Nice to read this, being someone who uses lots of Microsoft products, but I have mixed feelings: after all these years Cortana still understands 0.0% of my native language (Dutch). Very disappointing, especially seeing that Google has no problems understanding Dutch.
Researchers reach human parity in conversational speech recognition
11–20 of 164 posts
Re: Researchers reach human parity in conversational speech recognition
#12I don't have a background in this area, so I'm likely easily impressed, but this seems really impressive. And the acknowledgement that there's a lot of work to be done, such as discriminating between speakers and recognition in adverse environments. Yeah, it's Microsoft writing on their own technology, but they addressed in the text the questions I had already in mind from just reading the title. It didn't leave me w…
I don't get why that's frustrating, without image and speech recognition AI isn't possible. -- How intelligent could people be without sensory perception? Hellen Keller is the exception, take away the ability for humans to process sound, and images as a species and we wouldn't be nearly as advanced as we are today even if we still had the same brain structure and mental capacity. Ray Kurzweil understood this and is w…
Perhaps because "true AI" is an illusion. There is always a better term that has meaning.
And yet people like Ray Kurzweil toss the term around as if it does have meaning. What's the point unless you define it? You might as well reference anti gravity or teleportation.
Re: Researchers reach human parity in conversational speech recognition
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get why that's frustrating, without image and speech recognition AI isn't possible. -- How intelligent could people be without sensory perception? Hellen Keller is the exception, take away the ability for humans to process sound, and images as a species and we wouldn't be nearly as advanced as we are today even if we still had the same brain structure and mental capacity. Ray Kurzweil understood this and is w…
The touring test shows AI has little to do with image or speech recognition. An AI that operates in a purely virtual environment would still be revolutionary.
The Turing test doesn't test for intelligence, simply human-like communication. Things like lying, typing errors, or reaction to insult aren't indicators of an artificial intelligence, but are requirements for passing the Turing test.
One of the biggest criticisms of the Turing test is, because it's a behavioral or functional test, there is no way to ensure that the computer is actually thinking intelligently at all, rather than following a very-well-articulated rules engine.
Re: Researchers reach human parity in conversational speech recognition
#14Good for them! I'm a bit surprised that the researchers didn't already possess human-level speech recognition, though.
I wasn't sure which way round to parse it (ironically). Are they saying that Microsoft researchers are now almost as good at recognizing conversational speech as humans? Or that Microsoft researchers can now almost pass as human in conversational speech? Either way, good news for Microsoft Research, I think.
Re: Researchers reach human parity in conversational speech recognition
#15I don't have a background in this area, so I'm likely easily impressed, but this seems really impressive. And the acknowledgement that there's a lot of work to be done, such as discriminating between speakers and recognition in adverse environments. Yeah, it's Microsoft writing on their own technology, but they addressed in the text the questions I had already in mind from just reading the title. It didn't leave me w…
I don't get why that's frustrating, without image and speech recognition AI isn't possible. -- How intelligent could people be without sensory perception? Hellen Keller is the exception, take away the ability for humans to process sound, and images as a species and we wouldn't be nearly as advanced as we are today even if we still had the same brain structure and mental capacity. Ray Kurzweil understood this and is w…
Lots of good questions about what I mean by AI. I agree my statement wasn't very precise. And to be honest, that's a reflection of me not having a precise definition of what it is, exactly. However, I do think there's a distinction between speech/image recognition and what's commonly understood as AI, with speech and image recognition being sensory input systems, and AI in a more colloquial sense, such as learning and problem solving on at approximately human level. My statement was imprecise, and given I was expressing frustration at imprecision, my bad :)
Thanks for the feedback! Gives me more to think about.
Re: Researchers reach human parity in conversational speech recognition
#16I don't have a background in this area, so I'm likely easily impressed, but this seems really impressive. And the acknowledgement that there's a lot of work to be done, such as discriminating between speakers and recognition in adverse environments. Yeah, it's Microsoft writing on their own technology, but they addressed in the text the questions I had already in mind from just reading the title. It didn't leave me w…
Its frustrating when people assume any reference to AI means AGI or strong AI.
It's not their fault really. Tv and movies, especially ones like the matrix, AI and Irobot call AGI, AI.
Doesn't make it any less frustrating, but also distinguishes the people in it versus those who aren't.
Re: Researchers reach human parity in conversational speech recognition
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
The touring test shows AI has little to do with image or speech recognition. An AI that operates in a purely virtual environment would still be revolutionary.
The Turing test doesn't test for intelligence , simply human-like communication. Things like lying, typing errors, or reaction to insult aren't indicators of an artificial intelligence, but are requirements for passing the Turing test. One of the biggest criticisms of the Turing test is, because it's a behavioral or functional test, there is no way to ensure that the computer is actually thinking intelligently at all…
This is also true for pwople. How do you know humans are thinking and not following lots of social rules they learn thanks to special neural hardware for learning social interaction?
Think about the intelligence conveyed in ritualized greetings.
Re: Researchers reach human parity in conversational speech recognition
#18Ok, when's the next 2GB Xbox One update and will this fix the problem of me saying "Xbox watch NBC", and it 'hearing' "Xbox watch TV"?
Re: Researchers reach human parity in conversational speech recognition
#19Very nice. How long before something this good is available as open source?
A tough test would be to hook this up to a police/fire scanner, or air traffic control radio.
Re: Researchers reach human parity in conversational speech recognition
#20I don't have a background in this area, so I'm likely easily impressed, but this seems really impressive. And the acknowledgement that there's a lot of work to be done, such as discriminating between speakers and recognition in adverse environments. Yeah, it's Microsoft writing on their own technology, but they addressed in the text the questions I had already in mind from just reading the title. It didn't leave me w…
I'm curious, what is your definition of AI?
A machine process qualifies as AI if it believes in a god.
EDIT: I see the nuances of epistemological problems are lost to HN and knee-jerk culture war atheism still rules supreme.