A machine one wants to talk to seems to be an AI-complete problem. Speaking is an act, and not one the human mind takes lightly. @PaulSkallas will have some Lindy thoughts on that.
-
-
Replying to @SimonDeDeo @BrianRoemmele
There's no ancient antecedent to speaking to AI. Alexa and Siri are terrible, awkward and alienating. But it's not because they are in the stone age, but because humans want to talk to other humans. You can feel it when you speak to these AI assistants. It doesn't feel right
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Speech is in a different category than text or UI. The only antecedents to speaking to objects is praying to an icon/wailing wall/religious service. Even voice 2 text, which some thought we would be doing more by now has not garnered much traction.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @PaulSkallas @SimonDeDeo
Paul, I hear ya. The antecedents may very well be humans. Additionally in the late 1800s telephonophobia had a similar discordance with a generation. The original phone needed to be anthropomorphized with the bells as eyes and microphone as nose for some to even use the device.pic.twitter.com/TE1y7v2aR8
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Paul, as to Speech-To-Text. Google and other have shown that it has indeed taken off. One interesting statistic is the youth cohort: 25% of individuals ages 16-24 use voice search on mobile:https://blog.globalwebindex.com/chart-of-the-day/25-of-16-24s-use-voice-search-on-mobile/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BrianRoemmele @SimonDeDeo
what does "not interested" mean? http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/12/12/nearly-half-of-americans-use-digital-voice-assistants-mostly-on-their-smartphones/?utm_source=Triggermail&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Post%20Blast%20%28bii-apps-and-platforms%29:%20Voice%20assistant%20usage%20remains%20low%20%E2%80%94%20FCC%20votes%20to%20repeal%20net%20neutrality%20rules%20%E2%80%94%20Facebook%20introduces%20Click-to-WhatsApp&utm_term=BII%20List%20Mobile%20ALL …pic.twitter.com/XNGKLr5KPv
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @PaulSkallas @SimonDeDeo
Paul, the same research group conducted a similar study when the Macintosh was released in 1984. Over 70% were not interested in owning a computer. Now it’s in their pocket. Here is some empirical insights from the source, this is just voice search growth...pic.twitter.com/40ncMVuitl
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @BrianRoemmele @SimonDeDeo
But owning a computer isn't the same thing as speaking to AI. Twitter seems like it doesn't have an antecedent but then you realize it's just a bar or coffee house to interact with other people. But where's this antecedent with speaking to AI in history?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @PaulSkallas @SimonDeDeo
Simon, question, is an antecedent or lack thereof an important marker for you? Having an antecedent for speaking to AI increases or decreases utility in your thesis?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BrianRoemmele @PaulSkallas
That’s Paul. But I think he’s right: computers augment us—they cannot transform us. So historical antecedents can be an excellent guide.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like
Simon, thank you. I hear ya. It may be how we define transform. Always on instant access communication via mobile internet may have done this to humans. So much so that if a Carrington Event befell us, many would not survive without it. Augment definitely, but perhaps transformed
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.