6 ms·

AI, Apple and Google

174 points by kawera 10y ago

zatkin 10y ago
I get the feeling that if AI gets sprinkled all over iOS, it's going to be annoying because the device will try and suggest actions that you may not want. That turns away users because the device is trying to predict too much.
sahaj 10y ago
One bold difference it seems between the companies is that Apple idea cycle lives around the release of the iPhone or hardware, though may change in the future. Google, on the other hand, is the complete opposite. The idea cycle is always ongoing (think core app updates) and hardware is an afterthought or accompanies later. This likely will lead to different outcomes for AI implementation for each respective company. "the promise of extracting new insight from all sorts of data pools will not always be met." While certainly true, we can all agree that not having access to these data pools is a disadvantage.
zeta0134 10y ago
Serious question: is any group working on a voice activated digital assistant for the privacy minded? One that can operate without a connection to a backend network where it must necessarily transmit recordings of your voice to perform queries? Or is good speech recognition just that intensive, such that common consumer devices really can't handle the load?
- honkhonkpants 10y ago
  Google's voice recognition usually runs on the device. It works fine on my phone even in "airplane mode".
- ChuckMcM 10y ago
  Speech recognition is easily trainable outside of the cloud, general purpose recognition is still a bit dicey (all the possible accents that you have to deal with). And even in the cloud its useless.
- russjr08 10y ago
  I don't think speech recognition is the problem, but rather natural language processing. Google Now for instance can recognize me saying "Set a timer" or "Turn on WiFi" even while airplane mode is enabled, but start adding in context (such as "Who is Bob Marley?" "When was he born?") and it probably wouldn't work.
- aksx 10y ago
  Not exactly what you are looking for but https://mycroft.ai/ https://mycroft.ai/
- dharma1 10y ago
  For an AI assistant, check mycroft. Note that there is a lot more to an AI assistant than speech recognition. For just speech recognition you can use Kaldi. Its not hard to deploy on your own server. I've been meaning to package it for Ubuntu phones but haven't gotten around to it yet. Pretty good speech recognition is doable on current mobile hardware. The trained models are large and there is still work ahead shifting the inference to mobile GPUs but it's doable. It also helps if it's integrated into the OS, if you want it to work invisibly with multiple apps.
  - walterbell 10y ago
    See also Protonet Zoe, https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/protonet-zoe-start-your-secure-smart-home-now https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/protonet-zoe-start-your-s... with some code at http://experimental-platform.github.io http://experimental-platform.github.io and project background at http://www.curbed.com/2016/3/28/11317418/zoe-smart-home-technology-hub-data-privacy http://www.curbed.com/2016/3/28/11317418/zoe-smart-home-tech....
- oulipo 10y ago
  We are working on exactly this at https://snips.ai https://snips.ai ! Check this blog post which explains what we are building: https://medium.com/@javimaker/what-apples-privacy-announcement-means-to-you-and-why-it-s-important-we-push-beyond-df7a6ec1c93b#.fy5m3nsxx https://medium.com/@javimaker/what-apples-privacy-announceme... Snips organizes all your information and make it searchable intelligently and actionable fast (it predicts your recurrent patterns so you can order a Uber in one tap)
  - adyus 10y ago
    Are you playing with iOS 10's SFSpeechRecognizer & AVSpeechSynthesizer yet? Looking forward to Snips doing much more!
- skoocda 10y ago
  It depends on your use case. Full conversational speech recognition can't adequately fit in memory on a mobile device, but smaller packages like PocketSphinx can. Kaldi, also mentioned in the comments, can serve various use cases, but again it's limited by the lexicon size. If we're talking Google or Siri-level, it's not fitting onto a device in the near future.
eridius 10y ago
> After all, Apple Maps has 3x more users than Google Maps on the iPhone and Google Maps is definitely better. That's a pretty bold statement. When Apple Maps first launched this was certainly true. But Apple Maps has improved significantly since then, to the point where whether Apple Maps or Google Maps is better depends on where you are and what data you're trying to find.
- sgslo 10y ago
  In San Antonio, Texas, last week, I used Apple Maps to search for 'two brothers bbq'. The actual name of the establishment is 'two bros bbq' or similar. Apple maps decided to give me results from Europe as the first few in the result set. Why in the world would I want directions to Europe while in Texas? Google maps, of course, picked it up on the first try. One other thing - while in navigation mode with Apple maps, try panning the map around, or even zooming. Let me know how that goes.
  - drakenot 10y ago
    I think they announced that the panning/zooming issue is resolved with the Apple Maps in iOS10. So hopefully that will be one less annoyance.
