Speech to text recognition able to automatically understand and transcribe any voice is the major foundation stone of a Voice interface system, not to mention a universal translator. Imagine never needing to restrict what you watch to simply those items in languages you understand.

This will not only have a huge impact in allowing universal accessibility to knowledge, it will definitely improve international relationships at the level of individuals, who will no longer need to learn a different language just to talk to someone around the world.

(Surprised that you didn’t use it yourself to highlight your points in this piece.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGglKPqG16s

The CC-Transcription Accuracy Rate is for shit, and laughable.

For now.

But here’s the thing of, it’s one of the first clips they ever ran through the machine and not only does it handle *multiple* fe/male voices **in addition** to Mister Darth Vader’s, but it ALSO attempts to machine transcribe the singing.

That was the first time that I’ve ever seen that.

Now, at the Current Rates of Improvement for Speech to Text Transcription the projections are that it will hit Accuracy Rates of >±95% (to include Scottish brogues), no later than the end of the year 2016.

That’s going to be a HUGE game changer and I am curious as to what you think the impact will?

Val’s point about DNA was that it serves as a proof of possibility of nanoscale molecular assembly with negligible rates of error, as was made explicitly clear. Your canard that robots are not (currently) made of DNA is either a deliberate misreading of this plainly stated point or a betrayal of the fact that you are not very bright. By the way, a nice touch of class, pointing to your supposed academic credentials whilst belittling someone as “little man.” You are a pompous embarrassment.

The evidence is undeniable.

Stupendous robots and powerful AIs are inevitable in the not too distant future.

Anyone else interested can find me at http://www.ianmonroe.com, or on twitter or facebook!

See, “Angela”? You don’t have to hide behind pseudonyms. Be proud of your work. Show it off. Point me to your published research. Show me what you’ve done. Prove you’re worth talking to. Otherwise, I’m going to be forced to conclude that you’re just full of shit, and you obviously wouldn’t want that. You seem to care quite desperately about what we think of you.

Unless… you have something to hide? Or maybe you’re lying? I mean, why else wouldn’t you take ownership of your own words? You’re not a coward, are you?

ps — I think that’s the first time anyone has ever called me an occultist. That’s just darling.

college was a long time ago, you are familiar with maiden names, now aren’t you Mr. Occultist who (ick) “dreams in Enochian?”

also, if this is the best website you can make? It ain’ta bad, for 1997,,,,,,

Suggestions:

Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
Try different keywords.
Try more general keywords.
Try fewer keywords.

Prove it. Send me your name and your alma mater. I want to call them and find out for sure.

“Anonymous internet posters, don’t be their dupe.”