undefined | Better HN

0 pointsethbro6y ago0 comments

The other issue with bots is whether a company's support is bot-only or human.

Free choice and all, but without disclosure (pre-purchase) a company shouldn't be able to "cost manage" their support function by using an algorithm fronted by chatbots.

0 comments

5 comments · 2 top-level

acdha6y ago

Yeah, I'd also back laws banning a lot of the no-recourse situations companies cost-minimize you into but that'd also want to account for, say, having you talk to people who are under strict instructions not to help you or tell you why.

(Once Verizon tried to charge me an ETF despite being a couple of years out of contract. The phone support was horrible and I thought it might have just been an English fluency issue but then I called the executive office and the person who fixed my bill just casually volunteered that the people in the first-tier call centers cannot in any way reverse charges or escalate to people who can, and aren't allowed to say that. They understood the question but their jobs were literally on the line if they told you that they couldn't help.)

sokoloff6y ago· 3 in thread

Should they have to disclose that their phone system has an IVR before every purchase as well? That they use a third-party logistics provider to handle returns?

ethbroOP6y ago

Utilizing algorithmic-only customer support seems far more impactful than those technologies, from a customer standpoint.

As Google and PayPal have shown, it's generally a cluster$&#* (at best), even with state of the art technologies.

Furthermore, it provides a fundamental shift in the power dynamic by removing the possibility of whistleblowers and ethical counterpressure. You literally have management as the sole arbiter of algorithmic settings, with (currently) no legal disclosure requirements as to any internals.

That seems pretty screwed up from a free-market, transparency perspective.

jjoonathan6y ago

Nah, those with an IVR should be summarily shot.

Kidding, of course. Mostly.

Disclosing IVRs before purchase would be a good start. Preferably with a legally mandated recognizable logo that customers can quickly learn to associate with terrible support.

acdha6y ago

Only if they pretend that you're interacting with real people. An IVR is often bad customer service but it's clear what you're dealing with.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

5 comments · 2 top-level

acdha6y ago

sokoloff6y ago· 3 in thread

Should they have to disclose that their phone system has an IVR before every purchase as well? That they use a third-party logistics provider to handle returns?

ethbroOP6y ago

Utilizing algorithmic-only customer support seems far more impactful than those technologies, from a customer standpoint.

As Google and PayPal have shown, it's generally a cluster$&#* (at best), even with state of the art technologies.

That seems pretty screwed up from a free-market, transparency perspective.

jjoonathan6y ago

Nah, those with an IVR should be summarily shot.

Kidding, of course. Mostly.

Disclosing IVRs before purchase would be a good start. Preferably with a legally mandated recognizable logo that customers can quickly learn to associate with terrible support.

acdha6y ago

Only if they pretend that you're interacting with real people. An IVR is often bad customer service but it's clear what you're dealing with.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse