Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Sunday July 08 2018, @02:47PM   Printer-friendly
from the at-least-for-now dept.

Google's Duplex AI could kill the call center

Google is reportedly shopping its Duplex AI system around as a tool for call centers, according to The Information, including a large insurance company.

Duplex would handle simple calls for the insurance company, and if the customer started asking complex questions the bot can't handle a human would step in, according to the report. However, it's unlikely that AI research will cease after mastering simple conversations, meaning call centers could one day be largely automated using this technology.

[...] Update: A Google spokesperson reiterated that Duplex is only being tested as a consumer technology for now, and that the company isn't testing it for enterprise. The entire statement is below:

We're currently focused on consumer use cases for the Duplex technology and we aren't testing Duplex with any enterprise clients. As we shared last week, Duplex is designed to operate in very specific use cases, and currently we're focused on testing with restaurant reservations, hair salon booking, and holiday hours with a limited set of trusted testers. It's important that we get the experience right and we're taking a slow and measured approach as we incorporate learnings and feedback from our tests.

Also at Techspot and CNET.

Previously: Google Duplex: an AI that Can Make Phone Calls on Your Behalf
Google Starts "Limited Testing" of Google Duplex AI System


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @03:27PM (24 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @03:27PM (#704232)

    Google is the inevitable end result of Free Software. Without Richard Stallman, without the Free Software movement, without GNU/Linux, there would be no Google.

    Ever since day one of the GNU Project, Richard Stallman has made no secret about the fact that Free Software would impoverish the working class. It's happening now. We are in the endgame where all the wealth produced by the labor of Free Software programmers is accumulated in the hands of a few billionaires.

    Probably programming will not be as lucrative on the new basis as it is now. But that is not an argument against the change. It is not considered an injustice that sales clerks make the salaries that they now do. If programmers made the same, that would not be an injustice either.

    Richard Stallman told you explicitly this day would come and he would see to it. You were too stupid to take his manifesto seriously.

    If you don't like being subjugated by the capitalist class, well then maybe you shouldn't have followed the teachings of a communist who told you to give away all your labor for free. The same Free Software which you gave to the capitalists is the same Free Software that will show you advertising as you starve to death.

    Don't like living in the future created by Free Software? In the words of Richard Stallman, "tough on you." Don't like starving? In the words of Richard Stallman, "do something else."

    Most of us cannot manage to get any money for standing on the street and making faces. But we are not, as a result, condemned to spend our lives standing on the street making faces, and starving. We do something else.

    Richard Stallman has the answer, for him. He destroyed the value of software, so he doesn't do software anymore. He retired to a life of motivational speaking to anyone young enough and naive enough to follow him. Most of us cannot manage to get any money for motivational speaking. We do something else, like starving to death.

    In the long run, making programs free is a step toward the postscarcity world, where nobody will have to work very hard just to make a living. People will be free to devote themselves to activities that are fun, such as programming, after spending the necessary ten hours a week on required tasks such as legislation, family counseling, robot repair and asteroid prospecting. There will be no need to be able to make a living from programming.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   0  
       Redundant=1, Interesting=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Redundant' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   0  
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Sunday July 08 2018, @03:37PM (21 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday July 08 2018, @03:37PM (#704234) Journal

    Where's the -1 misinformed shill mod?

    Google is the inevitable end result of Free Software.

    Maybe - just maybe - if you meant the BSD license, when you refer to "free software", you might have a point. That license allows you to take, and to give nothing back. Of course, you didn't mean the BSD license, because Stallman doesn't lobby for the BSD license.

    Without the GPL and it's fellow free licenses, just about all of us who are not professional programmers would be at the mercy of Microsoft, Apple, Sun, SCO, IBM, and assorted lower life forms. Most free licenses permit anyone at all to take, but they really like you to give something back. They don't demand that you give anything back, but they make it pretty clear that you should do so. The GPL covers that with the bit about distributing stuff covered by the GPL. If you distribute your altered code, then you have to also make available the source. If you don't distribute your code, then you need not make any source available. That's pretty simple.

