I wonder if it’ll be just like those self service checkouts — literally no improvements for 20 years.
Comment on The ‘doorman fallacy’: why careless adoption of AI backfires so easily
Honytawk@feddit.nl 2 days agoThe thing is that customers wouldn’t dislike dealing with AI in customer service if it actually worked.
It is like a self-service checkout. There is no problem with it, unless an item doesn’t want to scan, or an error appears where an employee is needed.
explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
jj4211@lemmy.world 2 days ago
The biggest improvement on the user side was to stop trying to weigh the bagging area to prevent loss.
The newer machine vision based systems are less likely to screw up. “Unexpected item in bagging area” was an almost universal experience, nowadays I have only been flagged for human review once.
Also, one store I was at just lets you put your items under a camera without finding barcodes, and you just confirm the identified products.
jj4211@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Think the issue is either a self service portal that works in very predictable way (like the self checkout) or a human to deal with nuance.
To the extent an LLM might be useful, it’s likely blocked from doing so because the operator doesn’t trust it either.
The biggest annoyance is that the LLM support tends to more aggressively refuse to bring a human in.