ENTRE NOUS: My Interview with a Chat-Bot

BY CLAUDE DUCLOUX

If you need assistance (and who doesn’t?) from any of the zillions of websites where we engage in commerce or communication, you’ll acknowledge that, all too often, you are subjected to the latest triumph of artificial intelligence–the automated “chat-bot.” You are confronted with a pop-up window staffed by an anthropomorphic greeting offering to help you with your “problem.” Of course, the relative sophistication and scope of each firm’s chat-bot is as wide as the Grand Canyon. While a software company’s chat-bot may be trained in 100 different solutions, usually a bank’s chat-bot answers are limited to “Would You Like to Open a New Account” and “We Can Open a New Account.” Sadly, your inquiry on interest rates will never reveal that, despite inflation, your savings account interest rate remains at a dependable 1 dried raisin every 90 days.

Now, I have no issue with having my problem solved, whether it be by highly programmed machine or a heavily accented live attendant in a country that contains most of the letters of the English alphabet. But I do insist upon resolution. And chat-bots couldn’t care less if you’re satisfied. Here’s a typical exchange:

ChatBot: How can I help you?

ME: I need to see if a bill was paid.

ChatBot: The best pain medications are ibuprofen and acetaminophen.

ME: Not “pain,” I need to know the payment date of an invoice.

ChatBot: Invoice functions are in the finance software. Would you like a tutorial?

ME: No. Can you access my account?

ChatBot: Would you like to start a new account?

ME: No. No. Thank you

ChatBot: You’re welcome. Did I resolve your issue?

ME: No. So …where can I get that ibuprofen?

Now, clearly we should have seen this coming. Need I remind you of the grandfather of such spookiness: Microsoft’s “Clippy,” ,the animated paper clip with Groucho Marx eyes who “divined” what document you were drafting and offered help. “Hey, it looks like you’re drafting a letter. Want me to help?” No. “But, you can create macros with the insert function; want to learn how?” No! Go away! “Sure, but … for the record, that’s not how you spell subpoena.” Happily, “Clippy” met his digital doom when the public discovered he could be deleted with the code Control+Alt+DIECLIPPYDIE. But I digress.

I have an engineering friend, Dave, at the nearby headquarters of Acumacloud Software, which specializes in helping Gen X-ers understand plot devices in streaming series. I asked him if their website had a “Bot.” He said they did, and he gave me the name and number of their head of AI engineering. I decided to give him a call.

ME: So, you’re Ryan? Are you the chat-bot guy?

RYAN: Who told you?

ME: Uh, Dave. Is that a problem?

RYAN: I guess not. Just didn’t expect anyone to call me.

ME: Well, I want to ask you, how long did it take you to develop your website’s chat-bot?

RYAN: Dave said I could tell you? I mean … the truth?

ME: Uh … sure.

RYAN: About a week.

ME: Only a week? One week?

RYAN: Sure, I wrote out about 50 common questions, and 50 evasive answers, and I just follow the script.

ME: What do you mean, “follow the script?”

RYAN: Well, there is no artificial intelligence component. It’s usually just me, sitting at my computer intercepting customer contacts. Sometimes I let my kids do it if I’m in bathroom or there’s a Cowboys game on.

ME: But doesn’t the chat-bot have to work 24 hours?

RYAN: Sure, but not in a row! Have you ever seen a chat-bot popup at 2 a.m.?

ME: I’m never online at 2 a.m.

RYAN: Bingo. Me either. Nobody really wants to talk to the bot, so no one misses it.

ME: But isn’t it hard to answer all the questions?

RYAN: Not after the 30-minute training. The secret is the three“As” of “Botting”

ME: Three “As”?

RYAN: Yeah … Answer, Avoid, and Abandon.

ME: Doesn’t sound very effective in resolving questions.

RYAN: Thanks. I think we nailed it.

ME: Well, do you think you’ll actually build a real effective chatbot?

RYAN: If we did, we’d be the first. Look, chat-bots are a diversion, intended to give the false impression that a machine can solve your problem, and their evasion will outlast any human being’s tolerance for waiting. Sometimes they get lucky, and a random answer works, but mostly it just prompts the customer to discover the real way to get live customer service.

ME: So, chat-bots serve an intermediary process?

RYAN: Yeah. Like diverting kids with shiny stuff, or saying the words “Hunter Biden’s Laptop” to conservative news watchers. They’ll watch for hours.

ME: So, I must ask: How did you come up with this plan? This device of diversion and deceit?

RYAN: Well, just watch the news. Nobody checks the truth of anything anymore. And when they do check, it takes so long that no one even cares when the truth comes out. By that time, we’ve moved on to new diversions. You know, even reality has become virtual. Go figure.

Well, you know, Ryan has a point, and that point directly relates to our duties of truth and candor that we owe to each other and our clients. When we’re asked a question, we need to listen to the actual question, and, unless the answer is protected by confidentiality, give an honest answer. We are not the hired guns and junkyard dogs that some clients desire. And being one will never make your client happy.

Case in point: The former president and his lawyer were, jointly and severally, sanctioned to the tune of $937,989 as costs for filing baseless claims. In the inevitable conversation between that lawyer and her client, undoubtedly, she will try to confirm that HE will pay those sanctions, as all she did was what he asked her to do. He undoubtedly (if history is any guide) will reply, “Me pay? You’re the lawyer who filed that junk. Never should have happened! I’m suing you to indemnify me!” And you know what? He’s right. That lawyer should never have filed those baseless claims.

The moral: Our jobs as lawyers are to be skilled guides and problem solvers. To do that, we must answer questions honestly and advise our clients of our duty to follow the rules. If you don’t, perhaps you can find work as a chat-bot.

Keep the faith.

The opinions expressed in Entre Nous are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the Austin Bar Association membership or the Austin Bar Association board of directors.