    Or, to phrase it differently: With BSD, you can close software anytime you like. With GPL, you can't close it, unless it stays within your own shop. The moment it leaves your shop, you are required by law to make the source available.

    TANSTAAFL, remember? There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. You don't take free code, and call it your own.

    --
    “I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
    • (Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @04:09PM (12 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @04:09PM (#704246)

      The GNU Manifesto (1985) predates the BSD license (1988). You are ignorant of the history of Free Software, you are splitting hairs by distinguishing between open source licenses, and you are seeking to confuse the issue by launching into a tangent about the irrelevant differences between open source licenses.

      The fact remains that Richard Stallman deliberately started a communist movement to undermine the working class by eliminating the value of their work. Since the widespread success of Free Software, the customary way in which programmers produce value is by publishing source code on GitHub where corporations like Google take the source code and use it for free without paying. Programming has become a volunteer activity done by the poor which immensely benefits the rich.

      Richard Stallman wrote his vision for the future in which programmers toil for free to produce software by night and work retail jobs by day to make ends meet. You cannot dispute this point because the GNU Manifesto explicitly states it.

      Richard Stallman sold the poor to the rich, and then he retired. He is the architect of poverty, and his future has come true.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Sunday July 08 2018, @04:45PM (11 children)

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday July 08 2018, @04:45PM (#704257) Journal

        So, uhhhhmmmm, what you are saying is that there are no coding jobs that pay? Or, are you merely saying that there are no coding jobs that pay what they are worth?

        I probably don't have enough information to argue the second. But, I'll point out that H1B's drive those wages down, more than any choice between licenses. But, you go ahead and blame Stallman and Google for the fact that you can't make the money you wish you could make. Maybe you should have gone for an MBA, then you could rape the world for the money you think you deserve.

        --
        “I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @05:09PM (10 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @05:09PM (#704263)

          Wages are not driven down by Free Software; jobs are eliminated entirely. When corporations like Google can exploit the free labor of the young and the naive (perhaps you have heard of Summer Of Code?) for as long as possible then corporations can enrich themselves by not paying wages at all. When coders realize they are being scammed, there are no jobs to be had.

          Congratulations on spinning off to another tangent, this time about H-1Bs. Your powers of deflecting blame are strong.

          • (Score: 3, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Sunday July 08 2018, @06:00PM (9 children)

            by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday July 08 2018, @06:00PM (#704276) Journal

            Ho-hum. Summer of code. Intern work. I guess you're not aware that people have been working as interns and apprentices for thousands of years. They work for nothing, or nearly nothing, in exchange for mentoring and experience. Apprentices have often worked for some set number of years, for room and board, and access to the tools of the trade.

            Do Summer of Code participants enter into the agreement willingly? Well - duhhh - I think they actually compete for the opportunity. Do those participants have advanced degrees or something, that makes them especially valuable? I don't think so - they are mostly inexperienced plebes.

            Spin things however you like, but you'll have a hard time convincing most sane people that open source has damaged the economy, or that it has prevented you from getting a job.

            Multiple companies have built businesses based on supporting open source operating systems. The OS is free, but the savvy to keep it all running smoothly costs. You need something special, they put it together. But, according to you, none of them can exist, and no one can make any money with open-sourced software.

            You really ought to reconsider your position.

            --
            “I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @06:28PM (5 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @06:28PM (#704282)

              It's more like all he cares about is money, and at no point do freedom or ethics come into it for him. Thus, this person would be happy with a world where all software violates users' freedoms, because he thinks he could make more money that way. Of course, the ends (money) don't justify the means (denying users their freedoms), even if you assume you can't make money with Free Software, which happens to be false.

              • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @07:01PM (4 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @07:01PM (#704295)

                Read this excerpt of the GNU Manifesto, please.

                In the long run, making programs free is a step toward the postscarcity world, where nobody will have to work very hard just to make a living. People will be free to devote themselves to activities that are fun, such as programming, after spending the necessary ten hours a week on required tasks such as legislation, family counseling, robot repair and asteroid prospecting. There will be no need to be able to make a living from programming.

