6 ms·

I apologize, I'm pretty sure I feel the way I do because I'm getting old, but here's how I feel: talking to computers is a really, really bad interface, so I do

by b6 12y ago

I apologize, I'm pretty sure I feel the way I do because I'm getting old, but here's how I feel: talking to computers is a really, really bad interface, so I don't do it. One reason it's bad is that the sounds we make are mush. It's a miracle if a computer system can correctly retrieve the words from an utterance. Another reason it's bad is that the words we say are nonsense. Our sentences aren't parseable, they don't conform to any actual grammar. So I see it as another example of people selling something that's supposed to be more convenient than what we already have, but for many reasons, it probably isn't. One day it may be, but it wouldn't be surprising for people to be selling it as more convenient for many years before it actually is. I'm not criticizing the technology -- it's amazing. It's just clear to me that it isn't ready to be invited into my life. I consider it inevitable that we will eventually lose control of technology, but we can at least try to be judicious.

pesenti 12y ago
Yes you are getting old. Just observe a kid using an ipad and you'll understand how useful it can be. My 5 year old is able to find pretty much anything she wants (like videos of play doh of frozen characters) through voice search.
dnautics 12y ago
I disagree. It's great, I Drive lyft professionally and it is very useful to be able to use the phone without removing it from its holster between ride. Also, I just dictated that entire paragraph while sitting in a noisy Korean restaurants
peterwwillis 12y ago
Well current voice recognition tech makes it a crappy user interface, but it could be improved. It does make a really handy feedback device, though. Much like haptic feedback, humans can detect a wide range of audio cues and use that as feedback in an interface. You probably already recognize the bip on your phone is a Facebook message while the bong is your e-mail alert, and the ding your text message. Back in the day when I made my own CarPC, I naturally made my own interface for it too, for, you know... reasons. The input was a mini numpad, but the output was audio - primarily text to speech. I could drive around and use the interface (mostly) safely, but be exactly sure of my input choices using the one-handed, nailed-down keypad. Worked like a charm. If in the future we nail down the voice input to be more accurate, fast and flexible, we can avoid the author's concerns and get something as useful as touch screens but based on our ears and mouths.
wodenokoto 12y ago
Obviously your sentences are parseable. Millions of humans around the world understand what you are saying. the usefulness of this didn't dawn on me until I read an interview with Andreg Ng where he talked about the huge amount of voice searches in China. Many adults can't type, so searching with voice is very convenient as opposed to drawing the characters. Many are down right illiterate or young children not old enough to read that much yet.
- lsaferite 12y ago
  As an interesting data point, my 2 year old knows how to find my wife's phone now. "Ok Google, find my phone." And wouldn't you know it, the damned phone starts making a noise for her. Both of my kids can use the phone to search things. Neither knows how to write yet and my son is just learning to read. It's amazing to watch how touch screens and voice commands have made high tech accessible to very young children.
- b6 12y ago
  > Obviously your sentences are parseable. Millions of humans around the world understand what you are saying. No, I mean parseable in the way that source code is parsed. I'm not aware of any human language that is parseable by a computer. Humans are able to understand each other because our brains are, loosely speaking, magical.
  - wodenokoto 12y ago
    Thats because natural language is ambiguous. Even simple sentences like " I saw a man on the hill with a telescope" have multiple meanings. This isn't solved by magic, but pure statistics. Try and ask your friends who has the telescope in the previous sentence and some will say the man and some will say "I". Without context we can't tell, but we can judge which one is more likely given who had the item in previous sentences of similar structure (the prior). Then usually we also have some context. Now we can add context: "I got a telescope for my birthday and was eager to use it. The next day I saw a man on the hill with my telescope". Now most people would expect the speaker to be looking through the telescope, but the man might have stolen it and taken it to the hill. Even humans have to guess.
brianmcc 12y ago
I'm with you. Speech interaction might be fine in some situations , but they seem all quite superficial to me. The day I have to dictate a regex to my IDE is the day I hang up my boots. I would prefer a keyboard in any situation except where environment/circumstance prevents it, e.g. when driving or wearing thick gloves to protect me from -20 degree temperatures.
- lsaferite 12y ago
  Some interactions with a computer are much better with a keyboard and maybe a mouse. Those are more edge cases for the creators. So many people now use computers just for consumption or for super simple creation that keyboards and mice are things they don't need.