    - asd 10y ago
      >I think they announced that the panning/zooming issue is resolved with the Apple Maps in iOS10. I wish this were the case. I'm running the iOS 10 beta on a 6S+ and gave Maps several seconds to load this area of upstate NY. http://i.imgur.com/wi7HRqe.jpg http://i.imgur.com/wi7HRqe.jpg The dark gray grid persists. Yea, it's the first beta, but I have mostly only noticed changes in the interface and not the actual map data.
      - glhaynes 10y ago
        I believe that's a different problem than was being discussed, which was that while driving directions are being shown on Maps on pre-iOS 10, it maddeningly only lets you pan/zoom a slight amount before snapping back to a zoomed-in, myopic-feeling view of your current location.
bouchier 10y ago
Nokia & RIM dismissed touchscreens not smartphones, geeze.
- honkhonkpants 10y ago
  Nokia marketed ghastly resistive touchscreens running Maemo for years (at least from 2005 to 2011).
pazimzadeh 10y ago
Apple has a knack for choosing the right interface for the task at hand (digital crown, multitouch, iPod wheel, mouse, etc). Are there any examples of Alphabet succesfully coming up with an original interface to solve a real problem other than google.com?
- sangnoir 10y ago
  > Are there any examples of Alphabet succesfully coming up with an original interface to solve a real problem other than google.com I'd say Google Now cards are pretty original interface and they are downright magical. Google already knows the time & place of an appointment I have across town, it also knows that traffic is getting pretty bad on the possible routes, so it tells me (without me asking) to leave much earlier than I had planned.
- jedikv 10y ago
  Well multitouch was available on the first gen android handsets but Apple's patents prevented them from using it for a couple of years.
peyton 10y ago
Another big difference is Apple starts with how the product should feel and works backwards. This is tough to reconcile with AI because AI sometimes fails. When your device doesn't do what you want, it feels bad. When you read an article about your HooliPhone handing over data to government agencies, it feels bad. When you go to the Hooli Store to demo a HooliPhone, ask it to show you photos of your dog before her last haircut, and get no results, you feel less enthusiastic about owning a HooliPhone. The solution Apple uses is to add constraints. Apple doesn't need AI to guess where you want to save a file on iOS because there isn't an exposed file system. There are some areas where simplification isn't possible, like mapping and voice assistants. These happen to be two of the most widely panned Apple features. The strategically tricky thing about Google's pivot to AI is that there's a confirmation bias against adding constraints. This may result in impressive demos that just don't feel right in the real world.
- askafriend 10y ago
  This is an incredibly insightful comment and I thank you for sharing your thoughts. You've put into words something I've been feeling and trying to express for a while. "How does it make you feel?" is an incredibly important question and unfortunately for Google, something you can't really quantify (see: Circles and Google+). Actually Circles and Google+ is a great example that we can look at to see how the feel of a product can help lead to it's eventual downfall. When someone "friend requested" you on Facebook, you had a simple decision to make: "Is this person a friend of mine?". While everyone has their own definition of "friend", it's pretty easy to make a decision and sometimes you're gonna have to say "no" but that's fine; it feels bad for a short amount of time. With Circles and Google+, you had to ask yourself: "Do I know this person?", "Is this person a friend of mine?", "But how close am I to them really?", "Should I add them to the family circle? but they're not really family...", and so on. The worst part is, you had to do this all upfront. When you have to reflect about that many things about a human being, it starts to become far more negative than it has to be. And if you're going thru this experience all the time, then good luck. Now Facebook has it's issues too, but see how such a subtly negative "feel" to a product can be real friction. I recently heard someone make the argument that while a lot of the Google AI tech is impressive, they haven't really been able to build something that feels that useful as a product in the real world. It's an impressive tech demo for sure at Google's conferences, but once the tech makes it to Android, they don't really become used all that much. Take Now-On-Tap, for example. It was a highly touted feature on Android: an incredible ability to rip context from whatever you were looking at on your phone. Now you hardly see it mentioned and people don't really seem to use it that much. Google Now stuff is cool too, but besides airplane reminders and calendar integration, is it really that useful day to day? I suspect most people would say no. Look...all of the stuff Google does is very cool and very impressive...but it just lack a certain human feel to it. A certain simplicity in how something is useful. These AI experiences are not predictably useful. They aren't experiences you can rely on. Now I'm certainly generalizing a bit, and I know someone will come up with some counterexamples (please do! I'm curious), but I think you understand the sentiment I'm trying to convey: that Apple just understands the user from a different vantage point than Google simply by asking how something make them feel (and Jony Ive has emphasized this question time and time again, though he sometimes gets made fun of for his overzealousness).
