5 ms·
Seems like they have enough resources to train their translation NN and speech-to-text NN. I don't think google has introduced those features for the users in t
by toohotatopic 6y ago
Seems like they have enough resources to train their translation NN and speech-to-text NN. I don't think google has introduced those features for the users in the first place but they were a means to get training data.
- aabhay 6y agoCame here to say this
- Dylan16807 6y agoEarlier today I watched a video of two people talking. Youtube decided it was in french and the transcript had less than one word per minute, all of them wrong.
- TameAntelope 6y agoAre you suggesting that your anecdote is sufficient to meaningfully change YouTube's strategy around speech-to-text?
- Dylan16807 6y agoChange? No. Show that the system is not up to snuff? Yes.
- SllX 6y agoTheir automated CC sucks, always has, and I check multiple times a year only to see that it still sucks, most recently last month. I’ve never had the best hearing, so I usually turn CC on when I can, particularly with ESL speakers with heavy accents; but if the only option on a YouTube video is the automated captions, then the only option is crap and I’ll go without. On the other hand channels with a large dedicated fan base will often have fans contributing captions out of their own volition. If they really think their NN is good enough to replace community contributed captions, I have yet to see evidence of this, and there’s no evidence in the announcement that this is a vote of confidence in their tech. If anything, it’s a vote against their ability to manage spam and abuse, they just don’t want to deal with it anymore.
- calineczka 6y agoExactly same experience. Hearing disabled and using subtitles whenever I can. The generated ones are not good at all. The more unusual wording (i.e. full of technical terms or custom names) the worse it is.
- curiousgal 6y agoTo be fair, the Live Caption feature on Pixel phone (which can transcribe videos you are watching) is great. Maybe they plan on rolling that.
- zaarn 6y agoSo people with hearing problems need to buy a Google Pixel phone to enjoy their Google Youtube video? Smells very fishy to me.
- SllX 6y agoA lifetime of thinking that companies can reimplement cool tech they have in use somewhere else in a place that it would be even more useful has left me disappointed in the possibilities. I’m not familiar with Pixels because I don’t use them, but even if I took you at your word that it is automated captioning that works, I wouldn’t hold my breath that it will show up on YouTube just because Google has the tech on a Pixel. It’s not like companies like Google have never had technical regressions either. Their core service, Google Search, is less useful to me than it was 10 years ago.
- majewsky 6y agoSearch became less useful because it's optimizing for ad revenue, not user experience. I don't see that conflict of interest here. If anything, better subtitles would lead to more watch minutes (from non-natives) and hence more ad revenue.
- bzb3 6y agoPlus one to this. I was pleasantly surprised to the point of being spooked with the quality of transcriptions on my pixel phone.
- detaro 6y agoThen maybe they should roll those out first in usable quality and then get rid of manual ones?