I believe that the main reason is that the AIs are OOMs cheaper than humans, letting the AIs be used for things like wholesale scams. Additionally, the AIs have demonstrated the ability to pull off incredible feats like Anthropic’s experiment or GPT-5.4 Pro and an internal OAI model solving very complex math problems, so they might be not that unprofessional in specific domains. Other domains could have the companies temporarily buy into the hype and watch as customers post angry rants...
“Solving very complex math problems” is irrelevant to the “unprofessionalism” discussed, because the former cherry-picks the best behaviour, while the latter is concerned with the average or worst behaviour.
Perhaps decisionmakers at the companies don’t have any visibility of the product that actually interacts with the clients, and they can only choose whether to push the button labeled “more AI” or “less AI”, with no option for “AI iff it’s good”. So, to choose which button to push, they must rely on what they know of AI, which based on the news is the ability to solve very complex math problems, which seems plenty smart enough to answer phone calls.
This is not the point that StanislavKrym was making. They said: “[models were] solving very complex math problems, so they might be not that unprofessional in specific domains”.
I believe that the main reason is that the AIs are OOMs cheaper than humans, letting the AIs be used for things like wholesale scams. Additionally, the AIs have demonstrated the ability to pull off incredible feats like Anthropic’s experiment or GPT-5.4 Pro and an internal OAI model solving very complex math problems, so they might be not that unprofessional in specific domains. Other domains could have the companies temporarily buy into the hype and watch as customers post angry rants...
“Solving very complex math problems” is irrelevant to the “unprofessionalism” discussed, because the former cherry-picks the best behaviour, while the latter is concerned with the average or worst behaviour.
Perhaps decisionmakers at the companies don’t have any visibility of the product that actually interacts with the clients, and they can only choose whether to push the button labeled “more AI” or “less AI”, with no option for “AI iff it’s good”. So, to choose which button to push, they must rely on what they know of AI, which based on the news is the ability to solve very complex math problems, which seems plenty smart enough to answer phone calls.
This is not the point that StanislavKrym was making. They said: “[models were] solving very complex math problems, so they might be not that unprofessional in specific domains”.