[mandeepj]

I see you are using these two words - Interpreter and Translator - interchangeably! They aren't same; there's a big difference between them [0].

From your demo, I gather you are a translator, which is a big let-off for me. Reading and understanding text is much slower than just listening. Also, spoken words are just 30ish% of the overall communication. I'm afraid while your users would be busy in reading translated text, they'd lose out on other vital communication cues like hand gestures, facial expressions etc.

Is real-time audio interpretation in the pipeline?

[0] - https://www.google.com/search?q=translator+vs+interpreter&oq...

[yonghee]

I agree with your observation about "Interpreter" vs. "Translator."

When we first started this project, we referred to it as an "interpreter." However, after speaking with human interpreters and considering their feedback, we settled on "real-time translation". We might have left some of our past on the internet tho..

As with everything, there are both advantages and limitations to text-based translations. Here are a few:

Limitations:

- Some people may find it challenging to follow gestures and expressions while reading.

- In more one-way scenarios, such as presentations and webinars, hearing the speaker’s voice often feels more natural.

Pros:

- Many users actually prefer text because it allows them to hear the speaker’s original voice and pick up on nuances.

- Having a written record enables post-meeting summaries and the opportunity to repurpose transcripts into other materials, such as blog posts, custom user manuals, JIRA notes, and more using AI.

- There are also technical constraints with voice-to-voice translations, which currently tend to be turn-based rather than real-time (streaming) - not ideal for exchange of ideas.

That said, we are excited to see how the TTS and STT technologies evolve and are looking forward to experimenting with “interpretation” in the future!

[bityard]

> Reading and understanding text is much slower than just listening.

Speak for yourself! I read _much_ faster than listening to someone saying the same thing. This is why I can't stand subtitles on videos, movies, and tv shows. Because of how my brain works, I can't help but read the text. And when it's there, I'm done reading the person's line when they are only 25-50% through speaking it. So it "feels" like I'm watching a show where everyone repeats the last half of every sentence.

> Is real-time audio interpretation in the pipeline?

When I saw the headline, I assumed the product was doing real-time translation and voice cloning in one. Now _that_ would be an interesting use of AI. (Google and others have been doing real-time voice recognition and text translation for years.)

[mandeepj]

> This is why I can't stand subtitles on videos, movies, and tv shows. Because of how my brain works, I can't help but read the text. And when it's there, so it "feels" like I'm watching a show where everyone repeats the last half of every sentence.

Ha! Translation is done in real time, but subtitles are not!! Were you thinking they are processed the same way? That's your confusion.

> I'm done reading the person's line when they are only 25-50% through speaking it.

How can an AI system translate someone when they haven't even spoken those words yet? Please check the title of the Post - it's a real-time system.

> I read _much_ faster than listening to someone saying the same thing.

Everyone reads and/or speaks at a different speed. You can pause a movie, but not a meeting, during the first time. You don't have to make any critical decisions while consuming entertainment, but on the contrary, at work, you might have to listen, process, understand, and connect the dots into various other subsystems and conclude how they may or may not affect your standing. At the end, might have to challenge the speaker or add to what they are saying. A lot of variables.

[yonghee]

We are also excited about real-time translation + voice cloning (like having your K-pop stars speaking your language with their voices!) This is actually something we explored previously. The tech is there but we weren't sure of the the user experience, especially in terms of latency.

Maybe we'll have this for Cuckoo 2.0!

[nicolinox]

for this check www.palabra.ai

[givemeethekeys]

> Reading and understanding text is much slower than just listening.

While watching their demo video, I had no trouble reading and interpreting the translated English at the speed the conversations were going on. There's a chance that some speakers would speak much quicker, but I think this software covers the vast majority of use-cases.

Real-time translation is a great start. I'm sure these models can be tweaked over time for better interpretation, especially given that they learn based on context.

There is another aspect to this: the small pauses forced by technology will give people just enough time to think, which is welcome in a business meeting.

Full disclosure: I am not a user or a customer, but this looks like it is something I would one day want to use if the opportunity presents itself.

[yonghee]

I think it’s similar to Netflix subtitles—some people prefer subtitles and dislike voice-overs, while others opt for the dubbed versions.

I also believe that as the meeting progresses, it feels more natural, and participants become aware of the translator. (Interestingly, they often start speaking more clearly and using fuller sentences, just as they would with human interpreters!)

Thanks for your comment. I hope you give it a try!

[carlosjobim]

In a business setting, the only communication that has any legal standing is the spoken word and the written word.

[yonghee]

That’s a great point. An added benefit of our approach is that it provides a written version of the conversation in multiple languages.

(Of course, some users may prefer to remove the conversation entirely for data security and privacy reasons.)

[mandeepj]

> In a business setting, the only communication that has any legal standing is the spoken word and the written word.

Legal, huh? How many indictments have you seen come out of a business meeting? The expression representation is very much part of a work environment. Someone may not say a word while hearing a crazy idea, but they'll certainly roll an eye.

[carlosjobim]

A business is a legal construct for organizing work, it's nothing more. And that's always present. You can't tell your boss that he should have known you weren't going to do the task you were asked to, because you rolled your eyes in the meeting. If you didn't communicate it verbally or in writing, then you haven't communicated it at all.

[mandeepj]

I don't understand why some of the folks in this thread are so confused! It's just basic English.

> You can't tell your boss that he should have known you weren't going to do the task you were asked to, because you rolled your eyes in the meeting. If you didn't communicate it verbally or in writing, then you haven't communicated it at all.

We are talking about "expressions" and just "expression" in a meeting; that's it. You don't talk about those things which you had mentioned in a meeting where someone is presenting on a topic.