I have mixed feelings on this and how they are implementing it. Here’s the direct quote
This is intended to handle the increase of calls that are related to one incident, so callers get automatically routed to an AI agent who asks if they are calling regarding the incident. If the answer is yes, then callers can receive information or updates, and if it’s no, then the callers are transferred to a human.
In a way this will reduce caller volume for the same incidents being called in over and over again. Seems like they are using a direct yes or no question which decreases any issues with the AI making shit up.
I do see how this can free up humans to deal with other calls and dispatch lifesaving services faster, eliminating repeat calls.
However, even if the AI works as described (which is a big if anyway), having to navigate even a simple yes or no will reduce time to lifesaving care.
Our 911 system has been slow and inadequate for a long time now. There has been an absolute refusal to fix it, and this has led to deaths. I do see this application easing that issue a bit, but I also see how this will cause deaths in a different way. Is it better to die on hold waiting for an operator or is it better to die navigating an AI system? I think less would die overall with the new system. It has been trained using the non-emergency call line.
To be clear I want us to just fund people to staff the 911 call center, but these shortages have been an issue for decades. Local governments refuse or are unable to take on the additional costs. I’m really unsure on how to feel about all this. My gut reaction is disgust, but I do see what they are trying to do. I guess we’ll have to wait for the data and stories
I think the summary of the existing incident and providing updates is where they are using the AI. Which if given a limited data set should work.
These LLM models do actually a good job of summarizing a list of facts you feed it. The issues happen when you want it to make something “new”
For 911 I’d rather the government find the money to fund them, but I do feel like they are using AI in an appropriate scope.
AI should not be used in life and death situations like a 911. But the way they are going about the roll out is demonstrating how to actually use AI as a tool and not some miracle machine.
They should have left it only on the non-emergency line and called it there.
I ask this out of genuine, burning curiosity, and mean no rudeness by this…
Did you read the article that the OP linked to?
I don’t mean to single you out with this question, I’m just confused after scrolling this far through sooo many similar comments. It almost feels as if I somehow ended up reading a different article from everyone else.
callers get automatically routed to an AI agent who asks if they are calling regarding the incident. If the answer is yes, then callers can receive information or updates, and if it’s no, then the callers are transferred to a human.
So if somebody calls and is completely out of his mind, what will AI do?
What if someone is obviously out of their mind and says yes? Random example, say someone has a stroke and has just barely figured out how to use the big red emergency call button on their phone screen. The AI asks if they are calling about blah blah emergency. Maybe the person only understands half of it, thinks they’re being asked if they’re calling about an emergency and say “yes”. Now they’re stuck having a form letter read to them by AI while their brain is dying. A person would catch something was up even if they said yes.
The article even notes this can be a problem without anything medical going on:
It’s also possible that AI agents handling 911 triage could fail to understand individuals with stronger accents and dialects, as well as differences in pitch and articulation. This is because AI is programmed with automatic speech recognition systems and, therefore, could potentialy be unreliable when presented with a speech unlike the ones used the AI is trained to recognize.
Responding to people having emergencies is too important a task to leave up to voice recognition slapped on top of an LLM.
I don’t know the concrete answer to your "what if,’ and I don’t think you or the author of the article do either. That would be a question for Carbyne.
I would speculate that there is an answer, and that neither you nor the author are the first to think of these problem scenarios. There’s design, engineering, and real-world testing involved.
This will kill people.
Yes. So many. Everyone involved in this decision, on both the legislative and corporate sides, needs to get the fucking wall.
But it’s new Orleans, so some of the difficult to emotionally comprehend number of deaths it causes might at least be funny.
I have mixed feelings on this and how they are implementing it. Here’s the direct quote
In a way this will reduce caller volume for the same incidents being called in over and over again. Seems like they are using a direct yes or no question which decreases any issues with the AI making shit up.
I do see how this can free up humans to deal with other calls and dispatch lifesaving services faster, eliminating repeat calls.
However, even if the AI works as described (which is a big if anyway), having to navigate even a simple yes or no will reduce time to lifesaving care.
Our 911 system has been slow and inadequate for a long time now. There has been an absolute refusal to fix it, and this has led to deaths. I do see this application easing that issue a bit, but I also see how this will cause deaths in a different way. Is it better to die on hold waiting for an operator or is it better to die navigating an AI system? I think less would die overall with the new system. It has been trained using the non-emergency call line.
To be clear I want us to just fund people to staff the 911 call center, but these shortages have been an issue for decades. Local governments refuse or are unable to take on the additional costs. I’m really unsure on how to feel about all this. My gut reaction is disgust, but I do see what they are trying to do. I guess we’ll have to wait for the data and stories
The key is to remember you can’t actually fix anything except with the wacky fashionable new scam. .and since when does a y/n require fucking “ai"?
I think the summary of the existing incident and providing updates is where they are using the AI. Which if given a limited data set should work.
These LLM models do actually a good job of summarizing a list of facts you feed it. The issues happen when you want it to make something “new”
For 911 I’d rather the government find the money to fund them, but I do feel like they are using AI in an appropriate scope.
AI should not be used in life and death situations like a 911. But the way they are going about the roll out is demonstrating how to actually use AI as a tool and not some miracle machine.
They should have left it only on the non-emergency line and called it there.
They know it will. They don’t care.
Yeah, I can just imagine how well a “AI” would deal with a situation like this when they can’t even operate a drive-thru properly.
I ask this out of genuine, burning curiosity, and mean no rudeness by this…
Did you read the article that the OP linked to?
I don’t mean to single you out with this question, I’m just confused after scrolling this far through sooo many similar comments. It almost feels as if I somehow ended up reading a different article from everyone else.
Did you read the article?
So if somebody calls and is completely out of his mind, what will AI do?
Is this a rhetorical question?
Just in case you wanted a real answer: The caller is obviously not saying “yes,” so transfer to human.
To be clear: I don’t know anyone at Carbyne or OPCD. I can only offer speculation. But I’m curious: What would you have guessed?
What if someone is obviously out of their mind and says yes? Random example, say someone has a stroke and has just barely figured out how to use the big red emergency call button on their phone screen. The AI asks if they are calling about blah blah emergency. Maybe the person only understands half of it, thinks they’re being asked if they’re calling about an emergency and say “yes”. Now they’re stuck having a form letter read to them by AI while their brain is dying. A person would catch something was up even if they said yes.
The article even notes this can be a problem without anything medical going on:
Responding to people having emergencies is too important a task to leave up to voice recognition slapped on top of an LLM.
I don’t know the concrete answer to your "what if,’ and I don’t think you or the author of the article do either. That would be a question for Carbyne.
I would speculate that there is an answer, and that neither you nor the author are the first to think of these problem scenarios. There’s design, engineering, and real-world testing involved.
“Well I just trust they thought of it” isn’t good enough.
But…just think how many money they can save! You are being selfish!
/s
deleted by creator