> The problem with voice reco isn't recognition technology, that works fine, it is with having computers understand what the hell to do with the voice. If I ty

> The problem with voice reco isn't recognition technology, that works fine, it is with having computers understand what the hell to do with the voice. If I type "remind me at 9am to water the plants", it does the right thing 100% of the time. If I say "OK, Google, remind me at 9am to water the plants"...not so much. If it just got "remind me at 9am" 100% of the time, I'd be satisfied. The fact that"water the plants" becomes "watering lamps" doesn't matter--I can figure out what I meant. But it doesn't transcribe "remind me at 9am" correctly. It knows what to do with that text, but it doesn't get that far reliably enough. Maybe I haven't tried saying this to humans enough for comparison, but right now, I'm not satisfied with the transcription of even the most common phrase. (Well over 90% of what I say to my phone starts with "OK, Google, remind me ..." --- For fun, I just tried reading this out to my phone, and it got that phrase all three times: > If I type remind me at 9 a.m. to water the plants it does the right thing 100% of time if I say OK Google remind me at 9 a.m. to water plants not so much if it just got remind me at 9 a.m. 100% of time I'd be satisfied the fact that water the plants becomes watering clamps doesn't matter I can figure out what I meant but it Not bad. It cut off partway through, and maybe I need to speak my punctuation, but it's less error prone than normal. Helps to speak very clearly, unsurprisingly.