131–140 of 238 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> AI in KFC drive thrus That right here is an anxiety trigger and would make me skip the place. There is nothing more ruining the day like arguing with a robot who keeps misinterpreting what you said.
Are we entering a new era of KFC drive-through jailbreaks?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The median delay between speakers in a human to human conversation is zero milliseconds. In other words, about 1/2 the time, one speaker interrupts the other, making the delay negative." Is that really a productive way to frame it? I would imagine there is some delay between one party hearing the part of the sentence that triggers the interruption, and them actually interrupting the other party. Shouldn't we quantif…
"Necessary" is an interesting framing. Here are a few others: - Expeditious - Constructive - Insightful -
Saying this as a user of these tools (openai, Google voice chat etc). These are fast yes, but they don't allow talking naturally with pauses. When we talk, we take long and small pauses for thinking or for other reasons. With these tools, AI starts taking as soon as we stop. Happens both in text and voice chat tools. I saw a demo on twitter a few weeks back where AI was waiting for the person to actually finish what…
This 100%, yes! I've found myself putting in filler words or holding a noise "Uhhhhhhhhh" while I'm trying to form a thought but I don't want the LLM to start replying. It's a really hard problem for sure. Similar to the problem of allowing for interruptions but not stopping if the user just says "Right!", "Yes", aka active listening. One thing I love about MacWhisper (not special to just this STT tool) is it's hold…
> The proposal examined here is that speakers use uh and um to announce that they are initiating what they expect to be a minor (uh), or major (um), delay in speaking. Speakers can use these announcements in turn to implicate, for example, that they are searching for a word, are deciding what to say next, want to keep the floor, or want to cede the floor. Evidence for the proposal comes from several large corpora of spontaneous speech. The evidence shows that speakers monitor their speech plans for upcoming delays worthy of comment. When they discover such a delay, they formulate where and how to suspend speaking, which item to produce (uh or um), whether to attach it as a clitic onto the previous word (as in “and-uh”), and whether to prolong it. The argument is that uh and um are conventional English words, and speakers plan for, formulate, and produce them just as they would any word.
[1]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00100...
This kind of thing immediately made me think about the 512gb mac studio. If this works as good on that hardware as it does on the recommended nvidia cards, then the $15k is not much the price of the hardware but rather the price of having a full conversational at home, private.
Saying this as a user of these tools (openai, Google voice chat etc). These are fast yes, but they don't allow talking naturally with pauses. When we talk, we take long and small pauses for thinking or for other reasons. With these tools, AI starts taking as soon as we stop. Happens both in text and voice chat tools. I saw a demo on twitter a few weeks back where AI was waiting for the person to actually finish what…
This is called turn detection, and there are some great tools coming out to solve this recently. (One user mentioned Livekit’s turn detection model). I think in a years time we will see dramatic improvement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> AI in KFC drive thrus That right here is an anxiety trigger and would make me skip the place. There is nothing more ruining the day like arguing with a robot who keeps misinterpreting what you said.
Read this if you haven’t already: https://marshallbrain.com/manna1 That’s a much more serious anxiety trigger for me.
I kept expecting a twist though - the technology evoked in Parts 6 & 7 is exactly what I would imagine the end point of Manna to become. Using the "racks" would be so much cheaper than feeding people and having all those robots around.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot better techniques exist now days than pure silence detection - 1. A special model that predicts when a conversation turn is coming up (e.g. when someone is going to stop speaking). Speech has a rhythm to it and pauses / ends of speech are actually predictable. 2. Generate a model response for every subsequent word that comes in (and throw away the previously generated response), so basically your time to speak…
I think 2 & 3 should be combined. The AI should just finish the current sentence (internally) before it's being spoken, and once it reaches a high enough confidence, stick with the response. That's what humans do, too. We gather context and are able to think of a response while the other person is still talking.