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

GPT‑Live

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–556 of 556 posts

Re: GPT‑Live

#551

Post by Martinussen »

timpera wrote: post #281
Martinussen wrote: post #279

This voice is awful , possibly one of the worst AI/computer voices I have heard in like two years now - what's up with that? Is this seriously the best a company burning this much money can do, and they consider this acceptable to release? Like two syllables in and my first response was to grimace and physically cringe. Does anyone here think this sounds good, or even just "fine enough"? Do engineers that work on thi…

What don't you like about the voice? Geniune question, I'm not using it in English but I think it sounds fine in my language, and it's an improvement over the previous one.

It's just... Very robotic and clearly generated, makes random inhuman pitch shifts, etc.. Very alien overall.

Re: GPT‑Live

#552

Post by FridgeSeal »

jdthedisciple wrote: post #524
FridgeSeal wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somewhat of a self-fulfilling prophecy no? - nobody else with the skills - talk to machine - nobody develops the skills to have a conversation - go to step 1. - bonus step: your own skills atrophy too.

Devil's advocate: The widespread lack of social skills was not caused by LLMs in the first place. In fact, AI ChatBots, if used right, can actually help remedy lacking socialising skills.

Not if there’s good money to be made exploiting people for money instead!

There’s plenty of evidence that these models worsen these issues, and we know from prior experience that companies like FB will happily exploit vulnerable users for money.

Re: GPT‑Live

#553

Post by nullbio »

derangedHorse wrote: post #374
nullbio wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. Fluid natural conversational AI is far more productive than any other interface for working with LLMs. Although I suppose you could make the argument that it should be more... Robotic like. Like in StarTrek. Which, is honestly probably better for work, too. A "get shit done" mode, of pure, cold, efficiency.

Ironically, Data (from TNG) has a lot of heart to him

Data is the goal!

Re: GPT‑Live

#554

Post by Ey7NFZ3P0nzAe »

derangedHorse wrote: post #380
overgard wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Blame the individual" doesn't really make sense when we're talking about things that have a society-wide impact. As an analogue, personally I'm not on social media, but I am affected by social media because everyone around me is on social media and their happiness and wellbeing also impacts me. AI companies need to stop pretending they can just outsource responsibility for their products. I think assuming people wil…

So you want to blame a company for the impact others have on you because those said others choose to consume their product?

> choose

I think there's a logic leap here that ignores most of what big companies know about how to gey people addicted to things

Re: GPT‑Live

#555

Post by hackrmn »

batperson wrote: post #371
hackrmn wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fewer people aren't staring into their phones or talking to them -- makes your social antennas pick up automatically on not wanting to disturb them (lest you draw their ire for not having the social antennas long enough to pick up on the fact they're "busy and don't want to engage with you" like a gymrat with AirPods to signal they're there to pump in peace and quiet listening to their favourite playlist, not talk to…

Social people will be fine, I think this tech is far more important for lonely people who for any reason don't get to socialize much (if at all), this is especially common in older people. These people might not have any other alternatives.

I think a fundamental and flawed assumption in your general line of argument boils down to that line:

> Social people will be fine

Thing is, "social" is not only a scale, it's not even a line for scale. It's this multidimensional space of different social preferences and different preferences as to _how_ to socialise, not to mention with whom and for what reason. In short, it's much more complicated than as to permit a "binary" division into the "social" and "other" people, but even if you did, I would wager the division puts it at 50% for either group, meaning you're basically describing a cataclysmic event where 50% of the population suddenly has no access to a fundamental trait of humanity that in known and unknown ways has assured our feeling of happiness and warded off a plethora of conditions of misery and worse that psychology has no names for (and won't ever have names for because that's like classifying different gradations of drinkable water, I imagine).

But yeah, humanity has always had to evolve, it's just that these changes come too fast for our adaptability to adapt to, I believe.

Re: GPT‑Live

#556

Post by iandanforth »

athyuttamre wrote: post #333
iandanforth wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we have less terrible voices please? Nothing that sounds like a bubbly millennial. Literally anything that has gravitas.

Have you tried some of our deeper voices like Spruce? Would love to hear what your ideal voice is.

I have. They are not to my taste.

Here's a voice I really enjoy listening to. https://elevenlabs.io/app/voice-library?search=zNsotODqUhvbJ...

If I could have Christopher Lee, or Stephen Fry, I would.

Post reply on HN