https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&q=%22computer+emotion%22&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp=
Gives an idea how much academic work is being done in the area. On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 2:33:47 AM UTC, archytas wrote: > > The German sounds somewhat more hostile than the translation Chris. > There's some work on how tone of voice affects decision. Argument content > rarely does well. Voice to text converters I've tried always fail (slightly > better if grandpa leaves his teeth in). We do know bilingual (and multi) > brains work differently than those with only one language. And little AI > programmes outperform us on old arcade games and most of us at chess. > > When it comes to talking to machines, natural language has been a pisser - > though I hear claims we may be getting round this. Google translate and > similar do a fair job, but if you translate to German and then back to > English really significant nonsense comes out. Spoken language is > noise-ridden, and even then maybe only ten percent of what humans > communicate face to face. > > Though we like to think picking up on nuance and emotion is smart, this > may be very misguided - especially as we are so easily conned by liars, > psychopaths and narcissists. Psychos do three times better with parole > boards than ordinary criminals, suggesting something is lost in translation > by worthies on parole boards. My daughters were even more successful with > me. > > We have machines working on Identifying sickos and psychos based on > language (text) use. The basic idea is to place some text from obvious to > sickos, identify Which words, phrases, syntax and so on They use, then > program the machine to spot them. We are doing something similar with > facial recognition and gait analysis. The way we walk is like a > fingerprint. > > In emotional intelligence tests we find a lot of smart people (and dumb > ones) do not get facial expressions as They are supposed to. Having seen > many smiling assassins I'm not sure who is getting this wrong. > > I'd Probably want to examine presuppositions on the bit lost in > translation from the perspective did natural language is not as smart as we > think anyway and May have a prime directive of confusion and deceit. And > I miss Francis too. > > > > On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 12:56:27 AM UTC Chris Jenkins wrote: >> >> What if the only way we could communicate was not understood by other >> software capable of emotions? Digital communication not convey tone now, >> imagine if they also lost nuance in translation? >> >> I'm thinking about this because I have the conversations in this group >> often break into two people together to talk over. I wonder if the other >> speakers understand at all. If our words not only lost her tone, but >> also their native dialect; if it was something even the speaker does not >> understand before they can receive from another person, we would be able to >> communicate at all? >> >> I wish Francisco were here to weigh; he would have insight I'd valuable >> as a native English speaker who has spent so much time in a country with a >> language other than their mother tongue to find. Gabby has been similar >> insight, how much time she spends in English with us, (and how many times >> have I asked if I missed a sense in translation), but I guess they are >> usually only fun poorly translated make my German , : D >> > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
