4 ms·
I don't think this is actually reliably possible due to the fact that while grammar does tend to follow patterns sometimes, we're fundamentally dealing with an
by sublinear 4y ago
I don't think this is actually reliably possible due to the fact that while grammar does tend to follow patterns sometimes, we're fundamentally dealing with an exponential amount of ways to say things to a voice assistant.
In the spirit of the title of this post, someone else also has to say something.
If your argument is that this is a "non-visual command line" there's slim hope of the layperson learning a whole secret grammar without even a goddamn man page just to do their menial tasks.
- ianai 4y agoI really doubt *nix would have made it so far if the cli were audio based, too. It's a fundamentally slower and lower bandwidth communication channel.
- zozbot234 4y ago*nix was optimized for low-bandwith channels. That's why the command names and options are extremely terse and typically return trivial output on success. OTOH it was assumed that input would be reliable, so there's no confirmation required for potentially dangerous commands. A "*nix for voice" would need to address that, at the very least.
- ianai 4y agoI’d sure be lost if I had to listen to the entirety of a manpage or dmesg output or /var/log/messages read out by voice. Some of those could take hours to read out. Nothing actually trivial about *nix command output. Just sometimes terse.