                Now, please tell the class how gifting Free Software to corporations like Google is a step toward the postscarcity world? What is your next step, after cutting the expenses of billionaires? Explain how the Free Software movement has not simply taken from the poor and given to the rich?

                • (Score: 4, Insightful) by c0lo on Monday July 09 2018, @12:09AM

                  by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 09 2018, @12:09AM (#704361) Journal

                  Now, please tell the class how gifting Free Software to corporations like Google is a step toward the postscarcity world?

                  It is not gifted exclusively to corporation like Google, it is also gifted to you.

                  As regarding to your question, please tell us how gifting Free Software to everyone is impeding the post-scarcity world? That's what you blame Stallman of, am I wrong?

                  --
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 09 2018, @12:10AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 09 2018, @12:10AM (#704362)

                  The Free Software movement is about user freedoms. If that happens to result in programmers making less money, that sacrifice is worth it. What's your alternative? A world where all software denies users their freedoms and is controlled entirely by the developers? No thanks. We have something close to that right now, and it's a disaster.

                  Rather than just attacking the concept of Free Software, tell me what your alternative is. I'm waiting.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 09 2018, @01:17AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 09 2018, @01:17AM (#704375)

                  Different AC. Our economy is jiggered in many ways to aid the rich in becoming richer as the poor become poorer. We built the Autobahn, but you're not allowed to walk on it. You need a car. We designed the Volkswagen as the car for the common person, but the desperately poor couldn't afford even a Volkswagen.

                  Free software is like that. It doesn't cost anything, but you need a computer to use it. The common person, even some of the desperately poor, can afford a personal computer. With free software, a person can read e-mail, browse and design the WWW, work with business documents, make music, draw, chat or play games. The free software to do those things often comes at no cost. Charities that provide computers to the poor can do so without paying for software--and without the busywork of licence management. We had a city, Munich, that made a policy of using free and open-source software wherever it could. Munich saved #11 million. They had to train their users on the new software, but they were able to avoid hardware upgrades because the free and open-source software was less demanding.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 09 2018, @04:03AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 09 2018, @04:03AM (#704428)

                  Explain how the Free Software movement has not simply taken from the poor and given to the rich?

                  That one's easy. It's gifted to everyone. The rich can take it and do as they please. The poor can take it and do as they please.
                  ...and it turns out that the opposite of what you say has come true -- millions of dollars of paid programming go into Free Software, several projects started by literal nobodies, and ordinary people on the street can download and use it for zero cost (which isn't technically the aim, but all it takes is one person to share it around, and it's all above-ground and legal).

                  Providing high-quality software to the public and lowering barriers to entrepreneurship for individuals and smaller entities is what Free Software has actually done.

            • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @06:52PM (2 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @06:52PM (#704291)

              The economy is doing splendidly. Capitalist billionaires are raking in the money, since the Free Software movement has reduced their software expenses to nothing. Except the working people at the bottom are doing terribly because they don't get paid for work. There's no economic reason for Google to pay any of the volunteers who made Linux. Google can just take Linux and put it in every Android phone and Linux developers don't get a dime.

              I am quite well aware of internships and apprentiships. What you are neglecting to consider is that internships and apprenticeships traditionally lead to employment. Where the Free Software movement is concerned, there is no need for employment to occur. Once the software has been written for free, the coder who wrote it has no remaining value and only an idiot would pay to employ that coder instead of simply finding another sucker who is willing to work for free.

              This is the state of affairs created by Richard Stallman and his Free Software movement. Disposable volunteers create software for as long as they are naive enough to do so. Giant corporations reap all the benefits. And it makes no difference to Richard Stallman whose lifework has been the communist takeover of an industry that has led to the enrichment of a handful of capitalists. Richard Stallman got out while the getting was good for him.

              • (Score: 1, Offtopic) by Runaway1956 on Sunday July 08 2018, @07:15PM (1 child)

                by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday July 08 2018, @07:15PM (#704303) Journal

                I suppose you would be happier if we all had to pay for the air that we breathe. Maybe instead of coding, you can get in on the oxygen licensing scam - I mean scheme.

