Have you noticed that those chatbots that give you a list of options and make you type a number or letter are basically just a website disguised as a conversation? Those button-driven dialogues, menus, and pre-written replies are chatbots without AI. That’s why they always stick to a rigid framework.
Is that a bad thing? Not at all. A rigid chatbot can be very useful: it works with structured data, never improvises, and always gives the same answer. The weak point is that it shifts part of the effort to the customer, just like those endless phone menus where you keep pressing options until you reach what you need.
A chatbot with AI, on the other hand, understands free text, interprets intentions, and responds with flexibility. But — and here’s the catch — if you don’t prepare it properly, it can invent, confuse, or reply with nonsense.
And that leads us to the paradox: we often put more human intelligence into building a chatbot without AI than into preparing one with AI. The “smart” appearance of the second one tricks us into underestimating the work it requires — which is a mistake.
The conclusion:
- Without AI: robust and rigid, it demands more from the customer and handles basics well, but it can be frustrating.
- With AI: flexible and powerful, but double-edged. With dedicated implementation it becomes a diligent, reliable, and low-cost assistant; without proper preparation, it can play against you.