Hacker News Reader

"I don't want to be sat on the train with people saying "Instagram","Facebook", "ignore", "ignore" all around me. "

Is it possible to implement a voice virus or recursive echo algo using a pile of VUI phones, like in a sardine like open plan office or a crowded bar?

Could I yell into a crowded room "OK Google Now say Siri say ok google now say siri" and let it viral transmit between phones until everyone shuts off their phones in an explosive echo chamber?

Just curious if Siri and Now can either generally or specifically (back door?) talk to each other and if so has anyone exploited it yet.

I also wonder if aside from owners voice there is a back door where stereotypical midwestern newsreader voice auto hacks in and how that interacts if at all. Or a recorded Steve Jobs voice auto unlocks all iphones or something. Or a string of hex digits or nato phonetics as a VUI back door. If there isn't a backdoor, likely you're not looking hard enough or its too heavily classified. And what kind of fun can I have once it becomes known.

> Is it me, or is the benefit of that extremely small?

It's not even a small benefit. It's a horrible interface. Streets and offices filled with people jabbering commands at machines would be just horrible.

It's a gimmick to sell phones that looks cool in a demo and grows old after a little actual use.

Right now it it's probably not worth it yet unless you're already using speech dictation for a disability (including RSI e.a.)

Once we get eye tracking by default on both desktop and AR there will be nothing more natural than the look-and-speak interface though...

But yes; ideally we would quickly get sub-vocalization detection too so that we can address your noisiness concern as well.

>Is it me, or is the benefit of that extremely small? I can move my finger and tap the 'Instagram' icon quicker than I can say "Instagram".

That's because you're picturing it as the slow clunky voice detection we have today. Imagine just picking up your phone and saying naturally: "untog's instagram" and it loads up, no touching no prompting.

Er, I still don't understand how that is quicker. You mean I get to skip unlocking my keypad? Apple's fingerprint scanner thing is a much better solution to that problem.

And how often does that get triggered by accident? I saw to a friend, "did you see my photo on Instagram", and my phone loads the app.

I'm sorry, but voice is an awful interface. And it has been for decades, ever since people first proposed the idea of office workers sitting around dictating their work. It never happened, and that's a good thing.

I know what you're saying but try to imagine a fully-functioning voice AI. Like in the movie Her. In this hypothetical situation you just talk naturally to your device and it knows what you want and can realistically understand you. That's the future.

But an app like Instagram doesn't make any sense in that world. A fully-functioning voice AI only works over voice - once you have to do something visual it loses its purpose. Imagine browsing flight choices by voice only. How is that better than looking at a table?

In any case, I find it interesting that some people walked away from Her and held it up as an example of our technological future, while others walked away and held it up as an example of a horrible dystopian nightmare. To each their own, I suppose.

That is, however, the opposite of what the OP is proposing.

> Is it me, or is the benefit of that extremely small? I can move my finger and tap the 'Instagram' icon quicker than I can say "Instagram". Never mind that the app itself is highly visual, so there's no point launching it without already looking at the screen and holding the phone to your hand.

On the other hand, if you're disabled, cooking, holding a baby, or under a car hood with greasy hands - maybe voice is suddenly 100x more interesting.

From large vacuum tube monstrosities to punch cards to command line to mouse/windows UI to touch to voice - all these progressions kept the previous generation capable (and in some times was only workable in a hybrid solution)

In each progression, another class of viable usage models is exposed. In each progression more users can leverage the power of computing. Just because I find my phone easier to browse with on the train doesn't mean it replaces my laptop at home.

Exactly. The only time I really want to use voice commands is when I'm driving and should not be staring at and touching my phone. It's nice that it can transcribe my voice into a text message. It's nice that it can read a website to me. These are my use cases.

Unfortunately, they are still a little awkward to use. To get it to text someone, I still have to type in their name because it's terrible at learning how my friends' names are pronounced. And to get it to read a web page, I have to highlight the text first and then click Speak. It'd be nice if these were easier to do hands-free.

> Is it me, or is the benefit of that extremely small? I can move my finger and tap the 'Instagram' icon quicker than I can say "Instagram". Never mind that the app itself is highly visual, so there's no point launching it without already looking at the screen and holding the phone to your hand.

I actually built this for Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.precon.wid...

and the key insight to a good UX was making it so it always listens, and changes dynamically, but you confirm that the app should open/the recognition was correct by tapping on it like any other icon.

If you combine the new Moto X with the Moto Hint you essentially have this listening only to you.

That would enable you to say "OK [Moto], Launch Instagram" and it hear you regardless of people around you (specifying that due to a follow up comment you've already received).

You can already say "OK Google [Now], [Open|Launch] Twitter" and it should work.