Oh, I'm with you, I think most people understand each other just fine. I just think it's ironic that Tallest didn't just tell him he's wrong, he implied he didn't understand him, which lends some support to the very statement that Tallest was disagreeing with.
Accurate communication isn't as natural as we like to think. TV Shows and Movies are often based around miscommunication as the catalyst for a dramatic situation.
Consider their are about 9 billion people in the world and of those you can only communicate well with a small fraction of them. Of the people that fluently understand our language there are still few that wills understand your points of view. You can try but the chance of something being understood the way you want it understowod with a few simple words is highly unlikely. The most complex the more difficult it is.
Look at the failure rate of relationships and the common reason of couples of communicating with each well which can lead to therapy and perhaps separation. Look at math word problems. Ever not grasped something until it was explained a different way or when words were replaced with images or video?
Language in the written or spoken form is highly imprecise. I can't even say a simple 2 word sentence without there being a multiples of meanings and spellings for each word. We can process this easily because we are human just like we can process faces but a computer needs more precision and to make it simply work, which isn't going to happen, so we end up with a very complex and imperfect system.
PS: If there are autocorrect typos I'm not changing them as it proves my point. If that isn't what you meant by saying "we understand each other just fine" we'll that proves my point, two.
Oh, I'm with you, I think most people understand each other just fine. I just think it's ironic that Tallest didn't just tell him he's wrong, he implied he didn't understand him, which lends some support to the very statement that Tallest was disagreeing with.
Accurate communication isn't as natural as we like to think. TV Shows and Movies are often based around miscommunication as the catalyst for a dramatic situation.
Consider their are about 9 billion people in the world and of those you can only communicate well with a small fraction of them. Of the people that fluently understand our language there are still few that wills understand your points of view. You can try but the chance of something being understood the way you want it understowod with a few simple words is highly unlikely. The most complex the more difficult it is.
Look at the failure rate of relationships and the common reason of couples of communicating with each well which can lead to therapy and perhaps separation. Look at math word problems. Ever not grasped something until it was explained a different way or when words were replaced with images or video?
Language in the written or spoken form is highly imprecise. I can't even say a simple 2 word sentence without there being a multiples of meanings and spellings for each word. We can process this easily because we are human just like we can process faces but a computer needs more precision and to make it simply work, which isn't going to happen, so we end up with a very complex and imperfect system.
PS: If there are autocorrect typos I'm not changing them as it proves my point. If that isn't what you meant by saying "we understand each other just fine" we'll that proves my point, two.
that that is is that that is not is not is not that it that it is
What does that sound like? "Don'tcha know what that's aboot, y'all?"
(From a Minnesotan who moved to LaLa Land) Slange!
O.o
How did you know? heehee, it pretty much is that, exactly. And picture this guy trying to talk about hockey with a bunch of rednecks in Georgia. It just doesn't work.
In all seriousness I can see a Siri based home entertainment working. Siri would still have to be initiated which is why I'd expect it to be a BT remote that would have a button that would call Siri to listen via microphones on your remote that would then send it to whatever device is controlling the content for the TV. You could even make it intelligent enough that it could pick up the content coming from the TV so it can cancel that out from your voice so it wouldn't have to momentarily mute the TV when you said, "Record Comedy Central from 11pm to Midnight MOnday through Thursday."
Yep, I can see this working. I just realllly think it'll all be tied back to the iPhone/iPad/iPod as a centralized "remote."
"Siri, turn my Nest thermostat down to 67 degrees, turn the bedroom lights down to 25% brightness and play some Marvin Gaye"
What does that sound like? "Don'tcha know what that's aboot, y'all?"
(From a Minnesotan who moved to LaLa Land) Slange!
O.o
How did you know? heehee, it pretty much is that, exactly. And picture this guy trying to talk about hockey with a bunch of rednecks in Georgia. It just doesn't work.