YeGoblynQueenne 10y ago
Hype harms the brain. >> In the last couple of years, magic started happening in AI. Techniques started working, or started working much better, and new techniques have appeared, especially around machine learning ('ML'), and when those were applied to some long-standing and important use cases we started getting dramatically better results. For example, the error rates for image recognition, speech recognition and natural language processing have collapsed to close to human rates, at least on some measurements. Let's see. a) Magic? Really? b) "The last couple of years" goes back to 2014. Machine learning's big break into the mainstream happened at least in 2012, when a conv net won ILSVCR [1]. Did the op not look further back before reporting on all this "magic"? c) Unfortunately no "new techniques" have appeared. Convolutional neural networks date from 1988 [2]. LSTM Recurrent Neural Networks were first described in 1997 [3]. Machine learning in general is pretty much as old as GOFAI, with the earliest connectionist ideas detailed in the 1950s [4]. All this is really well known and understood and not at all controversial- Geoff Hinton himself is on record explaining that the recent boom is due to more data and more processing power (I can dig up a link if there is any doubt). d) "the error rates for image recognition, speech recognition and natural language processing have collapsed to close to human rates, at least on some measurements" In image recognition, the big success story is the ImageNet results detailed above. For speech processing I'm told there's been a big jump also, someone else could give an example. For natural language processing: not in your wildest dreams. We're nowhere near "close to human rates" in any way, shape or form, unless you count very restricted results like how good this or that natural language parser does on a one-million word corpus like the Brown corpus. Unfortunately, that counts for nothing. Now, most of that is stuff you can find easily on wikipedia with a bit of reading. There's absolutely no reason to waste peoples' times with disinformation and pointless overhyping. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ImageNet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ImageNet [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convolutional_neural_network#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convolutional_neural_network#H... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recurrent_neural_network#Long_short_term_memory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recurrent_neural_network#Long_... [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptron#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptron#History
xbmcuser 10y ago
Apple has more map users than Google maps on iOS simply because you can't change defaults
- stephenr 10y ago
  Everyone on HN always rattles of the "perfect is the enemy off good" mantra when it comes to getting something out there, so they can iterate. A major fucking company takes the same approach, to provide its massive user base with additional functionality and improved privacy, improves the service over time, and people still want to claim it's all about "no one uses it by choice" Nothing prevents people going to the App Store to get the google maps app or using the browser version, and yet for millions of people the apple maps app is sufficient. It works, it's easy to use. If you don't want to use it you don't have to, but Jesus fucking Christ don't assume your experience and mindset is the same as every other person on the planet.
  - spot 10y ago
    but every application that wants to open maps is required to to use the apple map application, so google is locked out of the ecosystem. this is what bugs people, not releasing early and improving.
    - stephenr 10y ago
      How many apps open maps? I've always seen apps embed a map, sometimes with apples, sometimes with google's
dave2000 10y ago
"For example, the error rates for image recognition, speech recognition and natural language processing have collapsed to close to human rates, at least on some measurements." I've always laughed at how poor speech recognition is. I know it's probably a hard problem, and I know that sometimes you can transcribe a whole sentence without error. But how long will it be until it will just work; I'll be able to just speak normally, in English, and have it transcribe without error? Microsoft put up a page recently with a demo and prices, but it was a lot worse than the last one I tried.
Artlav 10y ago
> computers don't ask them anymore: > Where do you want to save this file? > Which photos do you want to delete to save space? I dearly hope not. These questions are too important to decide by the computers at their current level.

174 points by kawera 10y ago

I get the feeling that if AI gets sprinkled all over iOS, it's going to be annoying because the device will try and suggest actions that you may not want. That turns away users because the device is trying to predict too much.

sahaj 10y ago

One bold difference it seems between the companies is that Apple idea cycle lives around the release of the iPhone or hardware, though may change in the future. Google, on the other hand, is the complete opposite. The idea cycle is always ongoing (think core app updates) and hardware is an afterthought or accompanies later. This likely will lead to different outcomes for AI implementation for each respective company. "the promise of extracting new insight from all sorts of data pools will not always be met." While certainly true, we can all agree that not having access to these data pools is a disadvantage.

zeta0134 10y ago

Serious question: is any group working on a voice activated digital assistant for the privacy minded? One that can operate without a connection to a backend network where it must necessarily transmit recordings of your voice to perform queries? Or is good speech recognition just that intensive, such that common consumer devices really can't handle the load?

honkhonkpants 10y ago
Google's voice recognition usually runs on the device. It works fine on my phone even in "airplane mode".
ChuckMcM 10y ago
Speech recognition is easily trainable outside of the cloud, general purpose recognition is still a bit dicey (all the possible accents that you have to deal with). And even in the cloud its useless.
russjr08 10y ago
I don't think speech recognition is the problem, but rather natural language processing. Google Now for instance can recognize me saying "Set a timer" or "Turn on WiFi" even while airplane mode is enabled, but start adding in context (such as "Who is Bob Marley?" "When was he born?") and it probably wouldn't work.
aksx 10y ago
Not exactly what you are looking for but https://mycroft.ai/ https://mycroft.ai/
dharma1 10y ago
For an AI assistant, check mycroft. Note that there is a lot more to an AI assistant than speech recognition. For just speech recognition you can use Kaldi. Its not hard to deploy on your own server. I've been meaning to package it for Ubuntu phones but haven't gotten around to it yet. Pretty good speech recognition is doable on current mobile hardware. The trained models are large and there is still work ahead shifting the inference to mobile GPUs but it's doable. It also helps if it's integrated into the OS, if you want it to work invisibly with multiple apps.
- walterbell 10y ago
  See also Protonet Zoe, https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/protonet-zoe-start-your-secure-smart-home-now https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/protonet-zoe-start-your-s... with some code at http://experimental-platform.github.io http://experimental-platform.github.io and project background at http://www.curbed.com/2016/3/28/11317418/zoe-smart-home-technology-hub-data-privacy http://www.curbed.com/2016/3/28/11317418/zoe-smart-home-tech....
oulipo 10y ago
We are working on exactly this at https://snips.ai https://snips.ai ! Check this blog post which explains what we are building: https://medium.com/@javimaker/what-apples-privacy-announcement-means-to-you-and-why-it-s-important-we-push-beyond-df7a6ec1c93b#.fy5m3nsxx https://medium.com/@javimaker/what-apples-privacy-announceme... Snips organizes all your information and make it searchable intelligently and actionable fast (it predicts your recurrent patterns so you can order a Uber in one tap)
- adyus 10y ago
  Are you playing with iOS 10's SFSpeechRecognizer & AVSpeechSynthesizer yet? Looking forward to Snips doing much more!
skoocda 10y ago
It depends on your use case. Full conversational speech recognition can't adequately fit in memory on a mobile device, but smaller packages like PocketSphinx can. Kaldi, also mentioned in the comments, can serve various use cases, but again it's limited by the lexicon size. If we're talking Google or Siri-level, it's not fitting onto a device in the near future.

eridius 10y ago

> After all, Apple Maps has 3x more users than Google Maps on the iPhone and Google Maps is definitely better. That's a pretty bold statement. When Apple Maps first launched this was certainly true. But Apple Maps has improved significantly since then, to the point where whether Apple Maps or Google Maps is better depends on where you are and what data you're trying to find.

