Comment on The case against conversational interfaces « julian.digital
TheUniverseandNetworks@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Interesting article, I agree with his analysis, not sure (yet) that I agree with his conclusions. My brain needs to think about it in the background for a bit (just the way mine works).
TLDR: we should expect conversational interfaces to be an addition to the workflows we currently use.
drspod@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
Computer upvote this post. I mean comment. No, I meant the comment. Computer remove the upvote from the post. Computer upvote the comment.
Computer compose reply.
Dear Aunt, let’s set so double the killer delete select all
Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
In my own real world usage I estimate a comprehension rate of about 92% with voice agents. I’m no linguist, but I’d guess that you’d need to achieve at least 98% comprehension to not feel like a conversation is frustrating. I’m also trying instantly irritated if my computer is delayed and nothing happens when I click on something, or if I go to use someone else’s computer and they have double-clicking enabled for some reason (why?!) so my tolerance is probably on the low end.
Anyway, I thought this was an insightful read and the key to me is that the bar is pretty high now for Man-machine interfaces, so any implementation of newer tech needs to be both thoughtful and bug-free as possible in this realm.
taladar@sh.itjust.works 5 weeks ago
For me it feels more like 9.2% most of the time.
Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 5 weeks ago
Does feel like that, I agree, but if you spoke to someone who randomly completely misunderstood 8 out of every 100 words you said and had next to zero dead reckoning ability to figure out what that missing word was, I think you’d feel pretty frustrated.