Why is this work still not done by a machine?

When I say that I work on artificial intelligence, people often want to take the side of ordinary workers of the whole world. Exact formulations vary, but it usually comes down to “machines cannot do work for people, because people provide" human interaction "that is unattainable for a machine."

Immediately after one of these disputes, I had the pleasure of trying out these illustrious “human interactions” on the way home to New York from abroad. The first meeting took place with an employee of the airline. When I came to check-in, she told me that since I did not come at least an hour before departure, technically speaking, I missed it, and I would have to buy a new ticket. Actually, I was only a few minutes late, and at the airport from which I departed, waiting in queues for checking usually took from 0 to 5 minutes. I would say that if the entire airport were parking, they would not even need to give the sections alphanumeric designations.
')
I started to object, but they said that their system would not let them print a ticket, even if they wanted to. A bad start for "human interaction."

What is the point of being human if the decisions are made by cars? I asked the chain of command, but the real boss - their system - rested. I bought a new ticket, went through the security service, and, to kill time, I watched people get on the flight I was supposed to fly.

Since my interaction at the major airport was destroyed, I decided to take comfort with the help of unreasonably expensive treats from the terminal shop. The store was quite large, so it had two cash registers. However, the clerk, apparently herself searching for human interaction, left her post to chat with another clerk in the far corner of the store. I crossed the entire store to give them the money, and they pretended that I was invading their personal accommodation and demanding that they serve me. I do not like scandals, so I waited until she finished her story before she noticed me.

The next vivid manifestation of the human relationship was my communication with an immigration agent. He behaved as if he was a detective of the old school, knowing that you are guilty, and just waiting until you make a mistake. Fortunately, after several inhospitable questions, we both achieved what we wanted, and I left his country.

Upon landing at JFK, I received a greeting from an automatic immigration agent. He did not interrogate me, but simply scanned my passport, made calculations, and painted my image relatively well on the immigration ticket. Seriously, whatever image filter they have, it needs to be added to Instagram.

Leaving the terminal, I passed by the automatic registration of my favorite company JetBlue - they never blamed me for coming in just 55 minutes.

On the way home, I decided to get a treat at a more reasonable price on the CVS network, in which the self-service cash desk refrained from the temptation to chat with my neighbor, and instead looked forward to serving me.

It is worth noting that my experience, which brought more satisfaction from communicating with machine guns, is not unique. A recent study by Nuanced Enterprises found that 67% of people prefer self-service machines.

In addition, these machines save a lot of money. The cost of check-in for a flight by a living person costs the airline $ 3. Registration through the machine costs $ 0.14. According to the International Air Transport Association, switching to a fully automatic registration process can save the airline industry $ 1.6 billion a year . Hence the question: why is this not happening?

Automatic systems not only save money, they help to earn more. The McDonald's experiment showed that customers using self-service kiosks, on average, make larger orders, which leads to an increase in the average order by $ 0.3 . Perhaps customers who place an order with a person believe that they value them. I was surprised - do people who eat at McDonalds really worry about what others think of them? It always seemed to me that this restaurant is a choice of reckless.

If customers prefer it, it saves money and earns more - why hasn't it spread all over the place yet?

I understand, the first to be uncomfortable - it is better to have someone else work out all the roughness. But if it works for one company, why isn't all its competitors in the same vertical adopting it? A simple walk past the check-in counters is a clear demonstration of the absurdity of this situation. Some airlines have automatic machines, while others do not.

It is difficult to solve this riddle until we look at the demographics of the 33% of people (the rest in the Nuanced Enterprises study above) who do not prefer self-service machines. The most indicative metric is age. Suffice it to say that these are the 33% of the population who can ask their grandchildren what Twitter is.

Unfortunately, the same 33% usually make up the majority of those voting on the board of directors in most large companies. It becomes clear selective indecision of some companies in the issue of the introduction of machines in their business cycle. If I had to get permission from my grandfather for every new technological purchase, I would write this article on a typewriter and call the editor with the help of a telephone with a dial.

Therefore, the question is that if self-service automats are better in all the items related to making money, do not the luddit companies contradict their obligations to their shareholders? Perhaps shareholders should start demanding from companies to keep up with the latest technological trends.

Should shareholders have the ability to verify the use of technology in a company when a team of experts analyzes profit from the introduction of automation? Should there be allocated board seats for younger and tech savvy members who could drag organizations into the 21st century? After all, $ 1.6 billion a year is a rather big miscalculation, and airlines are not the only ones responsible for such miscalculations. Such an important thing as the introduction of technology should not depend on the whims of people who by their nature abhor the technology.

I’ll be happy to argue with anyone who misses the time when a friendly refueling clerk poured gasoline for you. I leave them the right to their opinion about the importance of human interaction. But when these opinions are put above the results of research and the profits of companies - and most importantly, of my travel experience - the time for radical measures comes. The AI ​​/ bots revolution is gaining momentum, and progress should not depend on personal opinions.