Scots Taffer on 19/6/2010 at 11:21
What the fuck does that even mean
ZylonBane on 20/6/2010 at 15:19
I second that confusion.
SubJeff on 20/6/2010 at 15:22
Thirded.
Why is he back again?
june gloom on 20/6/2010 at 17:06
Did IQs just drop sharply while I was away?
ZylonBane on 20/6/2010 at 19:38
I guess we can't all be a cool /b/tard like you.
june gloom on 20/6/2010 at 19:44
It's cute how you think I actually go to 4chan. Try again.
catbarf on 20/6/2010 at 20:06
Quote Posted by dethtoll
Except it wouldn't have quite the vague sense of inhumanity if it were a completely human voice.
Why would AI developers intentionally make their AI seem inhuman? All research and development over the past few decades has gone directly the other way. In-universe, as per nicked's question, there is no reason for GLaDOS to sound inhuman if realistic voices are possible.
ZylonBane on 20/6/2010 at 20:29
Quote Posted by catbarf
Why would AI developers intentionally make their AI seem inhuman?
So that people won't mistake it for a human. Bad things happen when mental models conflict with reality.
Al_B on 20/6/2010 at 21:25
I know where you're coming from - but mental models clash with reality all the time. This is particularly true if you meet up with others from a group (e.g. ttlg) where you've only seen their online presence.
As far as computer AI is concerned then yes - making it deliberately alien is a sensible idea, but it does assume that that's going to be more generally acceptable than something that appears human - but without human traits.
Pardoner on 20/6/2010 at 21:31
I imagine her thoughtless stewards gave her a synthesized voice as a placeholder and never got around to swapping it out. Either that, or her synthesizer is capable of more fidelity than she cares to express.
In any case, the scientists in-fiction are inexplicable and diligent. They're ludicrously unconcerned with intellectual soundness or consistency. Trying to catalog their absurdity may not be a meaningful pursuit--it might be a hilarious one, though.
