Needless to say, this is difficult to scale. It's fine for our app; which Serves a fairly small demographic, and does not make money, but it would be a big problem for major-league outfits.
I have a feeling that one of the first commercial applications of AI, will be moderation and response to customer complaints.
We'll have to see how well that works.
> We'll have to see how well that works.
Worth noting that almost all of YouTube's front facing customer service is heavily, heavily automated, which is a source of constant hostility and aggrivation for YouTubers, in that they must interact with these ML agents, get a stupid, nonsensical answer, then reply again to get a human reviewer who (usually) resolves the situation that would've been faster resolved by a human in the first place and let to less frustration for all involved.
I think it's a fantastic idea to not automate the process of signups for a service, and yes, it will substantially slow down the process. But I think everyone has just about had their fill of all these services that produce bad outcomes extremely quickly when a trivial amount of human involvement would've handled whatever issue better, in a perfectly acceptable time frame.
If you don't want to have a customer service department that is well staffed and well paid to handle customer complaints/problems/issues/what have you, then my suggestion is do not involve yourself with or build a company that will need one. Simple as.
Maybe instead of moderation and response, it would function better as a blackbox middleware to the customer support onboarding process. So instead of tackling the problem at the customer level, you use AI/ML to enable your existing support staff to scale their workload.
The picture I have in my mind is a pre-processor for new tickets that would add a series of tags to a support request. That would allow your support staff to be assigned to tags where they specialize. This simplistic implementation would probably integrate into existing service management platforms without having to stand up Yet Another B2B.
Not only is this a lie you've been willingly sold, it appears you've bought it and taken it home.
This said I don't think you should feel too bad, we the consumer buy these same lies all over the place "If we have to follow these regulations then it's going to be a big problem for the industry".
At the end of the day some of the problems do not scale easily and cheaply. In these cases business have the choice of willingly being good societal actors and taking a loss of profit in order to prevent issues, or by means of regulation be forced to behave in a fitting manner.
That was unkind. I didn't think we behaved that way, here, but I'm often wrong...
It certainly can be done, but that usually means the shareholders need to hold off on that second lambo. That doesn't often play well, in the boardroom.
The law is designed specifically to enable this, because the recording industry bought a bunch of politicians, and said "hey we need to have a zero cost zero risk mechanism for us to remove content we believe to be pirated, without having any penalties for being wrong, but there must be penalties for the host services if they try to stop us".
This is how the DMCA should have been designed in the first place.
It’s not a problem Etsy or others take seriously, even when the attack hits stores with multi-million dollars per year in sales.
It’s yet another case of a tech company refusing to staff enough workers to manually review and verify things that computers shouldn’t be doing by themselves.