Flag

We stand with Ukraine and our team members from Ukraine. Here are ways you can help

Home ›› Technology ›› Speech Recognition Is Only Part of the Future

Speech Recognition Is Only Part of the Future

by Brad
2 min read
Share this post on
Tweet
Share
Post
Share
Email
Print

Save

A VC’s perspective on user input mechanisms.

This article was originally published on Brad’s blog, Feld Thoughts.

A few weeks ago, Fred Wilson dictated a post on his blog, A VC, using his Nexus One phone. He also discovered Swype, an alternative text input system, which now has an unofficial Android app. As usual, the comment threads on A VC were very active and had lots of thoughts about the future (and past) of voice and keyboard input.

When I talk about human-computer interaction, I regularly say that in 20 years we will look back on the mouse and keyboard as input devices the same way we currently look back on punch cards.

While I don’t have a problem with mice and keyboards, I think we are locked into a totally sucky paradigm. The whole idea of having a software QWERTY keyboard on an iPhone amuses me to no end. Yeah, I’ve taught myself to type pretty quickly on it, but when I think of the information I’m trying to get into the phone, typing seems so totally outmoded.

Last year at CES “gestural input” was all the rage in the major CE booths (Sony, Samsung, LG, Panasonic, etc.). Translating from CES-speak, this was primarily things like “changing the channel on a TV using a gesture.” This year the silly basic gesture crap was gone and replaced with IP everywhere (very important in my mind) and 3D (very cute, but not important). And elsewhere there was plenty of 2D multitouch, most notably front-and-center in the Microsoft and Intel booths. I didn’t see much speech and I saw very little 3D UI stuff. One exception was the Sony booth, where Organic Motion (a portfolio company of my VC firm, Foundry Group) put up a last-minute installation for Sony to show off markerless 3D motion capture.

So while speech and 2D multitouch are going to be an important part of all of this, it’s a tiny part. If you want to envision what things could be like a decade from now, read Daniel Suarez’s incredible books, Daemon and Freedom™. Or watch the following video that I just recorded from my glasses and uploaded to my computer (warning: cute dog alert).

 

post authorBrad

Brad, Brad has been an early stage investor and entrepreneur for over 20 years. Prior to co-founding Foundry Group, he co-founded Mobius Venture Capital and, prior to that, founded Intensity Ventures, a company that helped launch and operate software companies and later became a venture affiliate of the predecessor to Mobius Venture Capital. Brad currently serves on the board of directors of Gist, Gnip, Oblong, Standing Cloud, and Zynga for Foundry Group. Previously, Brad served as chief technology officer of AmeriData Technologies. AmeriData acquired Feld Technologies, a firm he founded in 1987 that specialized in custom software applications. Brad had grown Feld Technologies into one of Boston’s leading software consulting firms prior to the acquisition. He also directed the diversification into software consulting at AmeriData, a $1.5 billion publicly-traded company which was acquired by GE Capital in 1995. In addition to his investing efforts, Brad has been active with several non-profit organizations and currently is chairman of the National Center for Women & Information Technology. Brad is a nationally recognized speaker on the topics of venture capital investing and entrepreneurship and writes widely read and well respected blogs at www.feld.com and www.askthevc.com. Notable companies that Brad has invested in and/or sat on the boards of include Abuzz (acq. NYT), Anyday.com (acq. PALM), Critical Path (CPTH), Cyanea (acq. IBM), Dante Group (acq. WEBM), DataPower (acq. IBM), FeedBurner (acq. by GOOG), Feld Group (acq. by EDS), Harmonix (acq. VIA), NetGenesis (IPO), ServiceMagic (acq. IACI), and ServiceMetrics (acq. EXDS). Brad holds Bachelor of Science and Master of Science degrees in Management Science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Brad is also an avid art collector and long-distance runner. He has completed fourteen marathons as part of his mission to run a marathon in each of the 50 states. Visit Brad's blog: https://.feld.com/ Or follow Brad on Twitter: https://twitter.com/bfeld

Tweet
Share
Post
Share
Email
Print

Related Articles

Discover how Flux.1, with its groundbreaking 12 billion parameters, sets a new benchmark in AI image generation. This article explores its advancements over Midjourney and Dall-E 3, showcasing its unmatched detail and prompt accuracy. Don’t miss out on seeing how this latest model redefines what’s possible in digital artistry!

Article by Jim Clyde Monge
Flux.1 is a Mind-Blowing Open-Weights AI Image Generator with 12B Parameters
  • This article examines Flux.1’s 12 billion parameters and its advancements over Midjourney and Dall-E 3. Highlights its superior image detail and prompt adherence.
  • The piece explores the shift of developers from Stability AI to Black Forest Labs and how this led to Flux.1. Analyzes the innovation impact.
  • It compares Flux.1 with Midjourney V6, Dall-E 3, and SD3 Ultra, focusing on visual quality, prompt coherence, and diversity.
  • The guide explains how to access Flux.1 via Replicate, HuggingFace, and Fal. Covers the different models—Pro, Dev, Schnell—and their uses.
  • The article investigates Flux.1’s capabilities in generating photorealistic and artistic images with examples of its realism and detailed rendering.
Share:Flux.1 is a Mind-Blowing Open-Weights AI Image Generator with 12B Parameters
5 min read

Is true consciousness in computers a possibility, or merely a fantasy? The article delves into the philosophical and scientific debates surrounding the nature of consciousness and its potential in AI. Explore why modern neuroscience and AI fall short of creating genuine awareness, the limits of current technology, and the profound philosophical questions that challenge our understanding of mind and machine. Discover why the pursuit of conscious machines might be more about myth than reality.

Article by Peter D'Autry
Why Computers Can’t Be Conscious
  • The article examines why computers, despite advancements, cannot achieve consciousness like humans. It challenges the assumption that mimicking human behavior equates to genuine consciousness.
  • It critiques the reductionist approach of equating neural activity with consciousness and argues that the “hard problem” of consciousness remains unsolved. The piece also discusses the limitations of both neuroscience and AI in addressing this problem.
  • The article disputes the notion that increasing complexity in AI will lead to consciousness, highlighting that understanding and experience cannot be solely derived from computational processes.
  • It emphasizes the importance of physical interaction and the lived experience in consciousness, arguing that AI lacks the embodied context necessary for genuine understanding and consciousness.
Share:Why Computers Can’t Be Conscious
18 min read

Tell us about you. Enroll in the course.

    This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Check our privacy policy and