I'm probably the only person who thinks this, but I don't want to control devices by talking to them and would find it a purchase impediment if it were a ubiquitous requirement.
It would be an option, obviously, and not a requirement - otherwise i-Device use would be banned in libraries, places of worship, auction houses etc, and people incapable of speech or whose only language is not supported would not be able to use the device.
Quote:
Originally Posted by allenbf
I tend to agree if the device is being used in public...I tend not to use Siri in public - but I'd love to use Siri with the Apple Remote app, on the rumored Applevision.
"Siri...find episodes of "How I Met Your Mother" from 2009"
Siri is great when she doesn't time out on me. I'd love to see them fix that first.
I'm increasingly using Siri in public when I'm alone or in a group to facilitate (joint) action - find the nearest ATM, Bank branch, restaurant etc and give directions to them, weather forecast for a destination, train times, currency conversion etc; it curiously becomes a part of our group discussion and decision-making (most of my colleagues either have iPhones or have gotten over the novelty of Siri-provided solutions) and it sometimes raises a chuckle or sneer ("What would you do without me?" is one of its common "boasts" when providing answers! ).
The trick is in learning to operate within Siri's limitations, as well as using the same flaws to entertain others even when it fails dismally.
Has anyone else noticed Siri losing her mind lately and not keeping track of conversation threads as well?
Me: "What is xxx" (I forget the original query) Siri: "I don't know. Would you like me to search the web?" Me: "Yes, search the web" Siri: "I thought so"
Maybe this would make sence, if apple truly wanted the best cheap phone on the market, reduce the price to a minimum, by hitting the market with a screen less phone, a approach like iPod shuffle yet it has Siri, home button (or d pad) it plays music, does phone calls, voice only apps, AirPlay (use as voice remote for full IOS on the screen.
Maybe this would make sence, if apple truly wanted the best cheap phone on the market, reduce the price to a minimum, by hitting the market with a screen less phone, a approach like iPod shuffle yet it has Siri, home button (or d pad) it plays music, does phone calls, voice only apps, AirPlay (use as voice remote for full IOS on the screen.
Yes! Something about the size of the current AppleTV Remote -- that can interface with the iPad Mini when needed. Want talk use the StickPhone -- want to see/surf/navigate use the iPad Mini. Both use a common SIM and Voice/Message/Data plan.
I'm probably the only person who thinks this, but I don't want to control devices by talking to them and would find it a purchase impediment if it were a ubiquitous requirement.
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
It'll never be a requirement for use.
Yup, just like internet access would never be a requirement for getting something as simple as Finder help. Seriously, I'm in the process of setting up a new machine with Mountain Lion, just clicked the Help menu in the Finder and almost nothing is available. I can see the machine attempting to hit the network, but no help seems to be available locally. WTF?! Ridiculous.
I can just hear some punk-ass kids saying "what kind of computer would ever not have constant, unfettered access to the internet? *sneer* ", and I would merely say that many, many security-conscious labs have computers that can't touch an outside network.
Anyway, I'm not suggesting that we will indeed be forced to access all of our iDevice functionality by voice any time soon, but it's dangerous to say anything will never be a requirement.
I'm probably the only person who thinks this, but I don't want to control devices by talking to them and would find it a purchase impediment if it were a ubiquitous requirement.
Oh, and I'd never use this dictation crap in any case. Never going to send Apple my voiceprint, just to (potentially) save a few keystrokes. It's so sad how everyone turns over their entire fucking lives and identity to a handful of internet powerhouse companies. Yes, Apple is an internet company these days, almost as much as Google, Yahoo, etc.
Comments
Accurate communication isn't as natural as we like to think. TV Shows and Movies are often based around miscommunication as the catalyst for a dramatic situation.
Consider their are about 9 billion people in the world and of those you can only communicate well with a small fraction of them. Of the people that fluently understand our language there are still few that wills understand your points of view. You can try but the chance of something being understood the way you want it understowod with a few simple words is highly unlikely. The most complex the more difficult it is.