sgslo 10y ago
In San Antonio, Texas, last week, I used Apple Maps to search for 'two brothers bbq'. The actual name of the establishment is 'two bros bbq' or similar. Apple maps decided to give me results from Europe as the first few in the result set. Why in the world would I want directions to Europe while in Texas? Google maps, of course, picked it up on the first try. One other thing - while in navigation mode with Apple maps, try panning the map around, or even zooming. Let me know how that goes.
- drakenot 10y ago
  I think they announced that the panning/zooming issue is resolved with the Apple Maps in iOS10. So hopefully that will be one less annoyance.
  - asd 10y ago
    >I think they announced that the panning/zooming issue is resolved with the Apple Maps in iOS10. I wish this were the case. I'm running the iOS 10 beta on a 6S+ and gave Maps several seconds to load this area of upstate NY. http://i.imgur.com/wi7HRqe.jpg http://i.imgur.com/wi7HRqe.jpg The dark gray grid persists. Yea, it's the first beta, but I have mostly only noticed changes in the interface and not the actual map data.
    - glhaynes 10y ago
      I believe that's a different problem than was being discussed, which was that while driving directions are being shown on Maps on pre-iOS 10, it maddeningly only lets you pan/zoom a slight amount before snapping back to a zoomed-in, myopic-feeling view of your current location.

bouchier 10y ago

Nokia & RIM dismissed touchscreens not smartphones, geeze.

honkhonkpants 10y ago
Nokia marketed ghastly resistive touchscreens running Maemo for years (at least from 2005 to 2011).

pazimzadeh 10y ago

Apple has a knack for choosing the right interface for the task at hand (digital crown, multitouch, iPod wheel, mouse, etc). Are there any examples of Alphabet succesfully coming up with an original interface to solve a real problem other than google.com?

sangnoir 10y ago
> Are there any examples of Alphabet succesfully coming up with an original interface to solve a real problem other than google.com I'd say Google Now cards are pretty original interface and they are downright magical. Google already knows the time & place of an appointment I have across town, it also knows that traffic is getting pretty bad on the possible routes, so it tells me (without me asking) to leave much earlier than I had planned.
jedikv 10y ago
Well multitouch was available on the first gen android handsets but Apple's patents prevented them from using it for a couple of years.

peyton 10y ago

Another big difference is Apple starts with how the product should feel and works backwards. This is tough to reconcile with AI because AI sometimes fails. When your device doesn't do what you want, it feels bad. When you read an article about your HooliPhone handing over data to government agencies, it feels bad. When you go to the Hooli Store to demo a HooliPhone, ask it to show you photos of your dog before her last haircut, and get no results, you feel less enthusiastic about owning a HooliPhone. The solution Apple uses is to add constraints. Apple doesn't need AI to guess where you want to save a file on iOS because there isn't an exposed file system. There are some areas where simplification isn't possible, like mapping and voice assistants. These happen to be two of the most widely panned Apple features. The strategically tricky thing about Google's pivot to AI is that there's a confirmation bias against adding constraints. This may result in impressive demos that just don't feel right in the real world.

askafriend 10y ago
This is an incredibly insightful comment and I thank you for sharing your thoughts. You've put into words something I've been feeling and trying to express for a while. "How does it make you feel?" is an incredibly important question and unfortunately for Google, something you can't really quantify (see: Circles and Google+). Actually Circles and Google+ is a great example that we can look at to see how the feel of a product can help lead to it's eventual downfall. When someone "friend requested" you on Facebook, you had a simple decision to make: "Is this person a friend of mine?". While everyone has their own definition of "friend", it's pretty easy to make a decision and sometimes you're gonna have to say "no" but that's fine; it feels bad for a short amount of time. With Circles and Google+, you had to ask yourself: "Do I know this person?", "Is this person a friend of mine?", "But how close am I to them really?", "Should I add them to the family circle? but they're not really family...", and so on. The worst part is, you had to do this all upfront. When you have to reflect about that many things about a human being, it starts to become far more negative than it has to be. And if you're going thru this experience all the time, then good luck. Now Facebook has it's issues too, but see how such a subtly negative "feel" to a product can be real friction. I recently heard someone make the argument that while a lot of the Google AI tech is impressive, they haven't really been able to build something that feels that useful as a product in the real world. It's an impressive tech demo for sure at Google's conferences, but once the tech makes it to Android, they don't really become used all that much. Take Now-On-Tap, for example. It was a highly touted feature on Android: an incredible ability to rip context from whatever you were looking at on your phone. Now you hardly see it mentioned and people don't really seem to use it that much. Google Now stuff is cool too, but besides airplane reminders and calendar integration, is it really that useful day to day? I suspect most people would say no. Look...all of the stuff Google does is very cool and very impressive...but it just lack a certain human feel to it. A certain simplicity in how something is useful. These AI experiences are not predictably useful. They aren't experiences you can rely on. Now I'm certainly generalizing a bit, and I know someone will come up with some counterexamples (please do! I'm curious), but I think you understand the sentiment I'm trying to convey: that Apple just understands the user from a different vantage point than Google simply by asking how something make them feel (and Jony Ive has emphasized this question time and time again, though he sometimes gets made fun of for his overzealousness).

