Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Sp3llbind3r t1_j6mbdbk wrote

I think the point you are missing is that it‘s not just the call center.

If an ambulance or a fire brigade goes out, those are occupied until they found out it was a false call. And that is way worse, because they will not be at an other place where they would be needed, someone could die because of that.


Drachefly t1_j6n33xo wrote

That seems like a part of the analysis they said would have to be done, so it's merely something they didn't mention, rather than actually missing.


ConciselyVerbose t1_j6p3jlu wrote

Let’s say, hypothetically, that it was as bad as 50% false calls, 50% calls that wouldn’t have been made, and that every false call is missing a real call. That’s break even. That means 1 person loses access to emergency services and 1 person gains.

Any better than that and you’re helping more people than you hurt. Obviously the ideal is perfection, and not having any false calls, especially ones that take resources from real people. But it doesn’t take amazing accuracy to improve the net outcome.

If you get data that they’re more likely to be incorrect than a normal call, you can change your prioritization to prioritize a human speaking. Apple can continue to improve their accuracy to minimize false positives. But those improvements are from a situation that’s already better than it not existing.