Live data from Hacker News

ChatGPT with voice is now available to all free users

twitter.com

261–270 of 303 posts

Re: ChatGPT with voice is now available to all free users

#261

I'm unconvinced. Just a brief experiment, but I find the voices grating. They are really well synthesized, but they sound like the classic well-trained call center agent: fake friendly. I think the dialect is part of it as well: identifiably US West coast, presumably SF-Bay. Something more neutral, say, mid-Atlantic would be preferable for non-USaians. I asked ChatGPT if it could change its dialect - it said yes, but…

>I asked ChatGPT if it could change its dialect - it said yes, but sounded exactly the same anyway.

Dialect, or accent?

Re: ChatGPT with voice is now available to all free users

#262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I think the personal Jarvis for everyday use won’t eventually be in the cloud. It can already be done on local hw as you are demonstrating and cloud has big downsides around privacy and latency and reliability. Like you said it’s difficult to keep up with and to me it feels very much like open source stuff might win for inference.

And yet of all things word processing and spreadsheets are going to the cloud, or even coding. Not sure big players won't be pushing heavily (as in, not releasing their best models) for the fat subscriptions/data gathering in the cloud, even if I'd much rather see local (as in cloud at home) computing

I understand what you mean. It makes me wonder if there is room for a solution those who want to own their own hardware and data. Almost like other appliances and equipment that initial cost too much for household ownership but maybe having a “brain” in your house will be a luxury appliance for example. As a Crestron system owner I would love to plugin Jarvis to my smart home somehow.

Re: ChatGPT with voice is now available to all free users

#263
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why aren't you complaining about what happens to your HN posts?

It's a spectrum, not a binary. They may not care about HN posts because: 1. We're anonymous here (by default) 2. You can't be fingerprinted from your HN posts the way you can be with your unique voice

You can be anonymous in openai too. Your voice is a terrible fingerprint with today's models.

Re: ChatGPT with voice is now available to all free users

#264

You can ask questions in any language and it automatically detects the language! Tried it and it works amazingly well. It replies in English though.

It replies in the language it thinks follows from what you said. It may have detected that you're non-English languages sounded like an English speaker?

It understands more languages than it speaks, so no it does not always reply in the same language.

Re: ChatGPT with voice is now available to all free users

#265
post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an absurd argument that you are just making for the sake of argument and you know it. There's a difference between someone getting things wrong and a LLM shamelessly making something up out of the whole cloth.

No; I'm much more confident in ChatGPT's accuracy than I am in a random podcast's accuracy. Podcasts tend to be relatively terrible, accuracy wise. If the alternative is learning from ChatGPT, your odds of getting correct information is substantially higher. Podcasts are entertaining! But not where I would go to learn anything.

why are you forced to listen to "random" podcasts vs podcasts by people you trust?

This argument is so dishonest its infuriating.

Re: ChatGPT with voice is now available to all free users

#266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Listen to better podcasts. :P

It's a mistake to listen to a podcast to learn important information.

This is such a weird take. Ppl don't listen to podcast like wikipedia page to learn 'facts' . Why are ppl even comparing chatgpt to podcasts.

Re: ChatGPT with voice is now available to all free users

#267

I’ve been using this for several weeks now and it’s replaced podcasts for me. I’ll just pick a topic and then ask for a summary and then ask clarifying questions. Other times I’ll just goof off. In one chat, I’m rewriting the Star Wars sequels movie by movie with ChatGPT. I’ve realized that I’m built to learn socially, and ChatGPT never tires of my questions or gets annoyed. One interesting story. My 15 year old kid…

[deleted]

Re: ChatGPT with voice is now available to all free users

#269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here, I did it for you: Nero was a Roman Emperor from 54 to 68 AD, known for his controversial and extravagant reign. He was the last emperor of the Julio-Claudian dynasty. Here are some key points about his life and rule: 1. *Early Life and Ascension*: Nero was born Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus in 37 AD. He was adopted by his great-uncle, Emperor Claudius, becoming Nero Claudius Caesar Drusus Germanicus. He ascended…

I also did a brief fact check of a few details here and they were all correct. Zero hallucinations. Does this make sense? Notice how little it matters if my understanding of Nero is complete or entirely accurate; I’m getting a general gist of the topic, and it seems like a good time.

This is missing the broad concern with hallucination: You are putting your trust in something that delivers all results confidently, even if they were predicted incorrectly. Your counter-argument is lack of trust in other sources (podcasts, the education system), however humans, when they don't know something, generally say they don't know something, whereas LLMs will confidently output incorrect information. Knowing nothing about a certain subject, and (for the sake of argument) lacking research access, I would much rather trust a podcast specializing in a certain area than asking a LLM.

Put more simply: I would rather have no information than incorrect information.

I work in a field of tech history that is under-represented on wikipedia, but represented well in other areas on the internet and the web. It is incredibly easy to get chatGPT to hallucinate information and give incorrect answers when asking very basic questions about this field, whereas this field is talked about and covered quite accurately from the early days of usenet all the way up to modern social media. Until the quality of training data can be improved, I can never use chatgpt for anything relating to this field, as I cannot trust its output.

Re: ChatGPT with voice is now available to all free users

#270

I'm unconvinced. Just a brief experiment, but I find the voices grating. They are really well synthesized, but they sound like the classic well-trained call center agent: fake friendly. I think the dialect is part of it as well: identifiably US West coast, presumably SF-Bay. Something more neutral, say, mid-Atlantic would be preferable for non-USaians. I asked ChatGPT if it could change its dialect - it said yes, but…

>I asked ChatGPT if it could change its dialect - it said yes, but sounded exactly the same anyway. Dialect, or accent?

In English, I asked it to change to a Scottish "accent". It said sure, but nothing changed. In German, I asked it to change to the "dialect" spoken in the Wallis - I got a bunch if info in the dialect, but all still in high German.

tl;dr: I tried both...

Post reply on HN