Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's interesting how we can frame "potentially automating tasks" in the most sinister conceivable way. The same argument applies to essentially all technology, like a computer.
> The same argument applies to essentially all technology, like a computer. Why yes, it does. Even setting aside that most AI hype: Yes, automation is in fact quite sinister if you do not go out of your way to deal with the downsides. Putting people out of a job is bad, actually. Yes. The industrial revolution was a great boon to humanity that drastically improved quality of living and wealth. It also created horrifi…
Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
361–370 of 378 posts
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#362Single moms in my area Vs Single moms in my area fucking Yep, it works
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#363Earlier quoted context omitted.
I work on a project where customers need to fill out a form to receive help. We introduced an AI chat bot to help them do the form by just talking through the problem and answering questions. Then the form is filled out for the customer for them to review before submitting. Personally I find it slower than just doing it manually but it has resulted in the form being correct more often now and has a lot of usage. Ther…
I'm sure there's a time and place for these things, but this sounds very much like the echo chamber I hear at work all the time. Someone has a 'friend' who has a totally-not-publically-visible form where a chat bot interacts with the form and helps the user fill the form in. ...and users love it. However, when really pressed, I've yet to encounter someone who can actually tell me specifically 1) What form it is (i.e.…
You would need to spend thousands of dollars to become a customer, if you are not already one.
>An agent interacts with a user.
Correct, they are asked to describe their problem. There are some follow up questions, then some very specific questions if the form still isn't filled out.
>The agent has free reign to fill out the form fields.
Correct but there are actually very few free form fields and a lot of selections.
>Guided by the user, the agent helps will out form fields in a way which is more accurate than users typing into the field themselves.
Correct, the form is filled out correctly more often now
>Guided by the user, the agent helps will out form fields in a way which is faster than users typing into the field themselves.
No, I specifically said it is not. I can fill out a junk but valid form in about 10 seconds and valid with relevant data for testing in about 30 seconds. It is not a long form, but your selections will change the next selections. But I also helped build the form and have seen it go through every iteration.
>At any time the user can opt to stop interacting with the the agent and fill in the fields and the agent must understand what's happened independently of the chat context. i.e. The form state has to be part of the chat bot's context.
Would be a nice feature upgrade but if the user abandons the bot they just fill out the form as normal, same as if they decided to skip the bot at the beginning.
>At the end, the details filled in by the agent are distinguished from user inputs for user review.
Do you mean how do we know if the chat bot was used or whether it fills out the form. Both are trivial.
>Has it increased the number of people filling in the form, or completing it correctly (or both?) ?
The ideal case is that they never need to request help, but nearly all users will need help maybe once or twice a year unless something is really wrong. But yes, the number of users filling out the form incorrectly has decreased. Seems like the users don't mind spending 2-5 minutes per year chatting with the bot.
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#364Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sure there's a time and place for these things, but this sounds very much like the echo chamber I hear at work all the time. Someone has a 'friend' who has a totally-not-publically-visible form where a chat bot interacts with the form and helps the user fill the form in. ...and users love it. However, when really pressed, I've yet to encounter someone who can actually tell me specifically 1) What form it is (i.e.…
>1) What form it is (i.e. can I see it?) You would need to spend thousands of dollars to become a customer, if you are not already one. >An agent interacts with a user. Correct, they are asked to describe their problem. There are some follow up questions, then some very specific questions if the form still isn't filled out. >The agent has free reign to fill out the form fields. Correct but there are actually very few…
Can you be more specific?
Like, where specifically would I have to spend money to see this.
> Seems like the users don't mind spending 2-5 minutes per year chatting with the bot.
This seems like an enormous amount of effort to have gone to for a single form that people use once a year.
Did you roll out the chatbot assist to other forms? If not, why not? If so, are any of those forms easier to get access to that we can see either live or in a video?
Honestly, this is why I get frustrated with these conversations.
If it works so well, why isn't this sort of thing rolled out in many, visible, obvious places. Why is it hidden away behind paywalls and internal systems where no one can see it?
Why isn't everyone doing it? I've visited 4 websites today which had a chat bot on them, and none of them had a way for the bot to interact with anything on the page other than their own chat context.
Like I said, I'm sure it works to some degree, and varying degrees depending how much effort you put into it... but I'm frustrated I can never find someone who's so proud of it working they can go HERE, look at THIS example of it working.
Does anyone have an example we can actually look at?
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#365Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sure there's a time and place for these things, but this sounds very much like the echo chamber I hear at work all the time. Someone has a 'friend' who has a totally-not-publically-visible form where a chat bot interacts with the form and helps the user fill the form in. ...and users love it. However, when really pressed, I've yet to encounter someone who can actually tell me specifically 1) What form it is (i.e.…
My partner has dyslexia and finds forms overwhelming. Chatbots break this down and (I suspect) give the same feeling of guidance. As for specific examples NHS has some terribly overwhelming forms and processes - image search IAPTUS. Another example; I was part of a team that created a chatbot which helped navigate internal systems for call centre operators. If a customer called in, we would pick up on keywords and th…
Are those example where a chatbot helps fill out the form, or just examples of where forms are hard?
My image search did not find any results of AI chatbots that helped fill out the form for you. Do you have a direct link to a form by any chance?
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#366Earlier quoted context omitted.
>unless you believe millions of people are spending their own money every month for useless tech that's a hot take! A classic "Eat shit! A million flies can't be wrong.". really made me smile :) BILLIONS of people are spending their own money for useless tech, simply because they fear of missing out. Thinking person can see it is generating text from the input query – which is useful of course – but not dramatically…
It's dramatically useful for millions of people who are now much more productive than they were 3 years ago, including the programmers who have 10x'd their output. Your superiority complex is nothing new... anytime new technology emerges, there's an old crochety class that thinks it's a fad. It's always people arrogant enough to believe they know the world better than everybody else. And no, billions of people aren't…
"It's dramatically useful for millions of people who are now much more productive than they were 3 years ago, including the programmers who have 10x'd their output." - anecdotally
Your productivity cult is nothing new, anytime new quantity multiplier emerges, there's a freshman manager class like you who thinks quantity>quality. It is obvious from your comment since more productive and 10x output are the only things you praised there.
It's always people arrogant enough to believe they are riding the right hype-train, and everybody else is left behind.
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#367Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I'm on the 300 per month tier. I tend to hit that limit after about 3 weeks, which is certainly annoying.
yeah I hit it in about two. I just signed up monthly to try it out for a bit but am wavering on whether I consider it worth it. It's good but I'm not sure it's enough better than DDG to pay for. And for AI I'd usually rather have API access and use it with tools rather than a web chat.
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#368Earlier quoted context omitted.
Today it is AI. Yesterday it was Blockchain. Tomorrow it will be Agentic AI Blockchains. I know what you are thinking: robots are coming for our jobs after that. Don't worry! Those AI robots will run on the Cloud.
Can I control those robots using VR?
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#369Is this something they're slowly rolling out, or isn't available in the EU? I don't think I've ever seen an AI summary in my Google searches.
I don't understand what triggers the AI overview. "per capita gdp by country" - no AI "population of Kansas" - no AI "lisp interpreter" - no AI "emacs vs. vim" - AI overview "size of mit student body" - AI overview What's going on?
Distracting adjectives like effing probably spoil the match between your search query and the topic cluster.
Re: Add "fucking" to your Google searches to neutralize AI summaries
#370Earlier quoted context omitted.
find out without ever touching your spotify account, https://lustmord.bandcamp.com , only whoever you share your browser search history with will know
Now I'm slightly crestfallen that "dronecore" doesn't have any particular relationship to bagpipes.