How chatbots have evolved

 

The origins of the chatbot

The proliferation of chatbots over the last decade may give the impression that they are only a product of the internet. In truth, though, the roots go all the way back to 1966 when Joseph Weizenbaum a German computer scientist and Professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology developed a program he called ELIZA.

The all caps make it look like an acronym, but ELIZA doesn’t stand for anything. Instead, as explained in the original Stanford article about it: “Its name was chosen to emphasize that it may be incrementally improved by its users, since its language abilities may be continually improved by a ‘teacher.’”

The reference there was to the character of Eliza in George Bernard Shaw’s Pygmalion (more likely recognized by people today as the character in the musical version My Fair Lady). Eliza was hoping to convince others that she was something she was not -- a well-bred lady. Likewise, the program was designed to come across as a human therapist and convince users “that they were having a conversation with a real human being.”

While ELIZA definitely counts as the first chatterbot, the term was only born decades later. In 1994

Michael Maudlin invented a program he named Julia and called the function of a chattering robot “ChatterBot,” and the term soon got shortened to chatbot. 

Chatbots now
While users enjoyed their conversations with those early chatbots, most of us would not mistake them for actual people. But today’s chatbots are a different story. 

They’re able to carry on much more natural-sounding conversations thanks to the application of machine learning, artificial intelligence , and natural language processing. Adding in ML and AI enables them to learn by identifying data patterns and then to apply their knowledge to answer questions and carry out tasks without any human intervention. 

Their greater functionality translates into far more use by businesses and their customers. Today businesses use bots for a range of communication needs, ranging from customer service to product suggestion, scheduling, and various forms of marketing designed to engage the audience.

But the biggest area of growth for chatbots may be in sales. In Chatbots: Vendor Opportunities & Market Forecasts 2020-2024, Juniper Research anticipates consumer retail spend over chatbots will hit $142 billion by 2024, quite a jump from the $2.8 billion we had in 2019.

Juniper also predicts that by 2024 more than half of retail chatbot interactions will go through automatically and that “80% of global consumer spend over chatbots will be attributable to discrete chatbots” that are used through a mobile app rather than a browser. 

On that basis, the report “urges retailers to implement chatbots as part of a wider omnichannel retail strategy in order to maximise their presence on a number of key retail channels.”

Read more in  Choose Your Chatbot Wisely

Now for something a little different

from http://thebluediamondgallery.com/c/communication.html

If you ever look at this blog, you'll notice that the overwhelming majority of posts merely link to my articles on other sites. Once in a rare while, though, I do post about writing or language. This is one of those rare posts, though with a twist. It's not so much my own how-to as a commentary on another.

I started to just write this up on a Google+ post, but it was getting rather long for that.

Now notice the sentence I just wrote before this one. It is true and relevant; however, that is not the only reason I put it in. The same goes for the sentence just before this one. Both the sentences featured two independent clauses put together. In one, they were joined by the coordination conjunction"but" after a comma. In the other, they were joined by the adverbial conjunction "however" with a comma that was placed after a semi-colon. Both "but" and "however" serve to join the two parts of the sentence in a way that signals the relationship of the first part to the second part.

And now on to what I'm referring to. it's Blogspot's "The Ultimate List of Words That Sell." Some points are fine and well known, like focusing on the reader/potential customer rather than the seller.  But some attempts to turn language around are really absurd. For example:


3) And This is a clever replacement for "but" when dealing with criticisms or objections. The word "but" signals to the prospect that you are about to utter a statement that runs counter to what they'd like to hear. "And" by its very nature is inclusive -- you seem to agree even when you're disagreeing. Consider these two examples from Sales Coach Seamus Brown:

"I see that you only have a budget of $50,000, but let me tell you why our system costs $100,000."

"I see that you only have a budget of $50,000, and let me tell you why our system costs $100,000."

Brown points out that the second sentence acknowledges the prospect's budget, while the first steamrolls over the problem and makes the buyer feel ignored. However, she fails to understand how conjunctions connote different meanings. 

Simply linking two contradictory points with the coordinating conjunction "and" does not make the contradiction go away. Using "and," the least specific of linkage words simply makes the sentence weaker. It actually indicates you're just paying lip service to the concerns of the buyer without working out a solution. A much better way to approach the problem is to make an actual selling point here. "I understand that you have set a budget of $50,000 and so would think that our $100,000 system is beyond your reach. But that's not the case because of our flexible payment terms/guaranteed savings/whatever."


Another strikingly stupid example offered in this article is this one:


12) Because

Ellen Langer, a social psychologist and professor at Harvard University, conducted a study where she tested the impact of phrasing on people's willingness to let someone cut them in line. Here are the variations she used:

"Excuse me, I have five pages. May I use the Xerox machine?"

"Excuse me, I have five pages. May I use the Xerox machine because I have to make some copies?"

"Excuse me, I have five pages. May I use the Xerox machine because I'm in a rush?"

