this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2024
974 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

59589 readers
3300 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Unless they hate it enough to ditch a business or service in great enough numbers that it costs the business more money than they save by outsourcing to a computer, people had better get used to it.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

This is the "consumer choice" argument.

The problem is that consumers likely don't have that choice. The "free market" is really bad in incentivising good long term behavior, they favor short term gains for their stockholders. Thus they likely all switch to practices that seemingly lower cost or raise short term profits. If they can fire employees and replace them with AI, they will do so.

If they would think long term, they would prefer to hire humans instead of AI, because that way they would give their future customers money to buy their stuff. AI will not be their customer. They would pay them enough money to be a happy and good consumer.

Customer choice doesn't matter here, they either just have to buy whatever is cheapest, or die, because their employers (if they even have one) don't pay they enough for them to have choice, because short term profits.

[–] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yeah - that's all part of the "unless enough people leave" point.

It really depends on the market though - if it's not an essential good, it doesn't need to be replaced (online games). If there's adequate competition, there's largely undifferentiated alternatives (utilities around me)... and if not, you probably don't have a choice (your local government services, monopolies, and shallow markets for essential goods).

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

My point is there never will be enough people to leave. Consumer boycotts do not work.

Between thousands of different factors to consider wherever to buy a product from a certain producer or not, child labor, environmental waste, political attitude of the CEO, etc... it isn't possible to make any decision on what product to consume.

It isn't about 'unless enough people leave" it is about "unless enough people protest to the government for market regulation" and "unless enough law makers care".

The free market is not self regulating, at least not with a long term positive effect.

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

I don't think customer support can be resolved by free market forces. If someone has purchased the product, has a problem, and is trying to contact support to resolve the problem, they're a bit too far gone on the model of free consumer choice, and that instance won't affect the free market.

I feel like we need legislation that, when a customer has a problem, they must be able to contact the company for a refund or resolution, AND, communication with an "AI" does not count as that communication.