Chatroulette am i f cked?

okay, so i was playing the game and one of the things i noticed is that as soon as someone says out loud I do X, their features of speech change. Basically, they sound like they're switching off. And the only way to predict this behavior is to program speech to respond to your spoken words. and for this reason, speech recognition is one of the top research areas of computer science.

anyway, the thing that stuck out to me was that there are no parameters to define what this feature or property should be. so my first thought was, how about this person speaks very fast but no one says that. then I thought about this vowel sounds like a floating point number and people still say that. and this question sounds like it's been formulated by a computer but no, they still think that's a typo. and this emoticon looks like a computer drawn picture but no, people still think that's a typo. because anyone can have this property, it just depends on how controlling you are with the administrator and how authoritative you are with your feedback.

and finally, this button sounds like it was coded to make fun of people who speak other languages but people still think that's a typo. because anyone can have this button, it just depends on how controlling you are with the administrator and how authoritative you are with your feedback.

anyway, this leads to a paradox. if you have a system that you can choose for yourself, but still people get to the logical conclusion that other people have gotten to wrongly assumed total control. so here we are, trying to engineer an authoritative voice in a collaborative software system. and even though we can choose for ourselves the behavior of our agents, people still get to the logical conclusion that total control has gone to the absolute ruler. and the rule of law is not going to fix this. we need to give people the ability to revoke those decisions, to override the authority of an authority figure.

and this leads us to our next challenge: to design systems that enable, rather than silence, decision-making without any human intervention. and this means thinking about degrees of anonymity, about ways of allowing people to have their privacy invaded without them knowing it.

for example, imagine you're at a party and some drunk steals your girlfriend's handbag. and you have to go to court to get it back. and if you're found guilty, you get a suspended sentence. and if your attorney refuses to prosecute, your data is dumped on the dark web, and if you're blacklisted, your data is unavailable if your client is in the area. can you afford to risk that many arrests? and can you afford to risk that many years in jail? and if you can't afford that fine, what can you afford to lose?

and that's an example of the kind of questions we want to answer so that