I can’t tell if there’s a /s missing there or not, but if there is, this person allegedly pointed the gun into a crowd and advanced showing intent. I would also agree that even in jest, if you brandish, you are signalling intent and immediately forfeit your right to life.
The rifleman allegedly pointed his rifle at the crowd, which is illegal, not a thought crime. The protester was defending the crowd from the rifleman, not protecting themselves directly.
There seems like a very easy solution here that doesn’t require AI.
Ghosts aren’t real.
Maybe guns are bad, and maybe if you bring a rifle to a high tense situation and hold it in any manner that may seem threatening, you deserve to get shot. Super sad that an innocent died. Had the “good guy” with a gun hit the target only, then at least there would only be one less moron carrying an AR-15 today, not a sad casualty.
I love text chats with a person, but I feel most of the time that when I start with a text chat with a bot and get transferred to a real agent, they ask all of the same questions, like info gathering name, phone, email, etc. it’s almost as if the real people can’t see the transcript of the conversation I had with the bot.
The thing is, most of those chats that I’ve worked with for years are simple chat bots, not AI, and those are plenty effective for their purpose. They have their preset question tree and that’s it. I may also be a little skewed in my experiences compared to a lot of people, since I’ve worked in IT for over a decade, so often when in reaching out to service, it’s something more advanced where I need a person to actually talk to. Also, anything billing or containing private information. I under no circumstances want that fed into an LLM or accessible to an AI agent so it can be shared accidentally to someone else.
Which part of “chonky boi” or “mach yeet” do you need an average middle schooler to translate for you? Contextually, it’s very clear what is being said for anyone that can read and speaks English.
You think you know what was said, then insulted it saying it was dumbed down for the average middle schooler. What does that say about you?
This is for sure me sometimes. I’ll work something out over 10 minutes and decide that I don’t want to deal with any follow up or that the way I typed it wasn’t clear enough and I don’t want to fix it.
As much as I would like to clock and move inside sometimes, I also believe that silence is complacency, and when I feel something said is wrong that others will read, I have an obligation to say something. I’m definitely not always right, but in some matters it’s more perspective and others it’s based on fact. This conversation ran it’s course for me.
I’m not going to argue with you. AI blows. There are article out there about companies hiring people back after going to AI. It really is a snake oil product that corporations have gobbled up. It’s got it’s use cases as a tool, but not as a human replacement, especially in matters of live and death.
You can look up and research some articles of you want, or don’t. Clearly your opinion on the matter is not popular, and that could be some hive mind, or it could be because everyone else sees the problems that you don’t.
Putting a system in place that can’t actually think at all and have it try and comprehend what is or is not an emergency, to me, is a terrible idea, and doomed to fail. Take that as you will, I won’t be following up with anything else. You can have the final word if you want, because I just can’t be bothered to care.
I would say there’s a failure in the body responsible for hiring and paying people to answer emergency calls. The only reason there is a shortage is because they are under paying employees. So yes, but AI, like everywhere else it’s been implemented, will fall short of what’s needed and will ultimately cost more financially, with the exception that in this case, lives could also be lost.
There’s without a doubt a problem, but AI isn’t the solution.
If there’s an insistence on AI for any reason, which almost always comes down to $$$, then have people transfer non emergency to the AI. First contact should be to a person 100% of the time.
I would bet there are large swaths of people that don’t know there is a nonemergency number to look up.
Have many emergencies that aren’t transferred does there have to be before it’s unacceptable? I’d say if one person calls with an emergency, gets AI, and doesn’t get transferred, then the entire system is failed and someone should go to jail.
What is wrong with the current setup? I bet a person can direct non emergency traffic faster than any AI, because they can actually comprehend a person and think. It’s not broken, someone is just about to make a fuck load of money at the expense of people not getting through to emergency services.
My counter is that if the question I ask the chat bot is too complicated to answer, then it should be redirected to a person that can.
Whenever I’m thinking of examples where I interface with these bots, it’s usually because my internet is down or some other service. After the most basic of prompts, I expect actual customer service, not being pawned off in something else.
It really is a deal breaker in many cases for me. If I were to call in somewhere as a prospective customer, and if I were addressed my a computer, I will not do business there. It tells me everything I need to know about how a company views it’s customers.
I do think “AI” as an internal tool for a lot of businesses makes sense in a lot of applications. Perhaps internal first contact for customer service or in code development as something that can work as a powerful linter or something that can generate robust unit testing. I feel it should almost never be customer facing.
I mainly disagree with you out of spite for AI, not because I disagree with the ideal vision that you have on the topic. It hasn’t been super mainstream long enough for me to be burned as many times as I have been, and the marketing makes me want to do bad things.
Whenever I call in to a service because it’s not working, when I get stuck talking to a computer, I’m fucking furious. Every single AI implementation I’ve worked with has been absolute trash. I spam click zero and yell “operator” when it says it didn’t hear me or asks for my problem, and I’ve 100% of the time made it through to a person. People also suck, but they at least understand what I’m saying and aren’t as patronizing.
You don’t need “ai” to do any of that. That is something we’ve been able to do for a long time. Whether or not call centers or help desks implemented a digital assistant is a different story.
I hope they all go under. I’ve no sympathy for them and I wish nothing but the worst for them.
If someone is going to Wikipedia specifically looking for information in a STEM field, then an AI summary isn’t going to help them. Odds are they can also read, because they’re looking up STEM topics.
Also, is Wikipedia not available around the world, or you just think only Americans can’t read? Inflammatory just for the sake of being inflammatory I’m guessing. Shit troll job.
It’s not important. You said AI isn’t being marketed to be able to do everything. I said yes it is. That’s it.
Unfortunately, yea there are people that are that way. A recently public scandal, Christian music singer, Michael Tait has been accused of sexually assaulting under age boys for years. His statements were more verbose but very similar to what you said.