just as they would be on the hook, if a human lies, or provides fraudulent information, or makes a deal with someone. Th…

Doesnt' that apply to peer-to-peer support forums? Like, if I create a Hotmail Account and use it to post to https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us to reply to every comment "I'm an official Microsoft representative, you're our 10-millionth question and you just won a free Surface! Please contact customer support for details." Would that be their fraud or mine? They created answers.microsoft.com to outsource support to…

thats impersonation of an employee or otherwise representative of the entity, and would be ultimately not be Microsoft's issue, but that of the person doing the impersonation.

Since they aren't employed by Microsoft, they can't substantiate or make such claims with legal footing.

I'm sure there are other nuances too that must be considered, however on the face of it, if a Chatbot is authorized for sales and/or discussion of price, and makes a sales claim of this type (forced or not) then its acting in reasonable capacity, and should be considered binding

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

#232

Post by dragonwriter »

mminer237 wrote: post #204
jordanpg wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are dismissive, but I assure you this kind of thing will keep lawyers and courts busy for some time to come. This raises all kinds of interesting legal issues that have no obvious resolution: * can agency be delegated to an LLM? * can an LLM create a contract on behalf of itself? another? an organization? * does the answer change if the person(s) or organization(s) want the LLM to be able to form contracts? * are…

As a lawyer (but not your lawyer, this isn't legal advice), the actual questions themselves all seem pretty obvious under current contract law: * You can't actually delegate agency to a computer. The Restatement of the Law of Agency says an agent must be a person. * No, an LLM is not a human, so it can't make contracts in any respect. * If you agree in an actual contract to be bound by the black box of the LLM, then…

> You can't actually delegate agency to a computer.

But...

> you agree in an actual contract to be bound by the black box of the LLM, then the LLM will govern the terms thereof.

This implies you can have a standing offer of a contract on the terms articylated5 by the LLM, with some specified method of acceptance, which suggests a different outcome than the “preliminary negotiations” you suggest for a contract where the LLM system is the frontend of the cobtract5 negotiation, provided that the reason that the outside party thought they were negotiating a cobtract with the company via thr LLM is that offer by the company.

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

#233

Post by pdntspa »

joshmanders wrote: post #183
tomashubelbauer wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

I usually just hit pound or asterisk repeatedly and get there, but lately some places must be wise to this because a few of them would say "unrecognized option, goodbye" and hangs up.

I mash zero or just say 'operator' and it works more often than I would think

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

#234

Post by mauvehaus »

cjbgkagh wrote: post #195
tomashubelbauer wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reminds me that sometimes when the mashing of random numbers doesn't work, I'll repeat "OPERATOR! OPERATOR! OPERATOR!" at the machine until it yields. I guess it works by the same mechanism whereby the call audio is analyzed on the fly and if the algorithm determines the overlap with the corpus of terms at which it was trained is too low it will connect you to a human. Creepy if that's the case though.

I tried the repeat ‘operator’ approach and the bot just hung up on me. I think the gibberish appears mentally disabled so they’re worried about being sued for not being accessible to people with disabilities.

I've also had the experience of being hung up on by a robot as well for repeatedly asking for the operator. Because I'm definitely going to be in a better mood once I reach a human having been hung up on by a machine. Who thought that one up?!

On the other hand, maybe people on average are so grateful to reach a human that they're extra polite?

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

#235

Post by dylan604 »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #159
bumby wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every chatbot I've worked ends up failing because I use some word or phrasing in my description that wasn't in their script This is an interesting insight I’ve experienced as well. It makes me wonder if the use of chatbots becoming more and more prevalent will eventually habitualize humans into specific speech patterns. Kinda like the homogenization of suburban America by capitalism, where most medium sized towns s…

So the chatbots are going to program us to work with them, since we can't program them to work with us? I for one do not welcome our new robot overlords.

So you're saying that chatbots are actually...cats?

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

#236

Post by borissk »

phkahler wrote: post #115
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…

>> Robots a a cruel joke on customers. My kid and I went 3 hours away for hew college orientation. She also booked 2 tours of apartments to look at while we were there. One of those was great, nice place, nice person helping. The other had kinda rude people in the office and had no actual units to show. "But I scheduled a tour!" turns out the chatbot "scheduled" a tour but was just making shit up. Had we not any othe…

The fact that one company had a chat bot mis-configured doesn't mean they all are useless.

There are a lot of lonely people who call companies just to have a chat with a human. There are a lot of lazy and/or stupid people who call companies for stuff that can be done online or on an app. There are a lot of people calling companies for information that is available online. Chat bots prevent a ton of time wasted for call center operators.

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

#237

Post by ilc »

gerl1ng wrote: post #217
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 had one good experience with a Chatbot recently when I needed Telco support by Deutsche Telekom. For some reason I lost my internet connection one day and when it came back up it was only half the bandwidth that DSL would sync up to usually. Also after rebooting my Edge Device. The Bot offered to restart my DSL from their end and I assume the profile gets updated along the way there as well. So after a few minutes…

But could the same problem have been done with a simple expert system, instead of a chatbot?

People seem all caught up in the new hottness, and forget the technologies that still work and are simple as dirt.

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

#238

Post by thaumasiotes »

beeboobaa wrote: post #227
thaumasiotes wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also says "Please confirm all information with the dealership." This is as obviously non-binding as anything could possibly be. All the dealership has to do is say "no, we don't sell cars at that price".

Easy enough to confirm with a representative of the dealership via their chat window that just sold the car for $1. The conclusion is that you probably shouldn't trust ChatGPT to represent your company.

You can insist on your own personal meanings for clear statements as much as you like, but it won't have any effect on the legal interpretation of those statements.

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

#239

Post by bumby »

dylan604 wrote: post #235
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the chatbots are going to program us to work with them, since we can't program them to work with us? I for one do not welcome our new robot overlords.

So you're saying that chatbots are actually...cats?

Catbots???

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

#240

Post by NoMoreNicksLeft »

b112 wrote: post #190
phkahler wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Robots a a cruel joke on customers. My kid and I went 3 hours away for hew college orientation. She also booked 2 tours of apartments to look at while we were there. One of those was great, nice place, nice person helping. The other had kinda rude people in the office and had no actual units to show. "But I scheduled a tour!" turns out the chatbot "scheduled" a tour but was just making shit up. Had we not any othe…

Companies are going to find that they are liable for things they promise. A company representative is just that, and no ToS on a website will help evade that fact. If someone claims to be representing the company, and the company knows, and the interaction is reasonable, the company is on the hook! Just as they would be on the hook, if a human lies, or provides fraudulent information, or makes a deal with someone. Th…

If a car dealership had a parrot in their showroom named Rupert, and Rupert learned to repeat "that's a deal!", no judge would entertain the idea that because someone heard Rupert repeat the phrase that it amounted to any legally binding promise. It's just a bird.

It's a pet, a novelty, entertainment for the bored kids who are waiting on daddy to finish buying his mid-life crisis Corvette. It's not a company representative.

> If someone claims to be representing the company, and the company knows, and the interaction is reasonable,

A chatbot isn't "someone" though.

> Try convincing a judge that the above was on purpose, by a 62 year old farmer that's never heard of AI.

I don't think you know how judges think. That's ok. You should be proud of the lack of proximity that you have to judges, means you didn't do anything exceedingly stupid in your life. But it also makes you a very poor predictor of how they go about making judgements.

Post reply on HN