4 ms·
I'm not sure it can be dismissed that easily. If Google stick to "providing tools" and let others decide how to use them, maybe they will do better. It's when
by exodust 8y ago
I'm not sure it can be dismissed that easily. If Google stick to "providing tools" and let others decide how to use them, maybe they will do better.
It's when Google product managers stand on a stage and tell us how their technology will make our lives better, that I cringe. I don't want Google telling me how I should live my life. Just provide the tools and tech, and let us work out how best to use them for ourselves.
There will be situations where this "warning" will be unwanted. Google should not be dictating when or how the warning is delivered. That should be at the discretion and option of the business or individual.
I can see this tech being useful in the reverse scenario they demonstrated. That is, the bot answering calls on behalf of the restaurant and accepting bookings. Often when you call a restaurant, it's noisy and you just know you've interrupted someone from doing other tasks.
- em3rgent0rdr 8y ago> "the reverse scenario they demonstrated. That is, the bot answering calls on behalf of the restaurant and accepting bookings" In the scenario of bots talking to bots, if they identify themselves as bots to one another, then they could quickly switch over to a much more efficient machine communication methods. :)