YeGoblynQueenne 10y ago

Hype harms the brain. >> In the last couple of years, magic started happening in AI. Techniques started working, or started working much better, and new techniques have appeared, especially around machine learning ('ML'), and when those were applied to some long-standing and important use cases we started getting dramatically better results. For example, the error rates for image recognition, speech recognition and natural language processing have collapsed to close to human rates, at least on some measurements. Let's see. a) Magic? Really? b) "The last couple of years" goes back to 2014. Machine learning's big break into the mainstream happened at least in 2012, when a conv net won ILSVCR [1]. Did the op not look further back before reporting on all this "magic"? c) Unfortunately no "new techniques" have appeared. Convolutional neural networks date from 1988 [2]. LSTM Recurrent Neural Networks were first described in 1997 [3]. Machine learning in general is pretty much as old as GOFAI, with the earliest connectionist ideas detailed in the 1950s [4]. All this is really well known and understood and not at all controversial- Geoff Hinton himself is on record explaining that the recent boom is due to more data and more processing power (I can dig up a link if there is any doubt). d) "the error rates for image recognition, speech recognition and natural language processing have collapsed to close to human rates, at least on some measurements" In image recognition, the big success story is the ImageNet results detailed above. For speech processing I'm told there's been a big jump also, someone else could give an example. For natural language processing: not in your wildest dreams. We're nowhere near "close to human rates" in any way, shape or form, unless you count very restricted results like how good this or that natural language parser does on a one-million word corpus like the Brown corpus. Unfortunately, that counts for nothing. Now, most of that is stuff you can find easily on wikipedia with a bit of reading. There's absolutely no reason to waste peoples' times with disinformation and pointless overhyping. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ImageNet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ImageNet [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convolutional_neural_network#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convolutional_neural_network#H... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recurrent_neural_network#Long_short_term_memory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recurrent_neural_network#Long_... [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptron#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptron#History

xbmcuser 10y ago

Apple has more map users than Google maps on iOS simply because you can't change defaults

stephenr 10y ago
Everyone on HN always rattles of the "perfect is the enemy off good" mantra when it comes to getting something out there, so they can iterate. A major fucking company takes the same approach, to provide its massive user base with additional functionality and improved privacy, improves the service over time, and people still want to claim it's all about "no one uses it by choice" Nothing prevents people going to the App Store to get the google maps app or using the browser version, and yet for millions of people the apple maps app is sufficient. It works, it's easy to use. If you don't want to use it you don't have to, but Jesus fucking Christ don't assume your experience and mindset is the same as every other person on the planet.
- spot 10y ago
  but every application that wants to open maps is required to to use the apple map application, so google is locked out of the ecosystem. this is what bugs people, not releasing early and improving.
  - stephenr 10y ago
    How many apps open maps? I've always seen apps embed a map, sometimes with apples, sometimes with google's

dave2000 10y ago

"For example, the error rates for image recognition, speech recognition and natural language processing have collapsed to close to human rates, at least on some measurements." I've always laughed at how poor speech recognition is. I know it's probably a hard problem, and I know that sometimes you can transcribe a whole sentence without error. But how long will it be until it will just work; I'll be able to just speak normally, in English, and have it transcribe without error? Microsoft put up a page recently with a demo and prices, but it was a lot worse than the last one I tried.

Artlav 10y ago

> computers don't ask them anymore: > Where do you want to save this file? > Which photos do you want to delete to save space? I dearly hope not. These questions are too important to decide by the computers at their current level.