- 4 days
“Our new AI listens to you and will do whatever you tell it to do.”
“Tell it to fuck off.”
Being real, this is why I fucking hate the bullshit, corporate greed hype of LLMs and generative software. All the “bubble” shit? It tars all versions of the technology with the same brush.
This? This is exactly what it should be used for. And, ffs, earlier speech to text was really the same fucking thing in essence. Software that took input in the form of voice, compared it to a set of data, and made a best guess at what you meant. Yeah, the details are different, but it’s the same concept.
This? This is fucking awesome. Locally run, and doing a job that’s vital in accessibility, with the side benefit of being useful to others. Assuming canonical is being honest anyway.
But this kind of thing should be the way things are done.
5 daysEven if we called them LLMs, which we should, people will keep having these negative connotations to the technology because of overmarketing. This feature is still using LLMs, and that’s not supposed to be a bad thing.
Stop blaming the technology, and blame the corpos pushing it to the moon. This is “BitTorrent is only used for piracy” bullshit all over again.
But it is AI, so it should be called that. People should adjust their simplistic notions about the term instead
Nah, it isn’t. Intelligence implies independence. What it is is a fancy algorithm with a big data set.
It doesn’t have to be general ai to be called ai, but so far none of the models I’m aware of have reached a standard to be called intelligence in the colloquial sense for sure
The term used in academic literature and the field itself for that kind of technology is and has been AI for at least ten years. Intelligence doesn’t imply independence anyways? And besides, even if it did, thats why an entire 50% of the term consists of the modifier “artificial”. So like, you’re right that it isn’t intelligence in the colloquial sense. It’s artificial intelligence in the technical and standardized sense, though. The use of term is pretty much totally undebatable. Just because people don’t like the term now doesn’t change that.
- 5 days
This would have been better received if they just didn’t use AI in the name. Sure, it’s just using an LLM under the hood, but it’s running purely locally. It also betters Linux since it helps address an accessibility issue.
- 6 days
Offline-only speech-to-text, integrated with the desktop for push-to-talk voice typing? That’s the kind of AI that I’d like to see. Actually add features that can help people without harming their rights. I’m still moving new machines to Debian but this is nice.
Also how is speech to text AI? It has existed for decades, obviously a lot better now but I don’t think I’d consider it “AI”
- 5 days
There’s been ML and non-ML ways of doing STT over the years. as far as I recall. The current best implementations are ML-based. In coloquial terms ML algorithms are AI. We used to call them AI in the 2010s, before AI was (un)cool.
- 3 days
I have been using a speech-to-text AI system the last day, and I’m using a
whisper large 3 turboVoxstral Small (Mistral) and a rewording model that fixes the sentence but doesn’t rewrite it, and it’s almost perfect. I’m using European-hosted AI through cortecs.ai, and it’s really cheap.
- 5 days
Based on what I read/saw and got out of it, I am real disappointed it looks like it’s gonna be using genAI instead of another form of AI we’ve been using for transcription. Otherwise, sounds like trying to be a modern genAI version of that speech to text software I’d see ads for on TV. Possibly good for accessibility, but I’ll wait and see after it comes out.
At least they claim the whole thing to be done offline after model installation and it’s allegedly sandboxed with the audio data being stored in a memory buffer that allegedly will be erased after the session. So I’ll have to wait and see how this all plays out before making more judgments on it.
Thanks Canonical…I’ll just throw it in the pile with all the other “wonderful” things you’ve made. It can go on the shelf next to Mir.
- 6 days
maybe it will lead to better accessibility tooling. This is obviously rather silly as a default mode of operations, especially if you imagine people in a crowded office all yelling at their computers. God fuck them. They are hunting for hype and not making linux better for the masses
- aim_at_me@lemmy.nzEnglish5 days
Bit of a click baity title lol. If there’s one good use of AI, its probably accessibility.
Yeah, “Ubuntu wants you to use their new feature” is… unsurprising. Explaining the benefits and purpose of that feature? Now you’re talking.
- 6 days
The framework split things into two groups, implicit AI that quietly improves what you already use and explicit AI that are features you’d actually summon on purpose.
The very first paragraph already upsets me. Have in mind, I would criticize this on every other operating system too. I believe no one should use Ai tools that act autonomously in the background, to improve or change what you already use. It should always be a “summon on purpose”.
More AI stuff as usual, waiting to see demonstration how this will work
Out of curiosity would it be accurate to call this sort of technology generative ai, or just machine learning? Or it depends on the implementation?
I feel like most of the anger around ai is because gen ai has a bunch of harmful baggage, and I’m curious if this is an example of gen ai having a productive use case, or an example of ai being more useful outside of gen ai specifically
- 6 days
My grandma used to hate tech until she learned to use the voice assistance on her mobile phone. It unlocked the phone for her because she doesnt have the dexterity to type. I hope one day this tool could get to that same point.
