Live data from Hacker News

The case against conversational interfaces

julian.digital

21–30 of 225 posts

Re: The case against conversational interfaces

#21
Individual UIs have been built for every product that has a UI with specific shortcuts and specific techniques you learn to use that tool. I don’t see why the same couldn’t apply for speech interfaces. The article does mention we haven’t figured out shortcuts like the thumbs up equivalent in speech yet but doesn’t explore that further. I can imagine specific words or combinations of words being used to control certain software that you have to learn. Eventually there would be some unification for common tasks.

Re: The case against conversational interfaces

#22
> because after 50+ years of marriage he just sensed that she was about to ask for it. It was like they were communicating telepathically.

> That is the type of relationship I want to have with my computer!

He means automation of routine tasks? Took 50 years to reach that in the example.

What if you want to do something new? Will the thought guessing module in your computer even allow that?

Re: The case against conversational interfaces

#23
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn't Waldorf a cult?

It is, packed of pseudosciences, which we still suffer today. In Switzerland, we get often measle outbreaks thanks to his cult.

Well, how folks view the philosophy can be multifaceted, so I'll leave the pseudoscience and cult part aside. On the measles, Steiner was certainly skeptical of vaccination, but I think in Switzerland you have a cultural issue with vaccination. The Waldorf school I went to in Canada, everyone had a measles vaccine, but I do recall a Swiss student coming to our distinctively not Waldorf high school and there being a huge song and dance about their vaccination status, I think as a society generally...you've got some problems there?

Re: The case against conversational interfaces

#24
post #21

Individual UIs have been built for every product that has a UI with specific shortcuts and specific techniques you learn to use that tool. I don’t see why the same couldn’t apply for speech interfaces. The article does mention we haven’t figured out shortcuts like the thumbs up equivalent in speech yet but doesn’t explore that further. I can imagine specific words or combinations of words being used to control certai…

Speaking is fundamentally slower than typing or using a mouse, and it is a catastrophically bad choice if you are not alone in a room.

Re: The case against conversational interfaces

#25
post #22

> because after 50+ years of marriage he just sensed that she was about to ask for it. It was like they were communicating telepathically. > That is the type of relationship I want to have with my computer! He means automation of routine tasks? Took 50 years to reach that in the example. What if you want to do something new? Will the thought guessing module in your computer even allow that?

I don't know, but I feel like we already have the "telepathic grandfather interface." Or at least we try to have it. My iPhone is constantly guessing at things to suggest to me (I use the share button a lot in different apps) and it's wrong more often than not, forcing me to constantly hunt for things (to say nothing about autocorrect, which is constantly changing correct words that I'd previously typed into incorrect ones)! It doesn't even use a basic, sensible LRU eviction policy. It has some totally inscrutable method of determining what to suggest!

If we want an interface that actually lets us work near the speed of thought, it can't be anything that re-arranges options behind our back all the time. Imagine if you went into your kitchen to cook something and the contents of all your drawers and cupboards had been re-arranged without your knowledge! It would be a total nightmare!

We already knew decades ago that spatial interfaces [1] are superior to everything else when it comes to working quickly. You can walk into a familiar room and instinctively turn on a light by reaching for the switch without even looking. With a well-organized kitchen an experienced chef (or even a skilled home cook) can cook a very complicated dish very efficiently when they know where all of the utensils are so that they don't need to go hunting for everything.

Yet today it seems like all software is constantly trying to guess what we want and in the process ends up rearranging everything so that we never feel comfortable using our computers anymore. I REALLY miss using Mac OS 9 (and earlier). At some point I need to set up some vintage Macs to use it again, though its usefulness at browsing the web is rather limited these days (mostly due to protocol changes, but also due to JavaScript). It'd be really nice to have a modern browser running on a vintage Mac, though the limited RAM would be a serious problem.

[1] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2003/04/finder/

Re: The case against conversational interfaces

#27
post #25
post #22

> because after 50+ years of marriage he just sensed that she was about to ask for it. It was like they were communicating telepathically. > That is the type of relationship I want to have with my computer! He means automation of routine tasks? Took 50 years to reach that in the example. What if you want to do something new? Will the thought guessing module in your computer even allow that?

I don't know, but I feel like we already have the "telepathic grandfather interface." Or at least we try to have it. My iPhone is constantly guessing at things to suggest to me (I use the share button a lot in different apps) and it's wrong more often than not, forcing me to constantly hunt for things (to say nothing about autocorrect, which is constantly changing correct words that I'd previously typed into incorrec…

> With a well-organized kitchen an experienced chef (or even a skilled home cook) can cook a very complicated dish very efficiently when they know where all of the utensils are so that they don't need to go hunting for everything.

Even I can make a breakfast without looking in my kitchen, because I know where all the needed stuff is :)

On another topic, it doesn't have to look well organized. My home office looks like a bomb exploded in it, but I know exactly where everything is.

> I REALLY miss using Mac OS 9 (and earlier).

I was late to the Mac party, about the Snow Leopard days. I definitely remember that back then OS X applications weren't allowed to steal focus from what I had in the foreground. These days every idiotic splash screen steals my typing.

Re: The case against conversational interfaces

#28
post #17

Completely agree, voice UI is best as an augmentation of our current HCI patterns with keyboard/mouse. I think one of the reasons this is, is because our brains kind of have separate buffers for visual memory and aural memory (Baddeley's working memory model). Most computer use takes up the visual buffer, and our aural buffer has extra bandwidth. This also means we can do things aurally while still maintaining focus/…

I feel like the people using Voice Attack or whatever in space sims zeroed in on this.

It's very useful being able to request auxillary functions without losing your focus, and I think that would apply to say, word editing as well - e.g. being able to say "insert a date here" rather the having to get into the menus to find it.

Conversely, latency would be a big issue.

Re: The case against conversational interfaces

#29
post #16

> The second thing we need to figure out is how we can compress voice input to make it faster to transmit. What’s the voice equivalent of a thumbs-up or a keyboard shortcut? Can I prompt Claude faster with simple sounds and whistles? This reminds me of the amazing 2013 video of Travis Rudd coding python by voice: https://youtu.be/8SkdfdXWYaI?si=AwBE_fk6Y88tLcos The number of times in the last few years I've wanted th…

I worked like that for a year in uni because of RSI and it's very easy to get voice strain if you use your voice for coding like that. Many short commands is very tiring for the voice.

It's also hard to dictate code without a lot of these commands because it's very dense in information.

I hope something else will be the solution. Maybe LLMs being smart enough to guess the code out of a very short description and then a set of corrections.

Re: The case against conversational interfaces

#30
"the case against"

You know, doesn't matter what you say. If businesses want something, they'll do it to you whether it's the best interface or not.

Amazon forces "the rabble" into their chatbot customer service system, and hides access to people.

People get touchscreens in their car and fumble to turn on their fog lights or defrost in bad weather. They get voice assistant phone trees and angrily yell "operator and agent".

I really wish there were true competition that would let people choose what works for them.

Post reply on HN