Seller support will get its collective digital rear handed to it many times when sellers write “Amelia says…”, for even a primitive AI will be right more often than seller support. They may start rubberstamping anything that a seller claims is said by Amelia.
So, for a few months, there will be a golden period when you can write to SS: “Amelia says that you should remove this feedback” or “Amelia says that you should reinstate my account” or “Amelia says that you should put laxatives in the coffee”.
Somehow I think Amazon won’t be legally bound by the drivel spouted by their chatbots. They will just leave sellers to burn in the fires their bots told them to start and shrug. Then look for new ways to implement more untested, unfinished AI.
Until one day they are. I am tired of companies farming out CS to contractors (not just Amazon) then claiming “we didn’t say that” when they get held to honor something that was said. Oral contracts are legal in my state, just sayin
I would love for companies to be forced to stand behind promises made on their behalf, starting with Seller Support. Considering that using AI is a choice, and one with known, glaring drawbacks, I’m in favor of making them liable for statements made by AI on their behalf too.
I know, I was being silly. I went to sleep at almost 5 this morning and my brain isn’t operating on all cylinders.
A contract still requires a legally competent party to enter into it. AI bots don’t come close to meeting that standard, and they they won’t for a while. Seller Support doesn’t meet that bar and they claim to be real people! Heck, the last lawyer I met didn’t meet that standard.
In the year 2525 If Man is still alive If Woman can survive
They may find
Ain’t gonna need to tell the truth,
Tell no lie
Everything you think, do and say IsIN the pillyou took today
…
I remain of the opinion that #SkyNetIsComing - and that unless we collectively pull our heads out of our nether regions, #IdiocracyISComing too…
I was laughng at this, and my wife asked if it was something that I could share. I did.
She is a lawyer ( one of the smart and ethical ones ). Her off-the-cuff opinion is that if the AI-owning party presents the AI as a competent agent, then they probably are stuck with whatever contracts it agrees to. IOW, they can’t present the AI as a competent agent and then renege on the deal via a unilateral claim that it was not competent.
