Headlines like this are extremely misleading and the framing of articles like this need to be challenged.
A bot did not fire the driver. A human created a bot that fired the driver. A human decided that the bot was most efficient for deciding these cases. A human within Amazon pitched this idea to their boss and a human accepted it, planned it, and rolled it out. By ascribing features to the bot, we (the audience) are lead to believe it’s some kind of glitchy programming error rather than deliberate choices made by the humans who work at Amazon
With a name like generator2 it's hard to know who to believe.
In all seriousness, I think it's been fairly well optimized to generate outrage and get people clicking the article, whereby many readers will reach the conclusions you mention.
3 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 19.7 ms ] threadA bot did not fire the driver. A human created a bot that fired the driver. A human decided that the bot was most efficient for deciding these cases. A human within Amazon pitched this idea to their boss and a human accepted it, planned it, and rolled it out. By ascribing features to the bot, we (the audience) are lead to believe it’s some kind of glitchy programming error rather than deliberate choices made by the humans who work at Amazon
In all seriousness, I think it's been fairly well optimized to generate outrage and get people clicking the article, whereby many readers will reach the conclusions you mention.