534
New Orleans will use AI to answer 911 calls instead of a human (www.shreveporttimes.com)
submitted 6 days ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
221 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 3 days ago (1 child)

Sure, usually, but compare like to like. If a human operator asked if the call was about an already known scenario and transferred people to an automated service if they said "yes", then the same exact thing could happen.

You attemtped to craft a very specific scenario in which harm would result, when in reality it is wildly unlikely that someone would call in at that precise time and only respond with the word "yes".

I can only speculate as to why you would do that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (1 child)

    I gave a single example of one way that AI can miss a genuine emergency in a way that a human operator won’t. ‘Nobody will ever call 911 with a stroke and be confused’ isn’t a realistic defense of removing the best system we have of assessing information, the human brain.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (1 child)

    It would have to be a stroke during the time there was an ongoing scenario that resulted in higher than typical call volume about the scenario, and a stroke victim calling in who could only say "yes".

    Not impossible, but wildly unlikely.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (1 child)

    It doesn’t have to be a stroke, do you really think that’s the only thing that can make people confused or give anything other than the expected answer? Panic, being hard of hearing, sometimes people even have to pretend to be calling someone else so that they can call for help in front of an abuser.

    You’re really married to the idea of this being unable to go wrong.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (1 child)

    I'm actually married to the idea that the same thing could go wrong with a human, so from that standpoint it's a wash.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (1 child)

    Again, a human being and an LLM strapped on top of voice recognition are not the same thing. A person can understand tone and context that an LLM can’t. It absolutely can’t perform at the same level while taking fucking drive through orders and you think it can function in an emergency? ‘Well people can make mistakes too’ isn’t going to bring back anyone who dies because of this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (1 child)

    All it needs to do is be at least as good as a human, and humans get tired, distracted, irritable, etc. so it's pretty easy to outperform humans.

    It's only looking for the word "yes". Literally any other sound and it routes to a human.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (1 child)

    The difference being that operators aren’t working tired, distracted, and irritable for their entire shift while AI is functionally brain damaged the entire time.

    If you’re going to refuse to acknowledge that just listening for the word ‘yes’ isn’t enough in an emergency situation then there’s no point in continuing this. Which, if it’s literally just a binary yes/no why the hell do we need AI and not ‘press 1 if you’re calling about x emergency’?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago (1 child)

    Which, if it’s literally just a binary yes/no why the hell do we need AI and not ‘press 1 if you’re calling about x emergency’?

    But but but what if the person is stroking out and presses 1 when they meant 2???

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago* (1 child)

    Oh, so that is a concern when it comes to pointing out the ways in which AI is a solution looking for a problem, but not when it comes to pointing out this could kill people?

    Not that you bothered to ask, but my solution is to add enough operators so that they aren’t working barely staffed at all times and getting overwhelmed the second more than a few calls come in. Working constantly at minimum staffing is the problem, this was solvable before 2022 without AI and it still isn’t necessary.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 days ago*

    I thought the extra question marks would have made it clear I was being sarcastic. No sarcasm this time: I'm sorry I wasn't clear enough. That's on me. Sorry.

    My ambiguous sarcasm aside, I was pointing out that your solution also had the same problem you were trying to solve, because that problem is always there, no matter what.

    Not that you bothered to ask, but my solution is to add enough operators so that they aren’t working barely staffed at all times and getting overwhelmed the second more than a few calls come in.

    And if we lived in a world where money wasn't very frequently the limiting factor, your solution might have merit. Unfortunately, capitalism is still something we have to deal with.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent