← Back to context

Comment by GreenVulpine

12 hours ago

There's no practical reason for most people. Spying is the primary function. Edge cases like accessibility or conferencing can be easily enabled with an add on USB mic. You'd need a USB webcam with mic for conferencing anyway.

People use voice commands on TV remotes all the time if they're using streaming apps. At this point it's the default way to interact with the UI for many people.

Typing out the show you're searching for with an awkward onscreen keyboard is a huge pain compared to just clicking a button and speaking.

HN users are very much in a bubble if it's surprising to learn consumers expect voice control functionality on a new TV.

  • Whilst most around me do expect voice control to exist... Most expect it not to function. "Hey Siri/Google" was always more of an exercise in frustration than success.

    It seems the Australian accent still befuddles most STT with about 1/8 words confused (said as someone who uses STT to use their computer at all).

    It would not shock me, if outside of North America and Great Britain, these systems are as effective as the original autocorrect algo.

  • "HN users are very much in a bubble if it's surprising if it's learn consumers expect voice control functionality on a new TV."

    Perhaps a few are unaware but most know. As I said in my post, some (like me) only want traditional FTA — and with it comes anonymity by default.

    Smart TVs undermine and subvert the virtues of FDA services. It should be mandated that it's possible for modern smart TVs to switch to FTA-only mode if viewers so desire. Similarly, regulation should ensure that dumb TVs always be available for those who want them.

Accessibility is not an edge case. Every single human being who lives long enough will experience some form of accessibity challenge, either for themselves or for others around them.

You can dismiss the lives experience of most humans over the history of humanity, but it won't win you any arguments.