Look at the failure rate of relationships and the common reason of couples of communicating with each well which can lead to therapy and perhaps separation. Look at math word problems. Ever not grasped something until it was explained a different way or when words were replaced with images or video?
Language in the written or spoken form is highly imprecise. I can't even say a simple 2 word sentence without there being a multiples of meanings and spellings for each word. We can process this easily because we are human just like we can process faces but a computer needs more precision and to make it simply work, which isn't going to happen, so we end up with a very complex and imperfect system.
PS: If there are autocorrect typos I'm not changing them as it proves my point. If that isn't what you meant by saying "we understand each other just fine" we'll that proves my point, two.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Quote:
Originally Posted by LighteningKid
Oh, I'm with you, I think most people understand each other just fine. I just think it's ironic that Tallest didn't just tell him he's wrong, he implied he didn't understand him, which lends some support to the very statement that Tallest was disagreeing with.
Accurate communication isn't as natural as we like to think. TV Shows and Movies are often based around miscommunication as the catalyst for a dramatic situation.
Consider their are about 9 billion people in the world and of those you can only communicate well with a small fraction of them. Of the people that fluently understand our language there are still few that wills understand your points of view. You can try but the chance of something being understood the way you want it understowod with a few simple words is highly unlikely. The most complex the more difficult it is.
Look at the failure rate of relationships and the common reason of couples of communicating with each well which can lead to therapy and perhaps separation. Look at math word problems. Ever not grasped something until it was explained a different way or when words were replaced with images or video?
Language in the written or spoken form is highly imprecise. I can't even say a simple 2 word sentence without there being a multiples of meanings and spellings for each word. We can process this easily because we are human just like we can process faces but a computer needs more precision and to make it simply work, which isn't going to happen, so we end up with a very complex and imperfect system.
PS: If there are autocorrect typos I'm not changing them as it proves my point. If that isn't what you meant by saying "we understand each other just fine" we'll that proves my point, two.
that that is is that that is not is not is not that it that it is
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
What does that sound like? "Don'tcha know what that's aboot, y'all?"
(From a Minnesotan who moved to LaLa Land) Slange!
O.o
How did you know? heehee, it pretty much is that, exactly. And picture this guy trying to talk about hockey with a bunch of rednecks in Georgia. It just doesn't work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
In all seriousness I can see a Siri based home entertainment working. Siri would still have to be initiated which is why I'd expect it to be a BT remote that would have a button that would call Siri to listen via microphones on your remote that would then send it to whatever device is controlling the content for the TV. You could even make it intelligent enough that it could pick up the content coming from the TV so it can cancel that out from your voice so it wouldn't have to momentarily mute the TV when you said, "Record Comedy Central from 11pm to Midnight MOnday through Thursday."
Yep, I can see this working. I just realllly think it'll all be tied back to the iPhone/iPad/iPod as a centralized "remote."
"Siri, turn my Nest thermostat down to 67 degrees, turn the bedroom lights down to 25% brightness and play some Marvin Gaye"
;-)
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
that that is is that that is not is not is not that it that it is
James while John had had had had had had had had had had had a better effect on the teacher.
Is that Morse Code?
Quote:
Originally Posted by allenbf
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
What does that sound like? "Don'tcha know what that's aboot, y'all?"
(From a Minnesotan who moved to LaLa Land) Slange!
O.o
How did you know? heehee, it pretty much is that, exactly. And picture this guy trying to talk about hockey with a bunch of rednecks in Georgia. It just doesn't work.
LOL! Exactly!
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
that that is is that that is not is not is not that it that it is
Is that Morse Code?
Punctuation...
That, that is, is...
That, that is not, is not...
Is not that it?
That it is!
OMG really? Since when? Then what did you say?
So, the return of Sherlock.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui
I'm probably the only person who thinks this, but I don't want to control devices by talking to them and would find it a purchase impediment if it were a ubiquitous requirement.
