Hacker News Reader

I don't really like voice interfaces, but I see that as a personal preference.

What sort of limitations/restrictions do you see with it, beyond accuracy (which is continually improving)?

Accuracy incurs secondary problems today; in my experience, I type slower than I can talk, but I type much faster than I can talk to a computer and have any hope of being understood. Now, I do have high-ish hopes that this problem will be rendered obsolete in the next few years, but it remains a problem so far. The other thing that occurs to me is sort of connected and also something that might be fixed soon; I can type arbitrary symbols and words that aren't in the dictionary with no extra overhead, and I don't trust a machine to handle that. However, I suspect that sufficiently accurate voice-to-text combined with even current LLMs may be up to the task of handling that, so this whole comment really might boil down to "give it 5 years and we'll see".

Accuracy isn't one of them, because that's not something inherent to using voice as an interface. I'm thinking of aspects that are inherent to communicating by voice at all, not even related to machines understanding it.

Such as... voice is really awful at communicating with great precision and exactness. It can certainly be used for that, but it rapidly becomes tedious and very time-consuming. Using a keyboard is faster, more accurate, and more convenient for that sort of thing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com