4 ms·
This goes against the most interesting part of the demo, though - that the 'umms' and 'uh-huhs' (and other small things) are enough to make this system pass the
by sjm-lbm 8y ago
This goes against the most interesting part of the demo, though - that the 'umms' and 'uh-huhs' (and other small things) are enough to make this system pass the Turing test, at least over a narrow communication channel.
Honestly, one thing your idea may show how far the big tech companies have strayed from their desire to create a concise and interesting product. Doing something like what you propose - basically, a system that calls, identifies itself as a robot and then is freed from the (difficult) technical problem of appearing to be human would be much easier to implement. With a bit of Twilio, "weekend hackathon to a workable demo" levels of easy to implement, IMHO. And, honestly, it looks like the public at large might have preferred that, and anyone using such a system to schedule an appointment would likely have a pretty much identical experience to the one provided by Duplex.
- lallysingh 8y agoI don't think the technical problem vs the self-identification are conflated. It's still easier to talk to something that acts like a human (at the conversational level, at least). I'd prefer those subtle hints ("umm") over explicit "That's not what I asked for" when communicating. I'd prefer to expect them to understand the same. When I know I'm talking to a software agent, I can change the way /I talk/ without having to lose fidelity from the way it talks. For example, I can spit out a large, complex sentence that's usually harder over the phone: Groups of four don't need or get reservations. "Reservation availability is Tuesday 2 to 5 pm, wednesday 2 to 3pm, friday 4pm to 6pm. " Then a "Thank you, goodbye" message tells me that I'm done with them, and as I know it's an AI, I don't have to worry about having offended a customer.