Story
number one…
A
few pieces of mail arrived recently at my home as well as the
homes of family members. What I saw on the outside of them concerned
me.
A
catalogue was one of the items retrieved. Label said it was for
someone that had passed away several years ago. We knew she had
ordered from the company, so the idea of a catalogue wasn’t too
strange on the surface. What did catch my attention was three
pieces of information presented in the labeling setup.
First,
it referenced a customer number. The identifying of it as a customer
number suggests that it was part of an account record, which would
mean information exclusive to this person.
Second,
it included a promotional code. Inside the pages were notes saying
that the promotion was essentially a reward for her long-time
loyalty to the company.
Third,
the second line in the mailing address area indicated that it
was for her “or current resident”.
Umm…
A
company sends something out indicating that it has been personalized
based on the account of frequent customer, with rewards associated
with that business, but if anyone that receives it wants to use
it that would be fine.
So,
the current resident can essentially act like the intended recipient?
Sounds a bit falsification of identity to me, but ok. Moving on…
Story
number two…
Person
I know bought a car. It was totaled after an accident. The incident
ended up being brought to the attention of the dealership he purchased
it from when some arrangements involving that very vehicle needed
to be wrapped up.
Yup.
He went, personally, down to the dealership and sat in an office
and discussed that the vehicle was no more. Officially off the
road and gone.
This
was the only transaction he had ever had with this brand of vehicle
and this dealership. He had made no purchases there previously
and has made no purchases there since.
About
a year after everything was finished, a text message arrived.
It was from the dealership, explained they hadn’t seen him in
a while and would like to offer him a discounted oil change service.
A few hours later, a second text arrived, as a nudge of sorts
to let him know it was a limited time offer.
Story
number three…
I
recently updated some information on a variety of websites, including
a few specializing in employment, job postings and professional
networking. The unsolicited emails began arriving soon after.
One
person has emailed me multiple times about opportunities that
may interest me. She explained that she had thoroughly reviewed
my information and was impressed with my qualifications. In the
last line, her email included the condition that I had to be a
resident of Canada in order to apply. You know, a country that…
while lovely and pleasant… is most definitely not the one I list
as the country I reside in.
Another
company continues to express interest in employing me as a registered
nurse or an anesthesiologist. (This one requires a bit of dot
connecting, because as you may have figured out, I have never
been a nurse or a doctor or in any way administered anesthesia.)
Years ago, I did work in a few places related to the medical field.
One of them was an operating room. Somehow, this company’s software
had to be interpreting the wording in my work history in a way
that licensed me as a nurse. Expand from there.
As
if those two examples weren’t enough to get you wondering about
software, quality reviews, algorithms and artificial intelligence,
I have one more.
In
the past week, a person has emailed me three times about contract
work that matches my special skills and talents. Her clients were
looking for individuals and businesses just like mine. Further
details showed she was looking for acrobats, gymnasts, balloon
artists and more to appear at a private outdoor party, a business
conference, and a second private party that was indoors at a home.
Unlike the anesthesia opportunity, I have yet to sort out how
this idea was matched to me.
At
the heart of these three stories is a very concerning foundation.
People have access to our information. And that information is
being used in strikingly haphazard and ill-informed fashion. At
best, the software development is off. At worst, it’s just horrible
stuff from people that have no ability to troubleshoot, problem-solve,
or conceptualize around what’s resulting.
A
deceased person’s account and rewards being offered to the current
resident. Services for a car that hasn’t been on the road in a
year and was reported as totaled to the company offering the services.
Employment opportunities being discussed that have no connection
at all with any of the qualifications on display.
Even
when I joke around or complain about advancements in the world
and specifically technology, the reality is I have great respect
for the folks leading most of these developments. They are asking
questions, exploring opportunities, and creating products that
are literally changing the world and how we experience things.
All of that said, these accomplishments make it even more striking
when they are so obviously used poorly. An observant “maybe we
should be careful about” idea expressed at a marketing meeting,
or, three or four pieces of data entered and a few options enabled
by someone in the IT department.
What
might be even more scary however, isn’t how easily they could
be cleaned up. Instead, it’s that they haven’t been cleaned up.
Because that implies companies and individuals that should be
capable of doing better just aren’t hitting minimum expectations
and have no desire to clean up collateral mess. It’s confirmation
that no matter how many steps we take forward, the garbage-in-means-garbage-out
user error limitations can bring it crashing in embarrassing and
reckless ways.
Now,
if you’ll excuse me, I have to get the oil changed on my car before
heading to a party where I’ll take a stack of my published books
and attempt to juggle. At least I will, once I find out how much
the job pays.