Clearly you didn't even look at the linked article. Your arguments would be more persuasive if you didn't make up supporting assertions, like a non-existent "reduction in crime." There was *not* a reduction in crime, there was an increase in crime. And guess what, Minneapolis has rebuilt its police force since then, because they realized that they actually needed those officers to keep the peace.

Yes, I agree with your explanation of why human agents have become so useless. It's not because they're human, but because their employers are cheap.

With that as a baseline (and the baseline isn't going to change any time soon), I would argue that Google's AI answer bot is better than reading through a bunch of documents.

This reporting makes a very wrong assumption: that the Minneapolis police department is the only law enforcement agency in the city. It is not.

What actually happened was, when the Minneapolis police force was cut in half, the county sheriff's department was forced to step in and make up for the loss of city officers. When the crime statistics for the city and county are combined, crime rates were up, not down.

This is exactly the kind of sloppy research I would expect from the "defund the police" crowd.

https://www.americanexperiment....

All right, show me a place where the police have been defunded, or eliminated, and the communities they served are better off. Surely in this big world, there is one place like that!

What made it an argument, was "...that's how you know...". No, it isn't "how you know" because the second statement is false. At least, in the West, the police largely *do* work for the people. The places (in the West) where police are most welcome, are also the places where crime is the lowest. And conversely, the places where police are least welcome, are the places with the highest crime rates. Apply these principles to any large city, any state or province, any nation. What you see is that police do perform their responsibilities effectively, when allowed to do so.

What kind of criminals trust police? Probably none of them. And police don't try to earn their trust. Police will often use lying as part of their interrogation tactics.

If you're law-abiding, they're much less prone to lie. Probably about the same level of lying as the people they are protecting.

I'll bet you sometimes tell lies too, so stop looking down your long, pointy nose at others who do so.

Not all LLM "support" bots are created equal. As with anything, it depends very much how much money and effort was put into the development of the system. I'm betting the LLM "support" bot you were trying to use, was thrown together cheaply.

Somebody's got to put the last screw in the box, after all! But hey, it happens in the good-old USA!

Your first sentence is true. But your second sentence isn't a logical conclusion drawn from the first.

Just because they lie, doesn't mean they "don't work for us."

Try it. It actually works quite well. Much better than the old documentation merry-go-round.

Have you actually talked to human agents lately? They know how to read scripts and give you the runaround, not answers. An actual solution from a human agent? Really? Your universe does seem to be an alternate one.

I don't know. Do you actually *like* the endless loops of long, wordy documentation pages that you have to dig through to finally find the answer you want? I certainly don't! Being able to ask an AI agent for the precise answer I want, is a game changer for me.

Claude has a Chrome extension that already does this.

So much for room for passengers!

It will be a Y3K crisis.