4 ms·

> This has already happened in web search, content recommendation, speech recognition, machine translation, and many more applications. It's simply impossible t

> This has already happened in web search, content recommendation, speech recognition, machine translation, and many more applications. It's simply impossible to run your own speech recognition or machine translation package that has a comparable quality to Google's. I don't really agree with that. All of these things can be done on your own machine, and generally comparably or even in a superior fashion to Google. Bear in mind that Google has to focus on a very long tail of "serving every single user", whereas your software has to serve you. This means your speech recognition needs to support your speech, not the speech of every accent and dialect on earth. Your content recommendation can be limited to types of content that are even peripherally of interest to you, and likely in a limited subset of languages. Basically any amount of data and processing Google needs to do something for everyone, you can massively subset for just yourself. The biggest issue is that most of the data and code that companies like Google are using is proprietary, so good luck getting a copy to run.

segfaultbuserr 6y ago
Good counterpoint. So far I don't have any new idea to add to this discussion, all I can do is upvoting. Just a quick response here: > This means your speech recognition needs to support your speech, not the speech of every accent and dialect on earth. What about machine translation? I don't need French, German, or Russian translation, until the day I need it... Hypothetically, combining it with speech recognition, it will create a perfect platform for wiretapping conversations.
- ocdtrekkie 6y ago
  I'm not inherently opposed to bouncing out to someone else's service when you need something you didn't expect. If you suddenly need to translate Russian, use a service maybe, and then start up running a Russian->English service on your own hardware if you expect to need it frequently going forwards.
dhosek 6y ago
Apple does their speech to text entirely on-device for phones (I just did a quick dictation test in airplane mode to verify. I think the watch offloads the process to the phone). It astonishes me just how much computing power is in my pocket.
- 0xCMP 6y ago
  And the next version supposedly is getting its own offline abilities now.

segfaultbuserr 6y ago

Good counterpoint. So far I don't have any new idea to add to this discussion, all I can do is upvoting. Just a quick response here: > This means your speech recognition needs to support your speech, not the speech of every accent and dialect on earth. What about machine translation? I don't need French, German, or Russian translation, until the day I need it... Hypothetically, combining it with speech recognition, it will create a perfect platform for wiretapping conversations.

ocdtrekkie 6y ago
I'm not inherently opposed to bouncing out to someone else's service when you need something you didn't expect. If you suddenly need to translate Russian, use a service maybe, and then start up running a Russian->English service on your own hardware if you expect to need it frequently going forwards.

dhosek 6y ago

Apple does their speech to text entirely on-device for phones (I just did a quick dictation test in airplane mode to verify. I think the watch offloads the process to the phone). It astonishes me just how much computing power is in my pocket.

0xCMP 6y ago
And the next version supposedly is getting its own offline abilities now.