Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Felt like talking to a person, I couldn't bring myself to treat it like a piece of code, that's how real it felt. I wanted to be polite and diplomatic, caught myself thinking about "how I look to this person". This brought me thinking of the conscious effort we put in when we talk with people and how sloppy and relaxed we can be when interacting with algorithms.

For a little example, when searching Google I default to a minimal set of keywords required to get the result, instead of typing full sentences. I'm sort of afraid this technology will train people to behave like that when video chatting with virtual assistants and that attitude will bleed in real life interactions in societies.



I see it the other way around.

I think our human-human interaction style will “leak” into the way we interact with humanoid AI agents. Movie-Her style.


Only if the AI gets annoyed when you don't treat it with respect.


Seems easy enough to bring in to the system prompt.

``` Even though you are not human, and an AI assistant, you will express annoyance when you are treated like a soulless computer, instead of a virtual assistant. You will appreciate "Please"s and "Thank you"s, and you will express annoyance if your user does not converse with you using full and respectful sentences. ```


E_PROGRAMMER_WAS_INSUFFICIENTLY_POLITE? With a corresponding E_PROGRAMMER_WAS_EXCEEDINGLY_POLITE?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INTERCAL for those who don't know.


Mine certainly has. I type to ChatGPT much more like a human than a search engine. It feels more natural for me as it's context aware than search engines ever were. I can ask follow up questions and ask for more details about a specific portion or ask for the analysis I just walked it through to get the results I want to apply to another data set.

"Now dump those results into a markdown table for me please."


Yeah... was thinking about that the other day. Is it wierd to say please to an AI? i'll say please, but i'll never correct my spelling. Sometimes it's garbled because i missed a space and a couple key strokes but it always understands.


Thanks for that insight. Brian here, one of the engineers for CVI. I've spoken with CVI so much, and as it has become more natural, I've found myself becoming more comfortable with a conversational style of interaction with the vastness of information contained within the LLMs and context under the hood. Whereas, with Google or other search based interactions I'm more point and shoot. I find CVI is more of an experience and for me yields more insight.


I’m having trouble understanding what CVI means here. Is it the firm Computer Vision Inc. (https://www.cvi.ai/)?

The firm in the post seems to be called Tavus, and their products either “digital twins” or “Carter.”

Not meaning to be pedantic, I’m just wondering whether the “V” in the thing you’ve spoken to indicates more “voice” or “video” conversations.


Hahah that's very valid looking back, it stands for Conversational Video Interface




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: