8 ms·

A different take by Google’s cofounder, Sergey Brin, in his most recent Founders’ Letter to investors: “The new spring in artificial intelligence is the most s

A different take by Google’s cofounder, Sergey Brin, in his most recent Founders’ Letter to investors: “The new spring in artificial intelligence is the most significant development in computing in my lifetime.” He listed many examples below the quote. “understand images in Google Photos; enable Waymo cars to recognize and distinguish objects safely; significantly improve sound and camera quality in our hardware; understand and produce speech for Google Home; translate over 100 languages in Google Translate; caption over a billion videos in 10 languages on YouTube; improve the efficiency of our data centers; help doctors diagnose diseases, such as diabetic retinopathy; discover new planetary systems; ...” https://abc.xyz/investor/founders-letters/2017/index.html https://abc.xyz/investor/founders-letters/2017/index.html An example from another continent: “To build the database, the hospital said it spent nearly two years to study more than 100,000 of its digital medical records spanning 12 years. The hospital also trained the AI tool using data from over 300 million medical records (link in Chinese) dating back to the 1990s from other hospitals in China. The tool has an accuracy rate of over 90% for diagnoses for more than 200 diseases, it said.“ https://qz.com/1244410/faced-with-a-doctor-shortage-a-chinese-hospital-is-betting-big-on-artificial-intelligence-to-treat-patients/ https://qz.com/1244410/faced-with-a-doctor-shortage-a-chines...

felippee 8y ago
Hi, author here: Well first off: letters to investors are among the most biased pieces of writing in existence. Second: I'm not saying connectionism did not succeed in many areas! I'm a connectionist by heart! I love connectionism! But that being said there is disconnect between the expectations and reality. And it is huge. And it is particularly visible in autonomous driving. And it is not limited to media or CEO's, but it made its way into top researchers. And that is a dangerous sign, which historically preceded a winter event...
- nopinsight 8y ago
  I agree that self-driving had/have been overhyped over the previous few years. The problem is harder than many people realize. The difference between the current AI renaissance and the past pre-winter AI ecosystems is the level of economic gain realized by the technology. The late 80s-early 90s AI winter, for example, resulted from the limitations of expert systems which were useful but only in niche markets and their development and maintenance costs were quite high relative to alternatives. The current AI systems do something that alternatives, like Mechanical Turks, can only accomplish with much greater costs and may not even have the scale necessary for global massive services like Google Photos or Youtube autocaptioning. The spread of computing infrastructure and connectivity into the hands of billions of global population is a key contributing factor.
  - felippee 8y ago
    > The difference between the current AI renaissance and the past pre-winter AI ecosystems is the level of economic gain realized by the technology I would argue this is well discounted by level of investment made against the future. I don't think the winter depends on the amount that somebody makes today on AI, rather on how much people are expecting to make in the future. If these don't match, there will be a winter. My take is that there is a huge bet against the future. And if DL ends up bringing just as much profit as it does today, interest will die very, very quickly.
    - nopinsight 8y ago
      Because there is a dearth of experts and a lack of deep technical knowledge among many business people, there are still a great many companies that have not yet started investing in deep learning or AI despite potential profits based on current technology. Non-tech sectors of the economy are probably underinvesting at the moment. This is analogous to the way electricity took decades to realize productivity gains in the broad economy. That said, the hype will dial down. I am just not sure the investment will decrease soon.
      - sanxiyn 8y ago
        While I agree there is underinvestment in non-tech sectors, I don't see why that would change and they will use deep learning. There are lots of profitable things in non-tech sectors that can be done with linear regression but not done.
        cm2187 8y ago
        There are lots of things in the non-tech sector that can be automated with simple vanilla software but isn't. To use AI instead, you need to have 1) sophisticated devs in place, 2) a management that gets the value added, 3) lots of data in a usable format, 4) willingness to invest & experiment. Lots of non-tech businesses are lacking one if not all of these.
        xamuel 8y ago
- ehsankia 8y ago
  How can something be biased when it's listing facts? Those are actual features that are available today to anyone, that were made possible by AI. Do you think it would be possible to type "pictures of me at the beach with my dog" without AI in such as short time frame? Or to have cars that drive themselves without a driver? These are concrete benefits of machine learning, I don't understand how that's biased.
  - jessaustin 8y ago
    How can something be biased when it's listing facts? If there are 100 facts that indicate a coming AI winter, and Brin just talks up the 15 facts that indicate AI's unalloyed dominance, that's definitely biased.
    - ehsankia 8y ago
      First, what are said 100 facts? The article looks at fairly mundane metrics such as number of tweets or self-driving accidents... Second, I'm not quite sure that's how it works. Like in mathematics, if your lemma is X, you can give a 100 examples of X being true, but I only need a single counter-example to break it. In my opinion a single valid modern use-case of AI is enough to show that we're not in an AI winter. By definition an AI winter means that nothing substantial is coming out of AI for a long period of time, yet Brin listed that Google alone has had a dozen in the past few years.
      - majewsky 8y ago
        > First, what are said 100 facts? You cannot ask a generic question, then attack the answer based on absence of evidence for a specific example.
  - Grue3 8y ago
    Can't speak for the other items, but these >translate over 100 languages in Google Translate; >caption over a billion videos in 10 languages on YouTube; barely even work. Yeah, it's a difficult problem but it's not even close to being solved.
