[alabastervlog]

My knee-jerk reaction is to think that the prospect of an insurance company handing support over to machines is a terrible development.

But it was already the case that they just arbitrarily do WTF ever they want, that outside a small set of actions that "bots" can perhaps handle fine they aren't going to do anything for you, and that the only way to get actual support for a real problem involves something being sent from a .gov email address or on frightening letterhead.

So... not really any different? You already basically have to threaten them (well, have someone scarier than you threaten them) to get any real support, this wouldn't be different.

[potato3732842]

>and that the only way to get actual support for a real problem involves something being sent from a .gov email address or on frightening letterhead.

What you really mean is that the only way to get them to honor their deal is credible threat of violence.

There might be a million intermediary steps spread across just as many parties but that's what it is at the end of the day.

[Muromec]

>the only way to get actual support for a real problem involves something being sent from a .gov email address or on frightening letterhead.

And then the they will add a low cost arbitration clause, where disputes are also handled by AI. Free market goes brrr