                --
                “I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @07:41PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @07:41PM (#704306)

                  Now you're just being silly. We do pay for the air we breathe, in the form of taxes to fund regulation such as zoning to ensure your pleasant residential neighborhood doesn't have a polluting factory poisoning your air and dumping radioactive nuclear waste in your backyard which will slowly kill you.

                  Likewise we pay for the water we drink and the sewers we use and the roads we drive on and the sidewalks we walk on, again with taxes.

                  Maybe you want to implement the Software Tax which Richard Stallman advocated in the GNU Manifesto. This would be a single payer system for all software, funded by your taxes, which would pay coders so Google wouldn't need to pay anyone ever, not even a single H1-B. Unless of course you're already paying too much in taxes for single payer programs that directly benefit you, like Medicare.

                  Nah, that would be too socialist for you. Let's stick with the communist model where Free Software is produced by unpaid volunteers for the benefit of capitalist billionaires. It's what works.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by nitehawk214 on Sunday July 08 2018, @04:44PM (7 children)

      by nitehawk214 (1304) on Sunday July 08 2018, @04:44PM (#704256)

      Its just another trolling spammer. At least this one can actually string a few words together into a sentence. Even if that sentence is a bunch of anarchist talking points.

      --
      "Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
      • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @05:20PM (6 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @05:20PM (#704266)

        On the contrary. I am someone who has actually read the GNU Manifesto and the General Public License from beginning to end. Can you say the same? Have you even read either document, ever?

        The Free Software movement is not some folk myth about how great Linux is to use in your basement while you eat Cheetos and Mountain Dew. The GNU Manifesto has explicitly stated goals to make sure you don't get paid and can't afford those Cheetos and Mountain Dew.

        Sweet foolish child, the words long written down have told you that Richard Stallman wants you to be poor when you grow up.

        • (Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @07:48PM (5 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @07:48PM (#704309)

          You must be completely inexperienced at getting paid to program.

          Have you ever actually held a programming job?

          • (Score: 1, Informative) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday July 08 2018, @08:25PM (1 child)

            by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Sunday July 08 2018, @08:25PM (#704317) Homepage

            Probably just an edgy kid who came in his pants for solving a "difficult" hackathon problem all by himself before somebody else told him about adjacency matrices.

            • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @08:41PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @08:41PM (#704323)

              No, I don't code golf, bro. Too impractical, utterly pointless.

              I am running some code through a debugger right now because I've ventured so far beyond the specifications of the language that I'm firmly in implementation defined behavior.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @08:36PM (2 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @08:36PM (#704320)

            Yes I have held a programming job. My title was Programmer and it was my job to find abandoned Free Software projects that were almost but not quite sufficient for the needs of the company and fix all the bugs so the software could actually be used.

            I also have authored many of my own Free Software projects, abandoned of course.

            So I am very experienced in the lifecycle of Free Software. It goes like this.

            1/ Creation. Some naive fool codes a piece of Free Software.
            2/ Growth. Like minded fools contribute to the project.
            3/ Abandonment. The contributors become disillusioned and abandon the project.
            4/ Theft. Finally someone eventually comes along and steals the abandoned code.

            Only in the final stage, Theft, does a Free Software project turn a profit, and not for the original contributors.

            I might wonder who is profiting from my code now, but the truth is I don't care.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 09 2018, @01:50AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 09 2018, @01:50AM (#704389)

              4/ Theft.

              Pull your head out of your ancap ass. Ever have to deal with somebody proprietary shit code you can't fix?

            • (Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:54PM

              by nitehawk214 (1304) on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:54PM (#705124)

              Show me on the doll where free software touched you.

              --
              "Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday July 08 2018, @03:52PM

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Sunday July 08 2018, @03:52PM (#704240) Journal

    I hope I can starve in the gutter but with a nice Oculus Go VR headset.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @04:00PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08 2018, @04:00PM (#704242)

    FOSS was inevitable. Other nation states wouldn't have accepted all their documents and tax systems being dependent on American technologies. Either the Russians, Europeans or the Chinese would have eventually promoted a local university developed compiler stack entirely. China came very close to this multiple times. Russia already had knockoff x86s in mass production.

    A business model that depends on industrial secrets is doomed to fail.