zlacker

>>tablet+(OP)
Machine translation and speech recognition. The state of the art for these is a multi-modal language model. I'm hearing impaired veering on deaf, and I use this technology all day every day. I wanted to watch an old TV series from the 1980s. There are no subtitles available. So I fed the show into a language model (Whisper) and now I have passable subtitles that allow me to watch the show.

Am I the only one who remembers when that was the stuff of science fiction? It was not so long ago an open question if machines would ever be able to transcribe speech in a useful way. How quickly we become numb to the magic.

>>retrac+J
Translation seems like the ideal application. It seems as though an LLM would truly have no issues integrating societal concepts, obscure references, pop culture, and more, and be able to compare it across culture to find a most-perfect translation. Even if it has to spit out three versions to perfectly communicate, it’s still leaps and bounds ahead of traditional translators already.

>>kulaha+25
> it’s still leaps and bounds ahead of traditional translators already

Traditional machine translators, perhaps. Human translation is still miles ahead when you actually care about the quality of the output. But for getting a general overview of a foreign-language website, translating a menu in a restaurant, or communicating with a taxi driver? Sure, LLMs would be a great fit!

>>crote+C9
>Human translation is still miles ahead when you actually care about the quality of the output.

The current SOTA LLMs are better than Traditional machine translators (there is no perhaps) and most human translators.

If a 'general overview' is all you think they're good for, then you've clearly not seriously used them.