It would be an option, obviously, and not a requirement - otherwise i-Device use would be banned in libraries, places of worship, auction houses etc, and people incapable of speech or whose only language is not supported would not be able to use the device.
Quote:
Originally Posted by allenbf
I tend to agree if the device is being used in public...I tend not to use Siri in public - but I'd love to use Siri with the Apple Remote app, on the rumored Applevision.
"Siri...find episodes of "How I Met Your Mother" from 2009"
Siri is great when she doesn't time out on me. I'd love to see them fix that first.
I'm increasingly using Siri in public when I'm alone or in a group to facilitate (joint) action - find the nearest ATM, Bank branch, restaurant etc and give directions to them, weather forecast for a destination, train times, currency conversion etc; it curiously becomes a part of our group discussion and decision-making (most of my colleagues either have iPhones or have gotten over the novelty of Siri-provided solutions) and it sometimes raises a chuckle or sneer ("What would you do without me?" is one of its common "boasts" when providing answers! ).
The trick is in learning to operate within Siri's limitations, as well as using the same flaws to entertain others even when it fails dismally.
Me: "What is xxx" (I forget the original query)
Siri: "I don't know. Would you like me to search the web?"
Me: "Yes, search the web"
Siri: "I thought so"
...and then nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryA
Has anyone else noticed Siri losing her mind lately and not keeping track of conversation threads as well?
Me: "What is xxx" (I forget the original query)
Siri: "I don't know. Would you like me to search the web?"
Me: "Yes, search the web"
Siri: "I thought so"
...and then nothing.
"What's the difference between Siri and the Panama Canal?"
"The Panama Canal is a Busy Ditch"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
"What's the difference between Siri and the Panama Canal?"
"The Panama Canal is a Busy Ditch"
ROTFL!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curtis Hannah
Maybe this would make sence, if apple truly wanted the best cheap phone on the market, reduce the price to a minimum, by hitting the market with a screen less phone, a approach like iPod shuffle yet it has Siri, home button (or d pad) it plays music, does phone calls, voice only apps, AirPlay (use as voice remote for full IOS on the screen.
Yes! Something about the size of the current AppleTV Remote -- that can interface with the iPad Mini when needed. Want talk use the StickPhone -- want to see/surf/navigate use the iPad Mini. Both use a common SIM and Voice/Message/Data plan.
Originally Posted by cnocbui
I'm probably the only person who thinks this, but I don't want to control devices by talking to them and would find it a purchase impediment if it were a ubiquitous requirement.
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
It'll never be a requirement for use.
Yup, just like internet access would never be a requirement for getting something as simple as Finder help. Seriously, I'm in the process of setting up a new machine with Mountain Lion, just clicked the Help menu in the Finder and almost nothing is available. I can see the machine attempting to hit the network, but no help seems to be available locally. WTF?! Ridiculous.
I can just hear some punk-ass kids saying "what kind of computer would ever not have constant, unfettered access to the internet? *sneer* ", and I would merely say that many, many security-conscious labs have computers that can't touch an outside network.
Anyway, I'm not suggesting that we will indeed be forced to access all of our iDevice functionality by voice any time soon, but it's dangerous to say anything will never be a requirement.
Originally Posted by cnocbui
I'm probably the only person who thinks this, but I don't want to control devices by talking to them and would find it a purchase impediment if it were a ubiquitous requirement.
Oh, and I'd never use this dictation crap in any case. Never going to send Apple my voiceprint, just to (potentially) save a few keystrokes. It's so sad how everyone turns over their entire fucking lives and identity to a handful of internet powerhouse companies. Yes, Apple is an internet company these days, almost as much as Google, Yahoo, etc.
Originally Posted by Blah64
…it's dangerous to say anything will never be a requirement.
Equally dangerous to claim that it will be.
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/20201/width/500/height/1000[/IMG]