I think you're now making a new claim that there's some continuum of customer service responsibility versus profitability.
I think you're now making a new claim that there's some continuum of customer service responsibility versus profitability. I don't think that was the original claim, and that's not what I'm claiming. I simply wanted to point out that a statement like "Companies that are wildly profitable should not shirk customer service responsibility" is not logically equivalent to saying, "Companies that are not wildly profitable should shirk customer service responsibilities." To argue that because you disagree with the inverse of a statement, therefore the statement itself is not valid, is faulty. The inverse of a statement need not be true for the statement itself to be true. "No company should be let off the hook for having awful customer service" does not preclude judging one of the most profitable companies in the world more harshly for having awful customer service. What I read from OP's statement is mainly this; we know in this case that it's not for lack of resources. So perhaps we can agree every company has the responsibility, but not all companies have the means. Is it not more reprehensible to fail to provide a service you are responsible for when you have the means to provide it than when you do not? Or more to the point, it's certainly noteworthy that they could become one of the most profitable companies in the world despite having such widely recognized terrible customer support. One might say it's significant evidence that they are able to maintain their profitability through not entirely competitive means.
Posted by zaroth on May 27, 2020, 3:58 AM
Tags
Related issues
- The issue is really the extreme difficulty of programming them, especially for anything sequential (rather than combinatorial).
- I probably could have beared with it if it was only limited to programming, but it showing up in creative fields has made me feel all sor...
- I hate that I'm in deep enough to know what you mean.
- The biggest problem with “AI” is that big corps are shoving it down our throats.
- in the middel of a coding session with 5.6 sol.
- [Hero Run] 535B-A23B on 18T tokens
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.3,500 issues0 comments
reliability (Other)
The issue is really the extreme difficulty of programming them, especially for anything sequential (rather than combinatorial).
I probably could have beared with it if it was only limited to programming, but it showing up in creative fields has made me feel all sor...
I hate that I'm in deep enough to know what you mean.
The biggest problem with “AI” is that big corps are shoving it down our throats.
in the middel of a coding session with 5.6 sol.
[Hero Run] 535B-A23B on 18T tokens
I hate that this is how AI is being used..
inexperienced protobuf user here -- why do non-googlers generally use protobuf?
I think you're now making a new claim that there's some continuum of customer service responsibility versus profitability.
I think you're now making a new claim that there's some continuum of customer service responsibility versus profitability. I don't think that was the original claim, and that's not what I'm claiming. I simply wanted to point out that a statement like "Companies that are wildly profitable should not shirk customer service responsibility" is not logically equivalent to saying, "Companies that are not wildly profitable should shirk customer service responsibilities." To argue that because you disagree with the inverse of a statement, therefore the statement itself is not valid, is faulty. The inverse of a statement need not be true for the statement itself to be true. "No company should be let off the hook for having awful customer service" does not preclude judging one of the most profitable companies in the world more harshly for having awful customer service. What I read from OP's statement is mainly this; we know in this case that it's not for lack of resources. So perhaps we can agree every company has the responsibility, but not all companies have the means. Is it not more reprehensible to fail to provide a service you are responsible for when you have the means to provide it than when you do not? Or more to the point, it's certainly noteworthy that they could become one of the most profitable companies in the world despite having such widely recognized terrible customer support. One might say it's significant evidence that they are able to maintain their profitability through not entirely competitive means.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.