rick the ponderer wrote: >There was a brief post on a possible path to agi at >http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=271202
The problem with speech recognition is not converting speech into words, but converting words into useful actions. "Press 1 or say 'yes'" is not a solution to the speech recognition problem. Your proposal looks similar to my proposal for competitive message routing, although lacking in detail. http://www.mattmahoney.net/agi.html Either way, it will be expensive. AGI is worth the labor it replaces, valued at over US $1 quadrillion worldwide over the next 30 years. When I see proposals that purport to solve AGI on a budget of $1 million or $1 billion or even $1 trillion, I can only shake my head. -- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----- Original Message ---- From: rick the ponderer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, August 9, 2008 4:18:34 PM Subject: Re: [agi] brief post on possible path to agi On 8/9/08, Brad Paulsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: rick, Except that the author bases his argument on an inaccurate premise. See: http://www.speech.cs.cmu.edu/ for an excellent speech recognizer. It's open source (has been for at least a decade). In fact, the Apple (who the author omitted) and Microsoft both based their speech recognizers on Sphinx (I know, I worked in the ATG research team at Apple that developed their speech recognizer). The Festival project (Google it), also partly hosted at CMU, is a world-class speech synthesizer. Also open source and free to all. And, there are others (eSpeak - based on Festival, GPL and free). Cheers, Brad rick the ponderer wrote: There was a brief post on a possible path to agi at http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=271202 yesterday. Essentially it involves masses of people creating binary classifiers in a economic market system, similar to how content is created on the web today (though with a micropayment system rather than advertising supported model). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;;> Your Subscription [Powered by Listbox] <http://www.listbox.com> ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com I'm the author of the post - I don't really know about speech recognizers (i had heard of those and have tried using them on my computer, I just meant products widely available to the nontechnical public), But my argument is they're not good enought yet (otherwise human transcription services wouldn't exist) because enough human labelled data hasn't been used to create them, and such an undertaking would require many thousands/millions of people (if you include video and text recognition). ________________________________ agi | Archives | Modify Your Subscription ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=108809214-a0d121 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
