This is super cool and fun and will almost certainly be really bad for society in loads of different ways. From the descriptions of all the guardrails they're needing to put in it seems like they know it too.
Sora 2 represents significant progress towards [AGI]. In keeping with OpenAI’s mission, it is important that humanity benefits from these models as they are developed.
I wonder how exactly they reconcile the quote above with "We are concerned about late-stage AGI development becoming a competitive race without time for adequate safety precautions"...
The closest thing out there is SignWriting [1] which has about as much traction in the real world as esperanto.
Second problem is that sign language is heavily influenced with corresponding facial expressions, body language, the motion of the hands, even how emphatic the motions are. Trying to approximate what is effectively a SPATIAL language into written glyphs feels like a complete waste of time.
If your native language is French, why might you prefer things to be written in French rather than, say, Swahili?
The point is that "SIGN LANGUAGE" is idiomatic to the native speaker's tongue. So if you're going to take the time to create a specialized written form of it, you can just write using the native language which can be read by BOTH the Deaf and non-Deaf community.
Deaf people are not magically illiterate.
Creating a written sign language serves no value since it is just a crappier version of the normal written equivalent.
So there's not a lot of value in creating a written form of say the French Sign Language because you can just use French.
Swahili regions have multiple types of sign language including Kenyan Sign Language.
[1]
No, this is not true. French and French Sign Language are totally unrelated languages. Sign languages generally have little to do with the spoken language of the country they’re used in, that’s why for example American Sign Language and British sign language are completely different and not mutually intelligible despite the UK and the US speaking the same language (with only slight differences in accent and vocabulary).
subtitles can work but it's basically a second language. perhaps comparable to many countries where people speak a dialect that's very different from the "standard" written language.
this is why you sometimes have sign language interpreters at events, rather than just captions.
there's not really a widely accepted written form of sign language.
No, the reason is because a) it's in real time, and b) there's no screen to put the subtitles on. If it was possible to simply display subtitles on people's vision, that would be much more preferable, because writing is a form of communication more people are familiar with than sign language. For example, someone might not be deaf, but might still not be able to hear the audio, so a sign language interpreter would not help them at all, while closed captions would.
That argument applies just as equally to sign language - most countries have their own idiosyncratic sign language. (ASL, LSE, etc.). Any televised event that has interpreters will be using the national language version.
The closest thing you're thinking of is IS - International Sign but its much more limited in terms of expression and not every deaf person knows it.
> there's not really a widely accepted written form of sign language.
Because it makes no sense to have it unless there was a regional deaf community that was fluent in sign language and also simultaneously illiterate.
https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/comments/6t7k1w/h...
If you're going to convert audio to a digital form in realtime anyway we have this new amazing invention called the WRITTEN LANGUAGE.
(Your comment would be just fine without the last sentence)
"Don't be snarky."