Did you read the article? The reason they're looking into this is because they're not able to run an excellent human 911 service, they can't hire enough people to handle the volume of non-emergency calls that are coming to the emergency line.
FaceDeer
It's the Register, ranty articles written like a teenager is kind of their brand.
Damned illegal alien criminals. They're not sending their best.
On the one hand, I hate seeing people scammed.
On the other hand, it's nice that they have less money to spend on political donations.
That's what the test will ultimately determine.
And next community over there's yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com, who continuously illustrate the capricious and hateful nature of many human moderators.
I say give AI a chance at it and see what happens. If it works, great. If it doesn't, people will just go elsewhere.
Unlikely. AI is cheaper than humans, that's the whole point. And you have no idea how well it'll be able to do the job. Neither do they, which is why they're planning a test first.
The problem with that kind of thing is always "who decides what's hate-filled and false?" If there was a Federal government mechanism for that in the United States it would now be in the hands of Trump and the Republicans.
What is the point in posting an article when nobody's going to address the contents of it?
Those questions can be asked about humans who are making the decision too. How long does it take for a human to determine that it's an emergency? How many are going to mis-identify as a non-emergency? There's nothing unique about AI here.
Seems like a good idea to have a mechanism to divert the non-emergency calls off of the 911 dispatchers, then.
You don't, which is why they're planning to try using AI to do it.
I honestly don't understand why you're asking. It's like there's an article about how a transportation company is investigating the use of teleporters to improve their delivery time and someone's responding with "but how will they do that without teleportation?"