News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on New services expand IBM Watson capabilities to images, speech, and more.

Re:New services expand IBM Watson capabilities to images, sp... by bhuga on Thursday February 05, 2015 @10:30AM (#9003684)
The text-to-speech is actually a little nicer than Siri or Cortana, but not groundbreaking. This was the only one of the 5 that I thought did well. The rest might have been better without demo pages.

For visual recognition, I used a picture of a snowmobile from http://www.1888goodwin.com/2013/11/14/what-do-you-need-to-do..., which it identified with 73% confidence as "Invertebrate".

Speech to text is a parody twitter account waiting to happen. Here's me asking it how it does with technical transcription:

How do you doing technical words.

If you were going to have to talk about get an jute cushion pull.

And you wanted to discuss the impact on a file server memory.

Issues that cross processes talk about home forks rivers slowed difficult.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New services expand IBM Watson capabilities to images, sp... by cma on Thursday February 05, 2015 @11:01AM (#9003874)
Maybe it overtrained on post-accident snowmobile riders.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New services expand IBM Watson capabilities to images, sp... by jp8000 on Thursday February 05, 2015 @10:35AM (#9003724)
Make sure you use a headset, not your laptop's microphone.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New services expand IBM Watson capabilities to images, sp... by iandanforth on Thursday February 05, 2015 @10:55AM (#9003842)
That's not a reasonable requirement. It only sounds like one to you because the technology has been so bad for so long.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New services expand IBM Watson capabilities to images, sp... by pesenti on Thursday February 05, 2015 @10:59AM (#9003864)
Smartphone microphones are much better than laptop microphones and pretty much on par with using headsets on a laptop - they represent our primary use case.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New services expand IBM Watson capabilities to images, sp... by picheny on Thursday February 05, 2015 @11:28AM (#9004062)
Well, I don't think the technology is that bad :-). But I agree with you. We have to solve the problem of poorer quality audio input, and the sooner the better! But there are also many scenarios where good audio input is feasible and would like feedback on those sorts of application ideas too.
[ Parent | on HN ]