615

Air Canada appears to have quietly killed its costly chatbot support.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] TDCN@feddit.dk 61 points 9 months ago

What i find most stupid about all of this is that Air Canada could just have admitted a mistake, payed The refund of ~450 USD which is basically nothing to them. It would have waisted no one's time and made good customer service and positive feedback. Then quietly fix the AI in the background and move on. Instead they now spend waaayy more money on legale fees, expensive lawyers, employees sallery, have a disabled AI, customer backlash and bad press all costing them many hundreds of thousands of dollars. So stupid.

[-] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 37 points 9 months ago

payed

Paid. Something something "payed" is only for nautical rope or something.

waisted

Wasted. Something something "waisted" is only for dressmaking or something.

I can't remember the details of what that bot says, but it is something along these lines. I am not a bot, and this action was performed manually. Cheers!

[-] TDCN@feddit.dk 24 points 9 months ago

Thanks. I do know tho, but im slightly dyslexic and English is not my first language so it's hard for me to catch my own mistakes, while I can easily see it when others are making it. Also autocorrect is a blessing and a curse for me sometimes.

[-] arefx@lemmy.ml 17 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Even best selling authors make these mistakes, most people don't have an editor proof reading their off the cuff reddit/lemmy comments.

[-] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago

I think it's crazy that your comment is true right now, but we are also just on the cusp where it would be 100% possible to have every one of your Lemmy comments proofread and edited by a LLM "editor".

[-] selokichtli@lemmy.ml 1 points 9 months ago

Are we allowed to write "meta" here?

[-] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 4 points 9 months ago

Not by itself. Then it's clique-signaling as bad as 'based' or 'werd'.

[-] fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 9 months ago

Test case.

Like whoever wrote the underlying bot (chatgpt?) Doesn't want a precedent saying bot is liable, so they will invest huge resources into this one case.

They probably settled thousands of cases waiting for this one to come up, thinking this one had the right characteristics.

[-] Mossheart@lemmy.ca 7 points 9 months ago

You'd think they'd have tried a better case then. They lost in the court of public opinion as soon as it was about bereavement and their argument that the chatbot on their own site is a separate legal entity they aren't responsible for is pants on head stupid.

In a way, we should be grateful they bungled it and are held liable, other companies may be held to the same standard in the future.

this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2024
615 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

59436 readers
1876 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS