I like that the article formalises this, but one concern is that the "whys" seem defined by currently available uses and thus it's limiting. I don't doubt that

I like that the article formalises this, but one concern is that the "whys" seem defined by currently available uses and thus it's limiting. I don't doubt that there are plenty of good practical/psychological reasons that these narrowly defined cases will work best and I respect that, but it feels like it will hardly push the envelope if we mimic rather than exceed. Clearly it's good to walk before you try to run but as the quality of NLP and speech recognition improves and people become more comfortable, I would hope to see growth around more open ended uses. Voice could ditch the specificity that apps and GUIs demand - you need to be in the right app to do a task but voice could open up a vast range of access (continuing how Alexa and Google Home already aggregate skills). This opens up more challenges around ambiguity (it's well known with the ubiquitous "play X for me" command that could often be handled by many skills) but that's part of what makes it interesting. Lastly I totally agree with those pointing out the speed issue - the right tool for the right job applies as always.