[paxys]

A big problem now both internally to a company and externally is that official support channels are being replaced by chatbots, and you really have no option but to trust their output because a human expert is no longer available.

If I post a question to the internal payment team's forum about a critical processing issue and some "payments bot" replies to me, should I be at fault for trusting the answer?

[RussianCow]

I know this is happening with external customer support, but is this really happening internally at big companies? Preventing you from talking to a human in the correct department about an issue feels like a bomb waiting to explode.

[jmalicki]

There is at least an effect that chatbots have become the primary line and support, and even if you are not prevented from talking to a human, the managers of the humans you would talk to have decided that since the chatbot is there, it is inappropriate for them to be spending much time supporting coworkers in other departments when the chatbot can do it.

So to a degree, corporate politics can sort of discourage it.

[wmeredith]

I'm sure it is. Thankfully I don't work for a company this large any more, but when I was employed by a multinational with 30K+ employees, our IT department was outsourced to India and you had to get through a couple layers of phone tree/webchat hell to actually talk to a real person. I could easily see companies of this size replacing their support with LLM nonsense.

[paxys]

Teams are heavily incentivized to incorporate AI in their internal workflows. At Meta it is a requirement, and will come up in your performance review if you fail to do so.

[Uhhrrr]

Yes, of course, and the company which removes human experts should expect things to fail in the manner that things usually fail when you remove your internal experts.