51–60 of 94 posts
I genuinely cannot believe someone wrote this entire article about how efficiently they lied to 10,000 people without having a single second of self awareness. The only thing I can think of is that Windsor is paying them for promotion, but of course that still doesn't explain it. "Is this genuine? Of course, it's just as genuine as if I had a clone replace me in all personal interactions so I could get on with stuff…
I genuinely cannot believe someone wrote this entire article about how efficiently they lied to 10,000 people without having a single second of self awareness. The only thing I can think of is that Windsor is paying them for promotion, but of course that still doesn't explain it. "Is this genuine? Of course, it's just as genuine as if I had a clone replace me in all personal interactions so I could get on with stuff…
Something can be unethical and profitable at the same time.
This seems at least a little unethical. At the very least, I would think worse of a company that sent a video to me that seemed personalized, but later turned out to be mass-produced. He has an ethics section in the article, but doesn't doesn't go very deep and (unsurprisingly) concludes that his own actions were perfectly fine. The root of the problem is why customers respond well to these videos: they're surprised…
>Really, I think this is doing a sort of trust arbitrage. The tech exists to fake personal videos now, but customers aren't widely aware of it. You can take advantage of that difference with stunts like this. In a few years, people will know this can easily be done and the value of personal videos will drop. At some point it'll be no different to the average customer than an email with "Hi !" or a letter with faux-ha…
That said, I would argue that this specific practice will become more ethical over time (as the arbitrage opportunity disappears). Once customers are aware of the practice, the trust difference fades, and the deception goes away. 10 years from now, this practice will be equivalent to claiming "Famous Fishtoaster's has the best fish toast in the world": it's a lie, but one that all parties know is false so no one is being deceived. Just like no one really believes personalized text in an email implies that that email was handwritten anymore, no one will believe these videos are personalized and the problem goes away.
But yeah, it will be a societal cost: one less thing we can trust. Just like "photos don't lie" went out the window with widespread photoshopping, so will trust in personalized videos.
Similarly there is a phenomenal company called HandWrytten. It uses robots to write thank you cards with ink pens. I upload a spreadsheet of all of my contacts, with a message for each, and the robot beautifully writes out the card in my own handwriting; personal hand writing is an extra fee. Takes about an hour for 155 contacts. I keep up with hundreds of people in my job and something personal like this really goes…
I've received thank you cards like this (I volunteer for certain well-regarded organizations). While the thank you card is very nice, the fake "handwritten" part is obvious - the strokes of the pen are a little too clean, too precise to be a human. A human tends to smudge some characters, or some characters will be squeezed in - the robotic handwriting never does that, so it's an obvious giveaway. Don't get me wrong,…
This seems at least a little unethical. At the very least, I would think worse of a company that sent a video to me that seemed personalized, but later turned out to be mass-produced. He has an ethics section in the article, but doesn't doesn't go very deep and (unsurprisingly) concludes that his own actions were perfectly fine. The root of the problem is why customers respond well to these videos: they're surprised…
"Listen, Caleb. Your application was very strong. Unfortunately, our strategy group just hasn't found an opening for you."
Caleb sighs, and says nothing.
The HR employee gently asks, "Caleb, are you still with me?"
"Ok, thank you. Is there anything I should be working on to make myself a better candidate?"
"Like I said, your application was very strong. We just don't have anything that would be a great fit for you right now."
"If I'm not a good fit, is there a different shape I could squeeze myself into?"
There is a pause.
Caleb asks, "Hey, no offense but... are you human?"
"I'm Shaun," the voice says. "I can help you with all kinds of resources... anything else I can do for you today, Caleb?"
This feels a lot like that.
So this is basically an ad for https://www.windsor.io/ , I guess. Wonder what sort of deal they worked out? Shame it leaves such a sense of disgust in most people here, to judge by the comments so far. They may have picked the wrong crowd.
https://angel.co/company/windsor-2/funding
There's zero reason to believe any of the data is true.