While only 70% agreed to let her cut in line when she used the first question, upwards of 90% let her skip when she used either the second and third phrasings. The takeaway? When asking people to do something, always include a reason. Don't just request that your prospect introduce you to another stakeholder or fill out a survey -- explain why you'd like them to take these actions.I can get the rush reason a bit for those who have sympathetic coworkers around, but explaining you want to use the Xerox machine because you need to make copies is absolutely ridiculous. What else would you be using it for -- to make coffee? Really, if I were on that line, I'd be completely turned off by someone trying to cut ahead of me for that because we're all waiting to use the Xerox machine to make copies.
Last and maybe least, in this case, is this:


13) Opportunity

Problems are bound to crop up in the sales process, but that doesn't mean you should acknowledge them as such. The word "problem" has a negative connotation, and can make the prospect feel as if the process is difficult and unpleasant. With this in mind, replace it with more positive words. Instead of saying "no problem," for example, say, "it's my pleasure." "I understand the problem" can become "I see an opportunity to make this run more smoothly.

Perhaps the writer doesn't normally get calls from recruiters. "Opportunity" is their word of choice for job possibilities. That's what most people would associate with it. But this section isn't even about using the word "opportunity," despite the heading. Rather it is about avoiding saying the word "problem," even "no problem."


This is absurd. No one walks away from hearing "no problem" with a negative association unless they are sticklers for saying a more old-fashioned "thank you." Now if the question is about using the word in connection to actual problems, I say, you're better off calling a spade a spade and then offering a real solution because that's what business deals are really all about: finding solutions to problems. There is no progress made by ignoring problems, sweeping them under the rug, or referring them through some ridiculous euphemism in order to try to mitigate their impact. The best selling point for any business offer is to identify the real problem the potential customer is struggling with and to offer a solution that will fix it. Unfortunately, this article will not work as a solution to communication problems.
Related post: http://writewaypro.blogspot.com/2015/08/3-signs-youre-doing-social-media-wrong.html#gpluscomments
and
http://level343.com/2012/08/30/key-questions-for-content-marketing/

the use of @ and # before Twitter

Grawlixes, AKA obscenicons are the short strings of symbols that take the place of profanity. It seems positively quaint in today's world when just about everything is considered fit for print, though you may still see it on rare occasion. I was reminded of the device recently when I read The Pigman. (I checked it out of the library after seeing it among the books on display at the New York Public Library's The ABC of It: Why Children's Books Matter). 
The 1968 novel has two narrators, and the teen boy says that to abstain from using curse words, he will type  “@#$%” or“3@#$%.”  I'm not certain I've ever seen the use of grawlixes in books before, though I have seen the oblique reference, something along the lines of "He called her something I cannot repeat," that you can find in a book lie The Forsyte Sage  or the dashes following a letter like "d___ " that you can find in books by the Brontes.

I have the impression that language in print really loosened up in the 1990s, and this fits with what I found in a 2000 article about the shifting standard for newspapers: "He spent 10 years at the San Antonio Express-News, where he watched 'damn' go from being bleeped out to containing dashes to being fully spelled out. "
BTW If you want to hear grawlixes in a song, there is one here:

Related post http://writewaypro.blogspot.com/2013/08/blame-ship-logs-for-this-word.html

Dictionary updates

The Oxford English Dictionary wants to show itself to be keeping up with trends and trendy words, some of which  you may wish you never heard of. Its blog has post Buzzworthy words added to Oxford Dictionaries Online – squee! has been paraphrased by a number of other online news sources already. But odds are good that this is the only one not to include a picture of Miley Cyrus demonstrating a move in the not Disney approved dance known as twerk (one of the additions).

Those who are interested in the digital currency movement may be happy to see that bitcoin makes it in (in the lower case form).  And in a nod to something that's been practically beaten to death in tech circles, BYOD is there. It's intersting to see how many of these are underlined by Blogger's spell check, about half I'd say, including the title's own "squee" and "selfie," another word we may wish we didn't have to have.
Here's the full list of Oxford's updates.

apols

A/W

babymoon

balayage

bitcoin

blondie

buzzworthy

BYOD

cake pop

chandelier earring

click and collect

dappy

derp

digital detox

double denim

emoji

fauxhawk

FIL

flatform

FOMO

food baby

geek chic

girl crush

grats

guac

hackerspace

Internet of things

jorts

LDR

me time

MOOC

omnishambles

pear cider

phablet

pixie cut

selfie

space tourism

squee

srsly

street food

TL;DR

twerk

unlike 

Blame the ship logs for this word

In my review of Orwell's Down and Out_, I mention that he devotes a whole section to analyzing swear word, though  "bloody"is the only one that makes it into print in the 1933 book; all the others are just represented by dashes in that wonderfully quaint Victorian device. 

 I'm not sure at exactly what point all that's fit to print allowed for more explicit language to be allowed into books, though I'd venture it was after 1970. Stephen Birmingham seems to get a kick out of including one in acronym form, saying that  "For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge" was recorded in that fashion in ships' logbooks next to records of punishment.  See the footnote on p. 271 of The Grandees.
I did a brief Google search and haven't found anyone who says he is mistaken in the etymology of the word.

