![]() ![]() Throughout our work with VUI design, we discovered that users were far willing to accept ‘dead-ends’ (interactions that can’t continue any further) when the interface was unable to ‘control the product’ rather than ‘being the product’ itself. my AE-35 unit), as well as the user’s expectation of what the interface should be able to control. This distinction directly affects the form of the dialogue ( the AE-35 unit vs. This question of an intelligence behind the hardware is an important one with voice interfaces that have a physical manifestation, whether a mobile device, a home appliance or a vehicle. He apparently has nearly complete control over all elements of the craft, but when referencing a problem, he claims that: “I’ve just picked up a fault in the AE-35 unit”, suggesting that the unit is an entity into itself. In all intents and purposes, HAL is both an occupant of the ship, and the ship itself. This connection between dialogue and tone forms the basis for any interaction and must both work in synthesis to avoid this dissonance, that can result in an experience ranging from comical to terrifying. The dissonance between the dialogue and the tone informs the audience that there is something fundamentally wrong with the interface. As elements of HAL’s system are removed, the voice begins to audibly deteriorate, and in one of the film’s most chilling moments, returns to factory settings singing a nursery rhyme like a young child. HAL’s cold functionality works against it at a time that it needs it the most. When Dave, the last remaining crew member, out-smarts HAL and begins to disassemble his CPU, the interface begins to plead for its life, but is unable to inject the emotional sympathy required from the human. Perhaps sometimes it’s better for the robot to stay a robot. The ‘uncanny-valley’ - the sense that this thing is almost human, but not quite - is very much present within the voice of HAL, and suggests that sometimes the design of a NLI should not always try to emulate the human tone exactly. This works within the context of the film because it is HAL’s sense of self-perfection (“We are all, by any practical definition of the words, foolproof and incapable of error”) that motivates him to murder the crew. That said, there is something ‘off’ about the exact tone of HAL something that suggests an underlying arrogance and self-righteousness, perfectly played in the film by the voice actor Douglas Rain. HAL is the synthesis of ‘brand’ and functionality into character form, and it’s also what makes the shift to a more emotional dialogue more chilling in the finale. One might argue that the human characters in the film are as equally cold and unemotional, and it seems very much the intent of Stanley Kubrick, the film’s director, to highlight this. It is a character that represents the logical efficiency of the ship and the mission in general. The cold, functional tone of the voice and measured pacing, seems to be intended to maintain a sense of professional calm an interface perfectly designed for the stresses of space travel. Um, of course he’s programmed that way to make it easier for us to talk to him, but as to whether or not he has real feelings is something I don’t think anyone can truthfully answer”. “Well, he acts like he has genuine emotions. At one point in the film, one of the human characters reflects that: However, despite how ‘natural’ the language of HAL is, he (they? it?) is a few degrees away from being ‘human’. There’s no need to stop and repeat a wake-word at every new question or request, and pronouns (he, she, they, it) function based on the noun from earlier in the conversation just as a natural conversation would. ![]() The dialogue between the members of the crew and the interface flows back and forth and build upon the previous subject. HAL 9000 could certainly be described as a natural language interface. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |