this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2026
529 points (97.7% liked)

Technology

86982 readers
2978 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] daychilde@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'll keep it simple and based on the article in question:

Right now, people who need help are waiting longer to talk to an operator becauase operators field lots of calls about large incidents (or well-witnessed incidents).

That's causing harm RIGHT NOW.

The theory is that if you offer callers a way to NOT TAKE UP OPERATOR TIME for incidents that are known, then the people who need help talk to an operator faster and get help faster.

That is what the article presents as what they're doing.

Everything you are saying is pure speculation.

You may well be right. We'll see.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

There are plenty of ways to mitigate this problem which do not require a AI solution. I find it insulting that you think it is the best solution considering their is no evidence of its effectiveness. In fact, I have presented why there are many reasons for concern.

The willingness for government to invest in unproven technology rather than increase manpower or develop their own mass alert systems is dysfunctional to say the least. The fact that they often commit to these plans without consulting experts or asking for public comment is dishonest and corrupt.

I have already had to deal with multiple people suffering from AI psychosis so I am not the biggest fan. You say real harm and AI is already doing it everyday. I see your retreat to reductionisism but I don't find it compelling in this instance. As I already alluded to, we know where this is going.

[–] daychilde@lemmy.world 0 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I find it insulting that you think it is the best solution

And I find you taking insult to be tiring.

And where did I say it was the best solution? Do not put words in my mouth

Go off an be unhappy in your little world of unhappiness.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 0 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

If you have a chip on your shoulder that is fine. You have already demonstrated your bombastic behavior as well and shown the ability for reflection. I appreciate that. Cheers!

[–] daychilde@lemmy.world 0 points 20 hours ago

Ironic. Attempts to be clever. Oh well.