Chatbot: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m Amwelladmin moved page Chat bots to Chatbot
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|tech|}}It’s just so obvious when you think about it. Lawyers are ornery, craggy, expensive and equivocal, and if they do give you a straight anwer it will be so hamstrung by [[double negative]]s, [[passive]]s and arcane constructions that most likely you won’t understand what they say anyway.
{{a|tech|}}It’s just so obvious when you think about it. Lawyers are ornery, craggy, expensive and equivocal, and if they do give you a straight anwer it will be so hamstrung by [[double negative]]s, [[passive]]s and arcane constructions that most likely you won’t understand what they say anyway.


Why not just use a chatbot? It works ok for triaging customer complains about Virgin internet doesn’t it?
Why not just use a [[chatbot]]? It works okay for triaging customer complaints about Virgin internet doesn’t it?

Revision as of 17:29, 11 July 2019

JC pontificates about technology
An occasional series.
Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.

It’s just so obvious when you think about it. Lawyers are ornery, craggy, expensive and equivocal, and if they do give you a straight anwer it will be so hamstrung by double negatives, passives and arcane constructions that most likely you won’t understand what they say anyway.

Why not just use a chatbot? It works okay for triaging customer complaints about Virgin internet doesn’t it?