Holy crap, people have been reposting takes on this interview for like three days and you can track the degradation of the actual content via the game of telephone in the headlines.
It’s kinda depressing.
FWIW, having read the original interview everybody is reheating, the 18000 waters was a random example the Taco Bell exec WSJ interviewed used to explain that part of the issue is that people feel less guilty about messing with automated orders than when they’re talking to a human. They are also not backing out from automated orders, which is why the headline is using “rethink”.
The core of the issue is correct, though, the guy does spend a significant amount of time giving corpolese synonims of “it’s a mess”. “We’ve certainly learned a lot” has to be my favourite.
Thanks for posting this take. The topic of AI taking jobs seems to garner a lot of emotional response but not much of a technology discussion.
There were people who were negative about using websites to place orders in the 90s in part because e-commerce killed order processing jobs and the need for phone reps at mail order catalogs.
In this case AI is being used as just another e-commerce UX, so it’s really just a continuation of what’s happening already.
People used to do things like put 18,000, or -1 and all kinds of other garbage in the fields on website order forms as well. That’s just a programmers job to fix with reasonable input validation.
It wouldn’t surprise me if drive-thru like Taco Bell started doing license plate recognition and reputation checking. So if you order and dash more than a couple times they might not take your order from outside in that car anymore.
On the upside they might be able to greet you by name and recall your last order:
Hello Mr Smith… Nice to see you today, would you like 10 cheesy gordita crunch tacos and 1 large diet Pepsi again?
That seems overengineered as hell to me. But then, having an entire LLM to do what much older voice recognition software could do better is overengineered by definition. The LLM won’t validate those things because the point of it, if it has one at all in this scenario, is for it to recognize off the cuff speech and malformed orders.
Which is partly why people are finding this idea doesn’t work, I suppose. Have a chatbot improvise based on what people are shouting and you get garbage inputs. Have strict requirements for voice commands and you get lots of failed attempts.
Unlike a bunch of other applications of AI chatbots this one maaaay eventually work. But then again, so may your idea. Honestly, if I was going to overengineer the shit out of having a tortilla-wrapped laxative inside a car I’d have you order directly in your phone and use that license plate recognition idea to prevent you having to talk to anybody or anything in the first place.
Holy crap, people have been reposting takes on this interview for like three days and you can track the degradation of the actual content via the game of telephone in the headlines.
It’s kinda depressing.
FWIW, having read the original interview everybody is reheating, the 18000 waters was a random example the Taco Bell exec WSJ interviewed used to explain that part of the issue is that people feel less guilty about messing with automated orders than when they’re talking to a human. They are also not backing out from automated orders, which is why the headline is using “rethink”.
The core of the issue is correct, though, the guy does spend a significant amount of time giving corpolese synonims of “it’s a mess”. “We’ve certainly learned a lot” has to be my favourite.
Thanks for posting this take. The topic of AI taking jobs seems to garner a lot of emotional response but not much of a technology discussion.
There were people who were negative about using websites to place orders in the 90s in part because e-commerce killed order processing jobs and the need for phone reps at mail order catalogs.
In this case AI is being used as just another e-commerce UX, so it’s really just a continuation of what’s happening already.
People used to do things like put 18,000, or -1 and all kinds of other garbage in the fields on website order forms as well. That’s just a programmers job to fix with reasonable input validation.
It wouldn’t surprise me if drive-thru like Taco Bell started doing license plate recognition and reputation checking. So if you order and dash more than a couple times they might not take your order from outside in that car anymore.
On the upside they might be able to greet you by name and recall your last order:
Hello Mr Smith… Nice to see you today, would you like 10 cheesy gordita crunch tacos and 1 large diet Pepsi again?
That seems overengineered as hell to me. But then, having an entire LLM to do what much older voice recognition software could do better is overengineered by definition. The LLM won’t validate those things because the point of it, if it has one at all in this scenario, is for it to recognize off the cuff speech and malformed orders.
Which is partly why people are finding this idea doesn’t work, I suppose. Have a chatbot improvise based on what people are shouting and you get garbage inputs. Have strict requirements for voice commands and you get lots of failed attempts.
Unlike a bunch of other applications of AI chatbots this one maaaay eventually work. But then again, so may your idea. Honestly, if I was going to overengineer the shit out of having a tortilla-wrapped laxative inside a car I’d have you order directly in your phone and use that license plate recognition idea to prevent you having to talk to anybody or anything in the first place.
Hmm, yes look at the gizmodo article
https://gizmodo.com/taco-bell-says-no-mas-to-ai-drive-thru-experiment-2000649786
Like, this isn’t journalism … it’s ??? “cope-baiting” ? Is that a thing ?