General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAI companies trying to shift people from screens to audio commands is about control of you, not just convenience for you
Is audio-first AI really what's best for consumers?
— TechCrunch (@techcrunch.com) 2026-01-11T18:15:08.345913443Z
Our Equity podcast digs into OpenAI and other companiesâs rumored shift toward screen-free AI experiences here: https://tcrn.ch/4pqfThP
Hugin
(37,452 posts)Few will take the time to type in prompts, many potentially could verbalize the prompts. It also obfuscates the hallucinations.
highplainsdem
(60,097 posts)there any record of voice commands and AI responses?
Hugin
(37,452 posts)Typically the voice interpretation generative AI is a separate entity and interface from a text AI. It is sometimes scrolled on a screen like captions. I doubt many would bother with that only repeating the prompt or blowing it off.
If one is listening there are plenty of
The delays between prompt and reply can also be very long in systems which allow large blocks for each interaction. Having a natural sounding conversation with an AI is sensitive to timing. They also in my experience become confused when interacting in group conversations.
haele
(15,093 posts)And that's why I like to limit any device to prompts, generally typed.
Not much I can do with the family Echo units, but I'm constantly having my spouse check his accounts to try to lock it to only go into listen mode with the prompt word instead of constant listen.
That's the rub.
F you Jeff Bezos
eppur_se_muova
(41,016 posts)don't want, and get absolutely no benefit from, and wouldn't use if I had any choice in the matter. Plus the word is usually followed by either "charge" or "fee".
I've long given up on the idea that they're actually concerned about anything being "convenient" for the customers. It's all about making more profits with fewer and fewer lower-paid employees, with zero being the ultimate goal.