However, it is sad that PR campaigns are required to reach out to an actual human being who cares.
However, it is sad that PR campaigns are required to reach out to an actual human being who cares.
/sarcasm
Also the part they were likely mad at was not data collection.
I fully disagree with your take.
You are assuming the default is negative. I think your explanation might be possible, but that by default it's wrong, as most people are not cynical/annoyed or any other negative quality.
My fundamental belief is that most people are nice and want to do good things.
If you are surrounded by cynical/annoyed people, you may be in a toxic environment, which may taint your judgement for other situations.
NB: either one of us could be making a fundamental attribution error https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error and it might be hard to find the truth, as it boils down to beliefs.
thanks for sharing that valuable information with us
I am assuming the default is negative - for Google.
I work for a far far older engineering company which is built on maintaining good relationships with our customers, vendors and their engineers. It is the exact opposite of the AI driven, frustrating/pointless bot response attitude of big tech companies. I like to think the difference is that we haven't optimised out our humanity yet.
Even worst is when actual humans get your cases, but can only reply with templates (like on Seller Central), where they have no problem sending you the same message over and over again.
This should be regulated for monopolies. People should be able to access a human for assistance.
The description of the problem they gave was inaccurate in any case, which didn't help the developer in working out the problem.
You therefore make a good point - while people often talk about the need for humans, these humans ALSO need to be free-thinking, not bound by a script, and have meaningful escalation paths to use for cases that the process isn't working for.