Jane Austen's influence on English language

A recent Guardian article on Jane Austen as the "queen of modern slang:" fits quite well with a piece I wrote a few months back about the influence of her work on the literature that followed -- as confirmed by big data in The Big Wow-Wow & a Bit of Ivory

The Guardian article informs us that

Oxford professor Charlotte Brewer told the Hay Festival in Hay-on-Wye that while Austen had a great influence on the first Oxford English Dictionary published in 1928, she is quoted 1,640 times in the most recent edition.Entries include 321 phrases from her 1815 novel Emma, which includes ‘dinner-party’ and  ‘brace yourself’. She also came up with ‘if I’ve told you once, I’ve told you 100 times’.

As the piece is very short, though, it adds in a piece of what it considers good news: an upcoming  BBC adaption of Death Comes to Pemberly. I don't usually like the modern writers' takes on the most popular couple of Pride and Prejudice. Someone picked out that book for me once, and I couldn't even bring myself to finish it. That's saying quite a bit. However, I have no objection to the Jane Austen stamps issued by the UK recently. They are little works of art in themselves.

Hopefully

I am old enough to remember being taught not to confuse "hopeful" with "I hope" or "we hope." I was also taught to draw a distinction between "healthy," which is what we hope to be, and "healthful," which was the correct term to describe the foods and activities that would contribute to our health. Ever hear anyone describe a low-fat diet as "healthful" today? No, people call it "healthy," and talk about eating "healthy" all the time. People also rarely use the term "hopefully" to mean "with hope," as they are usually using as a short form of "may it be so.

" A Washington Post article on the AP's official stamp of approval on the adjective "hopefully" functioning as "“It is hoped, we hope,” as it had to succumb to popular usage gave rise to an article in The Atlantic tthat argues that no regrets are necessary. Key quotes from the WP: "After all, 'English was created by barbarians, by a rabble of angry peasants,' McIntyre says. 'Because if it wasn’t, we would still be speaking Anglo-Saxon.' Or worse, French."
 Key quote from the Atlantic: "What this means is that in language and in clothing, there is no single standard any more, except at publications that rely steadfastly on a style guide and have the resources and skilled copy editors to enforce it. Often the issue is not the garment or the word, but how the wearer or user carries it off.

"This is the argument of those who take the attitude of anything goes, so long as meaning is effectively conveyed, against language purists who believe in preserving forms and Latin structures -- the type of people who are offended by split infinitives. I fall out somewhere in between the two extremes of these positions.

Avoid Jargon

Today I shared I took note of a link I saw on Google+ for the language of the excerpts:

"The only sustainable competitive advantage is knowledge of and engagement with customers," wrote Forrester analyst Josh Bernoff. "Brand, manufacturing, distribution and IT are all table stakes. The only source of competitive advantage is the one that can survive technology-fueled disruption, an obsession with understanding, delighting, connecting with and serving customers. In this age, companies that thrive ... are those that tilt their budgets toward customer knowledge and relationships."

Terms like "technology-fueled disruption" sound like something you would see see in "Dilbert." In "Politics and the English Language,"Orwell made the point that jargon gets in the way of clarity and impedes communication. Sometimes that is the point -- to keep the information obscured so that people feel they need your insight. You can market your services to those who are ignorant of which "sustainable competitive advantage" will "survive technology-fueled disruption" by assuring them that you know because you know the terms.

Given that start to my day, I found this list of sales jargon terms to avoid from Inc. a most welcome breath of fresh air. I almost had to laugh because one of the terms mentioned, "low-hanging fruit" was used in an email I received today. I wasn't impressed when I read the email even before I read this article. That may just make these things a it more bearable -- making a game of finding the jargon in business communication, particularly from people who pretend to be experts on writing, as was the case for the email I mentioned.

Related interest: http://eloquentscience.com/2011/04/take-the-pledge-i-wont-use-map-room-jargon/, 

http://www.fizzle-pop.com/home/tag/coporate-jargon

Vintage Vocabulary

If you have a love of words, be sure to read through this post on the words that first appeared in the Oxford English Dictionary back in 1951. That was the year of the nerd, fast food, Vegan, and 401 others. "Nerd" and the word's creation is attributed to none other than Dr. Seuss: "The origin is uncertain, but signs point to the 1950 children’s book If I Ran the Zoo by Dr. Seuss, which uses nerd as the name of a creature, as its inspiration."

The lines have "Nerd" capitalized as a proper name: "And then, just to show them, I'll sail to Katroo / And bring back an It-Kutch, a Preep and a Proo, / A Nerkle, a Nerd and a Seersucker too!"

The word "Vegan" is listed as a proper name, as well; the meaning then was "an alien from a planet orbiting the star Vega," not someone who conforms to a particular type of diet.