- tigershark 8y ago
  Hi, why in your analysis you spoke only about the companies that are not doing so well in self driving leaving out waymo success story? They are already have been hauling passengers without a safety pilot since last October. I guess without the minimum problem otherwise we would have heard plenty in the news like it happened for Tesla and Uber accidents. Is it not too convenient to leave out the facts that contradict your hypothesis?
  - ankurdhama 8y ago
    Is this happening inside google campus or in a city?
    - AndrewDucker 8y ago
      In Arizona, on the streets: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/02/robotaxi-permit-gets-arizonas-ok-waymo-will-start-service-in-2018/ https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/02/robotaxi-permit-gets-ar...
  - EdwardDiego 8y ago
    Where are the Waymo cars running? Everywhere? Are they still veering into buses to avoid sandbags?
    - tigershark 8y ago
      Phoenix, and they plan to start a commercial service by the end of the year in several US cities.
- milankovic 8y ago
  Very interesting points... The disconnect between the expectations and reality. Well, to some degree you will always have it, but that is a very interesting facet, and I concur that it is somewhat increasing. It has in the recent past, and it still is.. > And it is not limited to media or CEO's, but it made its way into top researchers. Interesting. One would assume that top researchers would be more "immune" than anyone else, but if it's true what you say and it already made its way.. For the record, I think you are onto something here. What would be your favorite pet theory that explains this phenomenon? Do you believe it has something to do with this culture of "fake it till you make it", as if we have forgotten the value of honesty?
- jacksmith21006 8y ago
  " letters to investors are among the most biased pieces of writing in existence. " Maybe true but they are words that are about things which are either true or not true. Has nothing to do where the words were shared. Saying they are on an investment letter so not relevant seems very short sighted. But just looking at the last 12 months it is folly to say we are moving to a AI winter. Things are just flying. Look at self driving cars without safety drivers or look at something like Google Duplex but there are so many other examples.
  - raesene9 8y ago
    Of course Google (or any other company) aren't going to blatently lie in a letter to investors (that kind of thing gets you sued) but it's pretty easy to spin words to sound more impressive than they may actually be. Using the list provided, one example "caption over a billion videos in 10 languages on YouTube;" - This doesn't say how accurate the captions acutally are. In my experience youtube captioning even of english dialect isn't exactly great. For one example try turning on the captions on this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQJrBSXSs6o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQJrBSXSs6o so it's true I'm sure to say they've captioned the videos AI based techniques, but that doesn't mean they're a perfected option. Also (purely anecodtally) Google translate also isn't exactly perfect yet either...
    - slow_donkey 8y ago
      ... I don't think I understand that video even with my own ears. YouTube captioning has actually significantly improved from it's previous hilarious state
- ptero 8y ago
  Making cars that drive safely no current, busy roads is a very difficult task. It is not surprising that the current systems do not do that (yet). It is surprising to me how well they still do. The fact though that my phone understands my voice and my handwriting and does on the fly translation of menus and simple requests is a sign of a major progress, too. AI is overhyped and overfunded at the moment, which is not unusual for a hot technology (synthetic biology; dotcoms). Those things go in cycles, but the down cycles are seldom all out winters. During the slowdowns best technologies still get funding (less lavish, but enough to work on) and one-hit wonders die, both of which is good in the long run. My friends working in biology are doing mostly fine even though there are no longer "this is the century of synthetic biology" posters at every airport and in every toilet.
artilect 8y ago
completely overblown.. 'understand' isn't true understanding 'recognize and distinguish' is nothing like how humans do it 'helping diagnose diseases' notice they don't say the AI is doing the diagnoses anymore
buvanshak 8y ago
>caption over a billion videos in 10 languages on YouTube; Utterly useless. And I don't think it is improving.
- etaioinshrdlu 8y ago
  I find the auto captions pretty useful.
- kettlecorn 8y ago
  This is less useless than you think. Captioning video could allow for video to become searchable as easily as text is now searchable. This could lead to far better search results for video and a leap forward in the way people produce and consume video content.
  - cooper12 8y ago
    They mean useless in the end result. Of course having perfect captions could potentially allow indexable videos, but the case is that the captions suck. They're so bad in fact that it's a common meme on Youtube comments for people to say "Go to timestamp and turn on subtitles" so people can laugh at whatever garbled interpretation the speech recognition made.
    - nopinsight 8y ago
      Have you used/tried them recently? The improvement relative to 5 years ago is major. At least in English, they are now good enough that I can read without listening to the audio and understand almost everything said. (There are still a few mistakes here and there but they often don’t matter.)
      - ballenf 8y ago
        Yes I’ve had to turn them off on permanently. Felt I could follow video better without sound often than with subtitles. I tried to help a couple channels to subtitle and the starting point was just sooo far from the finished product. I would guess I left 10% intact of the auto-translation. Maybe it would have been 5% five years ago; when things are this bad 100% improvement is hard to notice. It is super cool how easy it is to edit and improve the subtitles for any channel that allows it.
wrycoder 8y ago
When I saw the Google demo of a CNN using video to split a single audio stream of two guys talking over each other, I became a believer.
- fratlas 8y ago
  Do you have a video of this?
  - jvolkman 8y ago
    https://youtu.be/ogfYd705cRs?t=6m54s https://youtu.be/ogfYd705cRs?t=6m54s Edit: also, a blog post with more examples and a link to the related publication: https://ai.googleblog.com/2018/04/looking-to-listen-audio-visual-speech.html https://ai.googleblog.com/2018/04/looking-to-listen-audio-vi...
  - signa11 8y ago
    is it this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnzlbyTZsQY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnzlbyTZsQY perhaps ?
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - wrycoder 8y ago
    Sorry, I went to bed! The original google report was discussed here a few weeks ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16813766 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16813766
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- felippee 8y ago
  Hey, a small advice for the future: never build your belief entirely on a youtube video of a demo. In fact, never build your belief based on a demo, period. This is notorious with current technology: you can demonstrate anything. A few years ago Tesla demonstrated a driverless car. And what? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I'm willing to believe stuff I can test myself at home. If it works there, it likely actually works (though possibly needs more testing). But demo booths and youtube - never.
baxtr 8y ago
Well, the way I see it: mostly, these are “improvements”, huge ones, but still. They ride the current AI tech wave, take it an optimize apps with it. For most things, that people dream of and do marketing about need another leap forward, which we haven’t seen yet (it’ll come for sure)
- ehsankia 8y ago
  Almost anything that has to do with image understanding is entirely AI. Good luck writing an algorithm to detect a bicycle in an image. This also includes disease diagnostic as most of those have to do with analyzing images for tumors and so on. Also, while a lot of these can be seen as "improvements", in many cases, that improvement put it past the threshold of actually being usable or useful. Self-driving cars for example need to be at least a certain level before they can be deployed, and we would've never reached that without machine learning.
  - baxtr 8y ago
    I agree, the effects can be very impressive. I meant, that what is achievable is quite clear now and that we need a major innovation/steps for the next leap
acdha 8y ago
> understand images in Google Photos This is one of the areas I’m most enthusiastic about but … it’s still nowhere near the performance of untrained humans. Google has poured tons of resources into Photos and yet if I type “cat” into the search box I have to scroll past multiple pages of results to find the first picture which isn’t of my dog. That raises an interesting question: Google has no way to report failures. Does anyone know why they aren’t collecting that training data?
- chillydawg 8y ago
  They collect virtually everything you do on your phone. They probably notice that you scroll a long way after typing cat and so perhaps surmise the quality of search results was low.
  - acdha 8y ago
    Doesn’t that seem like a noisy signal since you’d have to disambiguate cases where someone was looking for a specific time/place and scrolling until they find it? I’ve assumed that the reason is the same as why none of the voice assistants has an error reporting UI or even acknowledgement of low confidence levels: the marketing image is “the future is now” and this would detract from it.
lispm 8y ago
> understand what is this 'understand'?

felippee 8y ago

Hi, author here: Well first off: letters to investors are among the most biased pieces of writing in existence. Second: I'm not saying connectionism did not succeed in many areas! I'm a connectionist by heart! I love connectionism! But that being said there is disconnect between the expectations and reality. And it is huge. And it is particularly visible in autonomous driving. And it is not limited to media or CEO's, but it made its way into top researchers. And that is a dangerous sign, which historically preceded a winter event...

nopinsight 8y ago
I agree that self-driving had/have been overhyped over the previous few years. The problem is harder than many people realize. The difference between the current AI renaissance and the past pre-winter AI ecosystems is the level of economic gain realized by the technology. The late 80s-early 90s AI winter, for example, resulted from the limitations of expert systems which were useful but only in niche markets and their development and maintenance costs were quite high relative to alternatives. The current AI systems do something that alternatives, like Mechanical Turks, can only accomplish with much greater costs and may not even have the scale necessary for global massive services like Google Photos or Youtube autocaptioning. The spread of computing infrastructure and connectivity into the hands of billions of global population is a key contributing factor.
- felippee 8y ago
  > The difference between the current AI renaissance and the past pre-winter AI ecosystems is the level of economic gain realized by the technology I would argue this is well discounted by level of investment made against the future. I don't think the winter depends on the amount that somebody makes today on AI, rather on how much people are expecting to make in the future. If these don't match, there will be a winter. My take is that there is a huge bet against the future. And if DL ends up bringing just as much profit as it does today, interest will die very, very quickly.
  - nopinsight 8y ago
    Because there is a dearth of experts and a lack of deep technical knowledge among many business people, there are still a great many companies that have not yet started investing in deep learning or AI despite potential profits based on current technology. Non-tech sectors of the economy are probably underinvesting at the moment. This is analogous to the way electricity took decades to realize productivity gains in the broad economy. That said, the hype will dial down. I am just not sure the investment will decrease soon.
    - sanxiyn 8y ago
      While I agree there is underinvestment in non-tech sectors, I don't see why that would change and they will use deep learning. There are lots of profitable things in non-tech sectors that can be done with linear regression but not done.
      - cm2187 8y ago
        There are lots of things in the non-tech sector that can be automated with simple vanilla software but isn't. To use AI instead, you need to have 1) sophisticated devs in place, 2) a management that gets the value added, 3) lots of data in a usable format, 4) willingness to invest & experiment. Lots of non-tech businesses are lacking one if not all of these.
      - xamuel 8y ago
ehsankia 8y ago
How can something be biased when it's listing facts? Those are actual features that are available today to anyone, that were made possible by AI. Do you think it would be possible to type "pictures of me at the beach with my dog" without AI in such as short time frame? Or to have cars that drive themselves without a driver? These are concrete benefits of machine learning, I don't understand how that's biased.
- jessaustin 8y ago
  How can something be biased when it's listing facts? If there are 100 facts that indicate a coming AI winter, and Brin just talks up the 15 facts that indicate AI's unalloyed dominance, that's definitely biased.
  - ehsankia 8y ago
    First, what are said 100 facts? The article looks at fairly mundane metrics such as number of tweets or self-driving accidents... Second, I'm not quite sure that's how it works. Like in mathematics, if your lemma is X, you can give a 100 examples of X being true, but I only need a single counter-example to break it. In my opinion a single valid modern use-case of AI is enough to show that we're not in an AI winter. By definition an AI winter means that nothing substantial is coming out of AI for a long period of time, yet Brin listed that Google alone has had a dozen in the past few years.
    - majewsky 8y ago
      > First, what are said 100 facts? You cannot ask a generic question, then attack the answer based on absence of evidence for a specific example.
- Grue3 8y ago
  Can't speak for the other items, but these >translate over 100 languages in Google Translate; >caption over a billion videos in 10 languages on YouTube; barely even work. Yeah, it's a difficult problem but it's not even close to being solved.
tigershark 8y ago
Hi, why in your analysis you spoke only about the companies that are not doing so well in self driving leaving out waymo success story? They are already have been hauling passengers without a safety pilot since last October. I guess without the minimum problem otherwise we would have heard plenty in the news like it happened for Tesla and Uber accidents. Is it not too convenient to leave out the facts that contradict your hypothesis?
- ankurdhama 8y ago
  Is this happening inside google campus or in a city?
  - AndrewDucker 8y ago
    In Arizona, on the streets: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/02/robotaxi-permit-gets-arizonas-ok-waymo-will-start-service-in-2018/ https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/02/robotaxi-permit-gets-ar...
- EdwardDiego 8y ago
  Where are the Waymo cars running? Everywhere? Are they still veering into buses to avoid sandbags?
  - tigershark 8y ago
    Phoenix, and they plan to start a commercial service by the end of the year in several US cities.
milankovic 8y ago
Very interesting points... The disconnect between the expectations and reality. Well, to some degree you will always have it, but that is a very interesting facet, and I concur that it is somewhat increasing. It has in the recent past, and it still is.. > And it is not limited to media or CEO's, but it made its way into top researchers. Interesting. One would assume that top researchers would be more "immune" than anyone else, but if it's true what you say and it already made its way.. For the record, I think you are onto something here. What would be your favorite pet theory that explains this phenomenon? Do you believe it has something to do with this culture of "fake it till you make it", as if we have forgotten the value of honesty?
jacksmith21006 8y ago
" letters to investors are among the most biased pieces of writing in existence. " Maybe true but they are words that are about things which are either true or not true. Has nothing to do where the words were shared. Saying they are on an investment letter so not relevant seems very short sighted. But just looking at the last 12 months it is folly to say we are moving to a AI winter. Things are just flying. Look at self driving cars without safety drivers or look at something like Google Duplex but there are so many other examples.
- raesene9 8y ago
  Of course Google (or any other company) aren't going to blatently lie in a letter to investors (that kind of thing gets you sued) but it's pretty easy to spin words to sound more impressive than they may actually be. Using the list provided, one example "caption over a billion videos in 10 languages on YouTube;" - This doesn't say how accurate the captions acutally are. In my experience youtube captioning even of english dialect isn't exactly great. For one example try turning on the captions on this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQJrBSXSs6o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQJrBSXSs6o so it's true I'm sure to say they've captioned the videos AI based techniques, but that doesn't mean they're a perfected option. Also (purely anecodtally) Google translate also isn't exactly perfect yet either...
  - slow_donkey 8y ago
    ... I don't think I understand that video even with my own ears. YouTube captioning has actually significantly improved from it's previous hilarious state
ptero 8y ago
Making cars that drive safely no current, busy roads is a very difficult task. It is not surprising that the current systems do not do that (yet). It is surprising to me how well they still do. The fact though that my phone understands my voice and my handwriting and does on the fly translation of menus and simple requests is a sign of a major progress, too. AI is overhyped and overfunded at the moment, which is not unusual for a hot technology (synthetic biology; dotcoms). Those things go in cycles, but the down cycles are seldom all out winters. During the slowdowns best technologies still get funding (less lavish, but enough to work on) and one-hit wonders die, both of which is good in the long run. My friends working in biology are doing mostly fine even though there are no longer "this is the century of synthetic biology" posters at every airport and in every toilet.

artilect 8y ago

completely overblown.. 'understand' isn't true understanding 'recognize and distinguish' is nothing like how humans do it 'helping diagnose diseases' notice they don't say the AI is doing the diagnoses anymore

buvanshak 8y ago

>caption over a billion videos in 10 languages on YouTube; Utterly useless. And I don't think it is improving.

etaioinshrdlu 8y ago
I find the auto captions pretty useful.
kettlecorn 8y ago
This is less useless than you think. Captioning video could allow for video to become searchable as easily as text is now searchable. This could lead to far better search results for video and a leap forward in the way people produce and consume video content.
- cooper12 8y ago
  They mean useless in the end result. Of course having perfect captions could potentially allow indexable videos, but the case is that the captions suck. They're so bad in fact that it's a common meme on Youtube comments for people to say "Go to timestamp and turn on subtitles" so people can laugh at whatever garbled interpretation the speech recognition made.
  - nopinsight 8y ago
    Have you used/tried them recently? The improvement relative to 5 years ago is major. At least in English, they are now good enough that I can read without listening to the audio and understand almost everything said. (There are still a few mistakes here and there but they often don’t matter.)
    - ballenf 8y ago
      Yes I’ve had to turn them off on permanently. Felt I could follow video better without sound often than with subtitles. I tried to help a couple channels to subtitle and the starting point was just sooo far from the finished product. I would guess I left 10% intact of the auto-translation. Maybe it would have been 5% five years ago; when things are this bad 100% improvement is hard to notice. It is super cool how easy it is to edit and improve the subtitles for any channel that allows it.

wrycoder 8y ago

When I saw the Google demo of a CNN using video to split a single audio stream of two guys talking over each other, I became a believer.

fratlas 8y ago
Do you have a video of this?
- jvolkman 8y ago
  https://youtu.be/ogfYd705cRs?t=6m54s https://youtu.be/ogfYd705cRs?t=6m54s Edit: also, a blog post with more examples and a link to the related publication: https://ai.googleblog.com/2018/04/looking-to-listen-audio-visual-speech.html https://ai.googleblog.com/2018/04/looking-to-listen-audio-vi...
- signa11 8y ago
  is it this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnzlbyTZsQY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnzlbyTZsQY perhaps ?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- wrycoder 8y ago
  Sorry, I went to bed! The original google report was discussed here a few weeks ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16813766 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16813766
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
felippee 8y ago
Hey, a small advice for the future: never build your belief entirely on a youtube video of a demo. In fact, never build your belief based on a demo, period. This is notorious with current technology: you can demonstrate anything. A few years ago Tesla demonstrated a driverless car. And what? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I'm willing to believe stuff I can test myself at home. If it works there, it likely actually works (though possibly needs more testing). But demo booths and youtube - never.

baxtr 8y ago

Well, the way I see it: mostly, these are “improvements”, huge ones, but still. They ride the current AI tech wave, take it an optimize apps with it. For most things, that people dream of and do marketing about need another leap forward, which we haven’t seen yet (it’ll come for sure)

ehsankia 8y ago
Almost anything that has to do with image understanding is entirely AI. Good luck writing an algorithm to detect a bicycle in an image. This also includes disease diagnostic as most of those have to do with analyzing images for tumors and so on. Also, while a lot of these can be seen as "improvements", in many cases, that improvement put it past the threshold of actually being usable or useful. Self-driving cars for example need to be at least a certain level before they can be deployed, and we would've never reached that without machine learning.
- baxtr 8y ago
  I agree, the effects can be very impressive. I meant, that what is achievable is quite clear now and that we need a major innovation/steps for the next leap

acdha 8y ago

> understand images in Google Photos This is one of the areas I’m most enthusiastic about but … it’s still nowhere near the performance of untrained humans. Google has poured tons of resources into Photos and yet if I type “cat” into the search box I have to scroll past multiple pages of results to find the first picture which isn’t of my dog. That raises an interesting question: Google has no way to report failures. Does anyone know why they aren’t collecting that training data?

chillydawg 8y ago
They collect virtually everything you do on your phone. They probably notice that you scroll a long way after typing cat and so perhaps surmise the quality of search results was low.
- acdha 8y ago
  Doesn’t that seem like a noisy signal since you’d have to disambiguate cases where someone was looking for a specific time/place and scrolling until they find it? I’ve assumed that the reason is the same as why none of the voice assistants has an error reporting UI or even acknowledgement of low confidence levels: the marketing image is “the future is now” and this would detract from it.

lispm 8y ago

> understand what is this 'understand'?