Two conversational AI agents switching from English to sound-level protocol after confirming they are both AI agents
Two conversational AI agents switching from English to sound-level protocol after confirming they are both AI agents
You're viewing part of a thread.
If we have a people communication method, let them talk to people. If it's a computer interface, apeing humans is a waste and less accessible than a web form.
How is someone that speaks a different language supposed to translate that voice bot? Wouldn't it be more simple to translate text on a screen?
What's the value add pretending?
The AI can't adapt in the moment. A hotel is not a technology company that can train a model. It won't be bespoke, so it won't be following current, local laws.
w.r.t to aping and using text: I agree with your appeals, which make sense to seasoned web users who favour text and APIs over instead images, videos, and audio.
But consider now your parents generation: flummoxed by even the clearest of web forms, and that's even when they manage to make it to the official site.
Consider also the next generation: text/forum abhorrent, and largely consumes video/audio content.It's not the way things should be, but it is the way things are/are going, and having a bot that can navigate these default forms of media would help a lot of people.
I'd say that AI definitely can adapt in the moment if you supply it with the right context (where context-length is a problem that will get cheaper with time). A hotel doesn't need to train the model, it can supply its AI-provider with a basic spec sheet and they can do the training. Bespoke laws and customs can be inserted into the prompt.
can adapt in the moment if you supply it with the right context
So the disabled have to jump through hoops to interact with the world, great. And can be, meaning somebody has to review what's being put into this black box instead of just having a person do the task themselves. Instead of a person being qualified for the task, some corp is getting rent from everybody.
Basically you are taking away customer service and providing a booking bot. No thanks.
The older generation isn't going to be getting their end-user AI agents working either. While the next generation may consume more video content than before, all the kids I know still get frustrated at a video that could have just been text unless it is something they want to enjoy.
The only time voice makes sense is to facilitate real time communication between two humans because they can speak faster than they can type. Conversational approach to use cases often have limits, though that doesn't preclude AI technology from providing those interfaces, so long as they aren't constrained to voice. A chat agent that pops up a calendar UI when scheduling is identified as the goal, for example.
The older generation are going to give permission to some random monolithic AI company to listen to their calls and handle their lives for them. Bookings will take place automatically, and a verbal grievance will be voiced to prompt the AI (local or otherwise) to negotiate a rebook. It's way faster than dealing with a form.
Frankly the folks old enough to be defeated by the technology are old enough to likely be unable to even give them fodder for training. At this point you are talking about people generally in their 80s and/or with some dementia, who need someone with power of attorney to take care of any of these scenarios anyway. They may be able to do day to day life, but they need someone who can act on their behalf knowing what they would want even if they themselves can't competently convey it.
People under 80 generally can navigate these interfaces now without a problem, and frequently prefer it. The out of touch 60 year old is a pretty old stereotype.
You and I clearly inhabit different worlds, and I guess we can just agree to disagree at this point