> I’m standing outside an Oakland apartment I’m trying to tour, punching the same code into the keypad over and over again. The door won’t budge. My fiancé and I repeatedly call the number provided for “immediate help,” but for 10 minutes, we get nothing but the flat, looping responses of an automated voice.

> Despite the fact that this Jack London Square complex has over 280 units, there is no on-site leasing office and no human agent to answer our questions — or, more importantly, to actually let us in. Instead, the entire process has been outsourced to artificial intelligence. We were trapped in a digital loop until, finally, a human had to intervene and remotely unlock the door for us.

> In my recent East Bay apartment hunt, I encountered AI everywhere I looked, from chipper leasing agents who turned out to be bots to Craigslist scams. While I was surprised to find the landscape so changed from the last time I moved, I quickly learned my experience was not unique.

Having managed 32 units I see why apartment managers want to outsource showings to AI agents if they can. It was easily the biggest time-sink.

Counter point:As a renter, I get faster replies from AI and I don't really mind it, I get the business rational and most of my questions are basic anyways: "what's the pet policy, am I responsible for water and electricity, what's the cost of parking and how many are available".

While the article hints at AI guided tours, I highly doubt that would happen purely to liability or squatting concerns.

Overall the article feels more like a rage piece for anti-ai sentiment rather than a fair constructive criticisms of the prevailing use of AI in the real estate industry