The second reason that such systems are extremely unlikely to emerge is that even if it would be doable technically, it would be extremely expensive to a company. And there would be literally no demand for it, because the overwhelming majority of people don't care about talking to robots. They already don't have enough time to spend with their children, partners, friends, parents... why would anyone waste time with a fake person? No company would invest the billions, if not hundreds of billions of dollars, to solve this problem in the next few hundred years.
You've missed the point. Why would people watch a TV show and grow to love/hate characters, where there's no interaction between you and them, and all the lines, actions and scenes are scripted and rehearsed. They certainly don't have time to do it, and have children, partners, friends, parents. They would surely not binge watch, schedule time to watch new episodes come rain hail or shine or spend big bucks to visit filming locations etc.
Companies will invest stupid amounts of money in AI that has human qualities. Take the TV Show example: the AI is the "show" and each day they get into entertaining or emotional circumstances that you can "catch up" about, joke about etc. Their charisma is highly engineered to be incredibly engaging and fun to talk to, so you keep coming back for more. Over time they become a "good friend" that you love talking to. They never rebuff you, snub you, have no time for you, make fun of you (too much, just enough to joke around and have some banter). But why do they keep telling you how great Pepsi's new flavours are??
Because the TV show has no bugs, no "I'm sorry, I didn't understand why you said, rephrase" in the middle of your rant against whatever, and creates the same experience for everyone who watches it, so that people can discuss amongst themselves.
Not in the middle of a rant, or while you are professing your love for someone. In neutral discourse, sure that's expected.
You can even not speak the same language, humans can understand each other by other means like body language and cultural cues. It's not something you can replicate in a machine unless you really understand how it works. Unless you are saying that human behaviour is completely understood...
Not in the middle of a rant, or while you are professing your love for someone.
It's possible to detect mode of speech even without visual cues. Factors such as pitch dynamics, speed of talk, etc. can be accounted for. Software can be trained to be even more sensitive to these signals than we are.
Of course, the problem is that this varies somewhat among different people. Therefore, part of AI training would need to happen with actual customer after purchase. There're a lot of unknowns in this process from manufacturer's point of view, so I can understand why it's not happening yet.
Once a “special” mode of speech is detected, though, it's simple to avoid canned “Please rephrase” response in case of unclear voice input. Instead the software would change its own mode of speech appropriately, and then evade the direct reply—humans do this all the time in real-life communication.
Comments
You've missed the point. Why would people watch a TV show and grow to love/hate characters, where there's no interaction between you and them, and all the lines, actions and scenes are scripted and rehearsed. They certainly don't have time to do it, and have children, partners, friends, parents. They would surely not binge watch, schedule time to watch new episodes come rain hail or shine or spend big bucks to visit filming locations etc.
Companies will invest stupid amounts of money in AI that has human qualities. Take the TV Show example: the AI is the "show" and each day they get into entertaining or emotional circumstances that you can "catch up" about, joke about etc. Their charisma is highly engineered to be incredibly engaging and fun to talk to, so you keep coming back for more. Over time they become a "good friend" that you love talking to. They never rebuff you, snub you, have no time for you, make fun of you (too much, just enough to joke around and have some banter). But why do they keep telling you how great Pepsi's new flavours are??
Because the TV show has no bugs, no "I'm sorry, I didn't understand why you said, rephrase" in the middle of your rant against whatever, and creates the same experience for everyone who watches it, so that people can discuss amongst themselves.
Slightly OT, but I'd be tempted to argue TV Shows can and do have bugs; plot holes, bad acting, continuity errors et al. They can be quite jarring.
That's a good point. At least they have less bugs than Siri.
Nevermind that for much of the history of TV, and still today, it randomly cuts out?
Heck, I sometimes say "I don't understand, can you explain?" Why would people be less tolerant of that from a robot than from me?
Not in the middle of a rant, or while you are professing your love for someone. In neutral discourse, sure that's expected.
You can even not speak the same language, humans can understand each other by other means like body language and cultural cues. It's not something you can replicate in a machine unless you really understand how it works. Unless you are saying that human behaviour is completely understood...
It's possible to detect mode of speech even without visual cues. Factors such as pitch dynamics, speed of talk, etc. can be accounted for. Software can be trained to be even more sensitive to these signals than we are.
Of course, the problem is that this varies somewhat among different people. Therefore, part of AI training would need to happen with actual customer after purchase. There're a lot of unknowns in this process from manufacturer's point of view, so I can understand why it's not happening yet.
Once a “special” mode of speech is detected, though, it's simple to avoid canned “Please rephrase” response in case of unclear voice input. Instead the software would change its own mode of speech appropriately, and then evade the direct reply—humans do this all the time in real-life communication.