A couple of years ago I read a quite serious piece on whether it was sensible or necessary to say please and thank you when interacting with AI platforms. This was not because Skynet might be a little less inclined to destroy humanity if we all had lovely manners. Instead, ran the argument, if we wanted AI’s “thoughts” and outputs to be of a certain quality or tone, we would have to teach it, and the sooner we started, the better.
Sadly, even in just the space of that couple of years, that particular ship has not just sailed, but rolled over and sunk without bubbles, meaning that one abiding characteristic of the AI-assisted workplace grievance seems to be a pseudo-legalistic and passive-aggressive tone which cannot help but put the reader’s teeth on edge.
None of that is terribly conducive to the swift and amicable resolution of that grievance. Tone begets tone, and particularly if the employee feeds the employer’s understandably terse response into some AI engine to determine his next move, the risk for both parties of an escalating spiral of reciprocal snippiness can only grow.
The sensible employer will therefore try to ensure so far as possible that it deals with the human employee and not the keyboard warrior. It should try to have calls and meetings with him about the grievance and not simply trade correspondence, as that facilitates the employee’s recourse to AI advisers. The employer should keep asking the employee what he wants and how he feels about particular...
The company further accused Garba of promoting an alternative digital wallet, Crowwe Wallet, alongside the alleged false claims about OPay. OPay Digital Services Limited has threatened legal actio...