by b6 12y ago

pesenti 12y ago

Yes you are getting old. Just observe a kid using an ipad and you'll understand how useful it can be. My 5 year old is able to find pretty much anything she wants (like videos of play doh of frozen characters) through voice search.

dnautics 12y ago

I disagree. It's great, I Drive lyft professionally and it is very useful to be able to use the phone without removing it from its holster between ride. Also, I just dictated that entire paragraph while sitting in a noisy Korean restaurants

peterwwillis 12y ago

Well current voice recognition tech makes it a crappy user interface, but it could be improved. It does make a really handy feedback device, though. Much like haptic feedback, humans can detect a wide range of audio cues and use that as feedback in an interface. You probably already recognize the bip on your phone is a Facebook message while the bong is your e-mail alert, and the ding your text message. Back in the day when I made my own CarPC, I naturally made my own interface for it too, for, you know... reasons. The input was a mini numpad, but the output was audio - primarily text to speech. I could drive around and use the interface (mostly) safely, but be exactly sure of my input choices using the one-handed, nailed-down keypad. Worked like a charm. If in the future we nail down the voice input to be more accurate, fast and flexible, we can avoid the author's concerns and get something as useful as touch screens but based on our ears and mouths.

wodenokoto 12y ago

Obviously your sentences are parseable. Millions of humans around the world understand what you are saying. the usefulness of this didn't dawn on me until I read an interview with Andreg Ng where he talked about the huge amount of voice searches in China. Many adults can't type, so searching with voice is very convenient as opposed to drawing the characters. Many are down right illiterate or young children not old enough to read that much yet.

lsaferite 12y ago
As an interesting data point, my 2 year old knows how to find my wife's phone now. "Ok Google, find my phone." And wouldn't you know it, the damned phone starts making a noise for her. Both of my kids can use the phone to search things. Neither knows how to write yet and my son is just learning to read. It's amazing to watch how touch screens and voice commands have made high tech accessible to very young children.
b6 12y ago
> Obviously your sentences are parseable. Millions of humans around the world understand what you are saying. No, I mean parseable in the way that source code is parsed. I'm not aware of any human language that is parseable by a computer. Humans are able to understand each other because our brains are, loosely speaking, magical.
- wodenokoto 12y ago
  Thats because natural language is ambiguous. Even simple sentences like " I saw a man on the hill with a telescope" have multiple meanings. This isn't solved by magic, but pure statistics. Try and ask your friends who has the telescope in the previous sentence and some will say the man and some will say "I". Without context we can't tell, but we can judge which one is more likely given who had the item in previous sentences of similar structure (the prior). Then usually we also have some context. Now we can add context: "I got a telescope for my birthday and was eager to use it. The next day I saw a man on the hill with my telescope". Now most people would expect the speaker to be looking through the telescope, but the man might have stolen it and taken it to the hill. Even humans have to guess.

brianmcc 12y ago

I'm with you. Speech interaction might be fine in some situations , but they seem all quite superficial to me. The day I have to dictate a regex to my IDE is the day I hang up my boots. I would prefer a keyboard in any situation except where environment/circumstance prevents it, e.g. when driving or wearing thick gloves to protect me from -20 degree temperatures.

lsaferite 12y ago
Some interactions with a computer are much better with a keyboard and maybe a mouse. Those are more edge cases for the creators. So many people now use computers just for consumption or for super simple creation that keyboards and mice are things they don't need.