5 ms·
The claim of the article is that it would be technically infeasible - and they go into how difficult it is to interpret context. However simple keyword matchin
by slededit 9y ago
The claim of the article is that it would be technically infeasible - and they go into how difficult it is to interpret context. However simple keyword matching would be more than enough.
Facebook has a lot of compute resources, but they wouldn't have to use it. Your smartphone is more than fast enough to do simple speech recognition. The accuracy rate wouldn't have to be that high - you won't get mad if you see an ad for a misheard keyword.
- monocasa 9y agoWouldn't that destroy your battery life?
- Crespyl 9y agoI don't necessarily believe that FB was literally listening to the phone mic, but it is the case that the FaceBook app was a notorious battery hog.
- slededit 9y agoRadioshack sold a voice recognition chip in the 80s[1] that was a simple 8-bit microcontroller. If you are willing to slip on the accuracy and false positives you can do recognition with very little computation. [1] http://21stdigitalhome.blogspot.ca/2013/06/vcp200-voice-recognition-ic.html http://21stdigitalhome.blogspot.ca/2013/06/vcp200-voice-reco...
- skjerns 9y ago"80s" - "voice recognition" - "accuracy" - which doesnt fit?
- gcb0 9y agoyour wrong preconceptions don't fit :) the downside was power usage. Motorola made one that was power efficient, used by nokia in the 90s and its pretty much the same chip in google's phone line today (just even more power efficient). division is under lenovo now
- jklinger410 9y agoDoes the Assistant listening for OK Google destroy your battery life? Your phone reads sensor data as a base state.
- quickben 9y agoNot really. These have hardware dsp support. The drain is minimum.
- janoc 9y agoThe Google Now only listens for the trigger phrase when idle - which is done all locally, without needing to talk to the servers. It has a battery impact but much less than sending all the voice data continuously to a server somewhere. The biggest battery killer would be the wifi or 3G transmitting non-stop in that case.
- SilasX 9y agoIt wouldn't have to transmit non-stop -- it could do some parsing/cleanup locally, then queue it up and upload it periodically with other, expected FB traffic.
- testvox 9y agoThe Facebook app does destroy the battery life of certain phones at least. That is the only reason I've actually seen people uninstall it for.
- callmeal 9y agoIt does. Uninstall FB and see how long you have to go between recharges. In my case it's every day with FB, and every 3 days without.
- wuliwong 9y agoI was thinking the same thing. Also not claiming to have any real idea of as to what they are actually doing but certainly having access to everyone's phone gives them a ton of distributed computing power for free.
- StanislavPetrov 9y ago>I was thinking the same thing. Also not claiming to have any real idea of as to what they are actually doing but certainly having access to everyone's phone gives them a ton of distributed computing power for free. Only if by "everyone" you mean people foolish and vapid enough to use Facebook and give them access to your phone.
- gcb0 9y agoIt would be extremely easy to implement. Ad is easy. You don't have to understand context. Just listen for a thousand or so keywords related to products that are paying you. Then if detection happens apply some rudimentary sentiment analysis on the surrounding phrase and that's all you will ever need. if you have a couple millions for me to start a small team we can offer this as a service next month or two.