3175: Website Task Flowchart

2025-12-02T08:30:51Z

2001:4C4E:1C14:9800:F167:89F7:6CCE:353B: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 3175
| date = December 1, 2025
| title = Website Task Flowchart
| image = website_task_flowchart_2x.png
| imagesize = 333x683px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Tired of waiting on hold? Use our website to chat with one of our live agents, who are available to produce words at you 24/7!
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|This page was created by a live agent producing words at you. Don't remove this notice too soon.}}
This is a flowchart comic. It pertains to show how to accomplish a task on a generic website.

The first step, applicable to many (but not all) interactive sites, is to actually attempt to log into the website. In most cases, successfully doing this might be taken as read (or at least the resulting success itself is), but these instructions make a specific point of leading you into a 'troubleshooting' section if it fails.

If the logging in does not fail (or no longer does!), the second step reduces ''everything'' that follows down to a single instruction to attempt to do whatever it is that you're actually trying to do. The only compromise given, is that it again leads you into a 'troubleshooting' section if this rather vagure endeavor leads to failure.

If you have managed to both work and log in (perhaps eventually, see below), its last stage is merely a congratulatory message. At this point, you have succeeded in the task that the flowchart was supposedly helping you to complete.

So far, so useless.

It is when you have problems that the flowchart gives you additional instructions. In both the case of being unable to log in ''and'' being unable to do the whatever-it-is that you're trying to do, the chart guides you to the perhaps just as unhelpful troubleshooting directive for the respective issue. In line with the generalist brevity of the other instructions, this merely consists of the instruction to troubleshoot the issue, without providing any actual guidance as to what specific approaches to take in that troubleshooting. The only concession given to the complexity that might be involved is that it explicitly states that you will have to spend several hours doing this (without any actual indication what it is that you'll be doing for several hours). Following which, each diversion queries whether any of whatever-you-did worked. The good news, if that all did work out in the end, is that you've now back on the the path that ultimately leads to the trite congratulations for being successful.

However, failing either troubleshooting dumps you into a "give up"-themed flow, sending you down the route of calling the Customer Service line. This proceeds to uphold exactly the same standards of helpfulness as the rest of the flowchart, by intoducing you to the inevitable '{{w|On hold messaging|hold message}}' which it fully expects (probably correctly) to contain an automated suggestion that you try to use the website ''instead'' of calling them directly.

As, by now, you have probably been wrestling with the website already for several hours (perhaps twice over!), the flowchart does not actually present any proper 'advice', merely the prediction that the entire frustrating episode will then have you throwing both computer and the phone handset away, before even hearing the full message. Specifically, into the sea, which is a drastic (and possibly {{w|Landlocked country#Doubly landlocked|non-trivial}}) action to take. It should at least, however, formally end this attempt to accomplish your troublesome task upon the troublesome website.

The title text is yet another part of the typical automated support-line message, perhaps for anyone who had not followed the flowchart as faithfully. In this further recorded suggestion, you may be encouraged to visit the website's 'live chat' function, a fairly recent development that combines the best/worst<sup>[delete as inapplicable]</sup> aspects of both online and phone-line support. "Live agents" is an ambiguous term, ''possibly'' being true support-line staff with all the answers to your questions. However, as it often leverages the ambiguity of typed-text communications, it often remains ambiguous as to whether you have a single (and qualified) person assisting you, the conversation may well be passed around various rather less than knowledgeable staff who are merely following a 'script' that follows a flowchart process (hopefully more useful than this one) to let them give more expert advice than they might be capable of. Or, increasingly, an automated/AI text-processing backend that attempts to understand your queries and follows a similar script-based rabbit-hole towards whatever conclusion it is capable of (including {{wiktionary|triage|triaging}} your initial responses before even allowing 'a real human', with the necessary skills, to be bothered by your request).

The claim that they can "produce words at you" might be {{w|English as a second or foreign language|slightly mangled English}}, or a blatantly honest admission that any conversation you have will be with {{w|Large language model|a potentially inexaustible AI system}}. At its worst, the words you receive might have {{w|Markov chain|even less understanding}} of your problem, as merely being able to send even [[1068: Swiftkey|vaguely logical sequences of words]] might be worse than useless. Additionally, giving random vague sequences of words would be very infuriating and cause the user to throw the laptop into the ocean.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Don't remove this notice too soon.}}
Doing a task using a company or organization's website:
{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Flowcharts]]
[[Category:Internet]]

Talk:3175: Website Task Flowchart

2025-12-02T08:30:11Z

2001:4C4E:1C14:9800:F167:89F7:6CCE:353B:

> who are available to produce words at you 24/7!

Is "produce words at you" an AI reference? -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 19:40, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
:I think it is likely an AI reference. —[[User:Theusaf|theusaf]] ([[User talk:Theusaf|talk]]) 19:46, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
:I tend to agree, but it does say "live agents" earlier so it could also be a reference to live but non-native language speakers in a foreign call center. [[Special:Contributions/47.248.235.170|47.248.235.170]] 20:24, 1 December 2025 (UTC)Pat
::Real-time bots are live but not ''alive''. [[Special:Contributions/64.114.211.79|64.114.211.79]] 21:26, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
:::I feel like for some certain definition of 'alive' bots could be considered alive. They are (kind of?)sentient, which just means they can think. 'sapient', on the other hand, means that he/she/they is self-aware. While it is generally considered that bots are not live, this may not always be true. Depending on how advanced AI ever get, (most probable answer: not very) they may one day be able to evolve and reproduce. They already perform metabolism and homeostasis (power and fans). They have structure, they are made of computer chips (im not a computer nerd, so this probably isn't accurate). They react to stimuli. Honestly, all that needs to let them be considered 'alive' is for them to be able to make other AI and for those AI to be slightly different, which they kind of already can. Besides being made of metal, there is no real reason to claim that an AI isn't 'alive', that's just what mainstream media claims. ([[User:Kirinhatchi|Kirinhatch]]|[[User talk:Kirinhatchi|talk]])--[[User:Kirinhatchi|Kirinhatchi]] ([[User talk:Kirinhatchi|talk]]) 01:05, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
:::They're certainly live as in "live TV" and/or a "live electricity socket", as in active/functional/doing-what-they-are-designed-to-do. [[Special:Contributions/78.144.255.82|78.144.255.82]] 01:44, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

wow second commenter --[[User:LazyTiger0203|LazyTiger0203]] ([[User talk:LazyTiger0203|talk]]) 19:45, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Is Randall <em>just now</em> finding out about this?!? What sequestered Internet space has he been hiding in? I want. Of course it's probably gone now. [[Special:Contributions/205.175.118.2|205.175.118.2]] 20:20, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

I have fixed several spelling errors. [[User:RadiantRainwing|RadiantRainwing]] ([[User talk:RadiantRainwing|talk]]) 02:49, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

I would replace the "Throw electronics into sea" step with "As soon as the call is no longer on hold, say the website the hold message suggests ''is not working''". Throwing devices into sea causes e-waste. [[Special:Contributions/2001:4C4E:1C14:9800:F167:89F7:6CCE:353B|2001:4C4E:1C14:9800:F167:89F7:6CCE:353B]] 08:30, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

3175: Website Task Flowchart

Talk:3175: Website Task Flowchart