3 ms·
I think we are closer than we think. The problem is that all voice control up until now is a closed app with simplified intents. In my opinion what we need is
by harperlee 8y ago
I think we are closer than we think.
The problem is that all voice control up until now is a closed app with simplified intents.
In my opinion what we need is a programming language whose REPL UX is voice-oriented, that eases the separation between using and extending the system. Prolog or a lisp could be quite near but we would require some changes such as: syntax easily read (:- in prolog is not very good), the ability to manage ums and ahhhs, the ability to “play” or “test” with functions through voice, etc.
- sanlyx 8y agoI once toyed with the idea of a machine-oriented spoken conlang similar to Lisp in "syntax" by reserving certain syllables for punctuation (brackets, etc.) One of the main problems of existing solutions is that they lack flexibility due to the poor state of natural language understanding, which is solved by pretty much removing natural language from the equation. However, it would be unusable for most people, or at least would have a learning curve too steep for it to be practical.
- decasteve 8y agoWe need some type of Structured Query Language, call it SEQUEL, or maybe abbreviated SQL for short. /s Jokes aside, maybe a LISP-like Sentence Processing Language might be the future of this type of HCI.
- harperlee 7y agoLook into Attempto Controlled English for an alternative closer to what I was thinking about :)