Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Crossing the uncanny valley of conversational voice

sesame.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 231 posts

Re: Crossing the uncanny valley of conversational voice

#51

Post by EGreg »

energy123 wrote: post #50
EGreg wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been asking this for years. People keep saying stuff like "but you'll want the human touch." Really? So when was the last time you asked someone for directions? Personally, I'd rather google something or discuss with ChatGPT than make someone listen to me for an hour. And that someone has to be extremely knowledgeable about a lot of different topics! Even here. Would I rather converse with y'all and get downvote…

I expect there'll be two phases to this. First phase is the widespread use of disembodied voice partners/friends/assistants. Then the second phase will be embodiment, which gives you oxytocin from touch, etc. Can't see this going well for the fertility crisis. The tech oligarchs then invest in ectogenesis technology, and use their sperm to dominate the gene pool.

You're assuming the tech oligarchs will be men.

I guess it's a pretty safe assumption :-P

Re: Crossing the uncanny valley of conversational voice

#52

Post by radley »

The inflection was quite good. The only thing off seemed to be when she was thinking on something new. Instead of pausing to think, her next thought actually started too quickly, cutting off the very end of what she was saying before.

I am curious how easy it would be to adjust the inflection and timing. She was over-complimentary, which is fine for a demo. But I'd love something more direct, like a brainstorming session, and almost talking over each other. And then a whiteboard...

Re: Crossing the uncanny valley of conversational voice

#53

Post by dmix »

thekevan wrote: post #10

It's good, but it still sounds fake to me, but in a different way. The voice itself sounds like a human, undoubtedly. But the cadence and the rhythm of speaking are off. It sounds like someone who isn't a podcaster trying to speak in the personality of a podcaster. It just sounds like someone trying too hard and speaking in an unnatural way.

Humans are extremely well tuned to detect authenticity in communication. Especially younger generations raised on mass marketing.

This is good in a way a scifi movie shows a tech, sounds cool and demos futuristic possibilities. But not quite passing the real human vibe yet. But I'm sure some people might find it preferable to a more to-the-point system like GPT or Siri/Alexa in certain niche cases not requiring immediate gratification.

Re: Crossing the uncanny valley of conversational voice

#54

Post by ok_dad »

energy123 wrote: post #50
EGreg wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been asking this for years. People keep saying stuff like "but you'll want the human touch." Really? So when was the last time you asked someone for directions? Personally, I'd rather google something or discuss with ChatGPT than make someone listen to me for an hour. And that someone has to be extremely knowledgeable about a lot of different topics! Even here. Would I rather converse with y'all and get downvote…

I expect there'll be two phases to this. First phase is the widespread use of disembodied voice partners/friends/assistants. Then the second phase will be embodiment, which gives you oxytocin from touch, etc. Can't see this going well for the fertility crisis. The tech oligarchs then invest in ectogenesis technology, and use their sperm to dominate the gene pool.

You should turn that into a novel, it sounds like something you could sell to the romance crowd. I hear sci-fi is the next genre they'll take over.

Re: Crossing the uncanny valley of conversational voice

#55

Post by tovej »

EGreg wrote: post #39
energy123 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now here's a little thought experiment. What does the world look like in 5 years when everyone is talking to these things that are indistinguishable from a real person? They will be funnier, more compassionate, less judgemental, smarter, and superficially "better" in every respect.

I've been asking this for years. People keep saying stuff like "but you'll want the human touch." Really? So when was the last time you asked someone for directions? Personally, I'd rather google something or discuss with ChatGPT than make someone listen to me for an hour. And that someone has to be extremely knowledgeable about a lot of different topics! Even here. Would I rather converse with y'all and get downvote…

Because the humans are reasoning and the LLMs aren't? I have yet to use an LLM for a complex problem and not have it hallucinate.

I expect a reasonable counterargument here would be 'but the LLMs have chain of thought now, and that's reasoning". I disagree, but I think that's a reasonable point of view. I can concede that point because it does not materially change the value of the output. Even if it does use chain of thought, an LLM gives you extremely trite solutions based on probable text, it still has no context in which to reason, it's "reasoning" in platos cave using the shapes of real world objects, filtered through a lossy language model.

LLMs are great for one thing: brainstorming, and brainstorming is only useful if you have no idea what to do in the first place. Once you know _anything_ substantial about the subject matter an LLM loses its value to you as a conversation partner.

Re: Crossing the uncanny valley of conversational voice

#58

Post by drsopp »

ok_dad wrote: post #54
energy123 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expect there'll be two phases to this. First phase is the widespread use of disembodied voice partners/friends/assistants. Then the second phase will be embodiment, which gives you oxytocin from touch, etc. Can't see this going well for the fertility crisis. The tech oligarchs then invest in ectogenesis technology, and use their sperm to dominate the gene pool.

You should turn that into a novel, it sounds like something you could sell to the romance crowd. I hear sci-fi is the next genre they'll take over.

They did this in Futurama

https://m.youtube.com/results?sp=mAEA&search_query=futurama+...

Re: Crossing the uncanny valley of conversational voice

#59

Post by igleria »

hn_user82179 wrote: post #4
monroewalker wrote: post #2

This was already posted here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43221377 but I’m really surprised at the lack of attention this model is getting. The responsiveness and apparent personality are pretty mind blowing. It’s similar to what OpenAI had initially demoed for advanced voice mode, at least for the voice conversation portion. The demo interactions are recorded, which is mentioned in their disclaimer under th…

It was genuinely startling how human it felt. Apparently they are planning on open-sourcing some of their work as well as selling glasses (presumably with the voice assistant). I’m very excited to have a voice assistant like this and am almost a bit worried I will start feeling emotionally attached to a voice assistant with this level of human-like sound.

Maybe the ability to personalize the voice so it is more... robotic or based on a fictional thing like Knight Rider would help to change the attachment to something more... healthy?

Re: Crossing the uncanny valley of conversational voice

#60

Post by thfuran »

dmix wrote: post #53
thekevan wrote: post #10

It's good, but it still sounds fake to me, but in a different way. The voice itself sounds like a human, undoubtedly. But the cadence and the rhythm of speaking are off. It sounds like someone who isn't a podcaster trying to speak in the personality of a podcaster. It just sounds like someone trying too hard and speaking in an unnatural way.

Humans are extremely well tuned to detect authenticity in communication. Especially younger generations raised on mass marketing. This is good in a way a scifi movie shows a tech, sounds cool and demos futuristic possibilities. But not quite passing the real human vibe yet. But I'm sure some people might find it preferable to a more to-the-point system like GPT or Siri/Alexa in certain niche cases not requiring immed…

>Humans are extremely well tuned to detect authenticity in communication.

I think the long-standing success of advertising and propaganda suggests that people really aren't all that good at that.

Post reply on HN