Larry Page Quotes

I closely follow everything about user interface or human-computer interface: technology that makes computers closer to the way the human being actually functions.

Taken as a whole, consumer technologies have made startling advances, but they still are not as easy to use as they should be.

Computers ought to help people find their own best path through lots of textual information.

My goal for technology has always been to reach a point where the technological mediation becomes invisible.

In chess, computers show that what we call 'strategy' is reducible to tactics, ultimately. It only looks creative to us. They are still just glorified cash registers. This should make us feel uncomfortable, whether or not we think computers will ever be good composers of music or artistic painters.

Computers are great tools, but they need to be applied to the physical world.

Truly smart technologies will remind us that we are not mere automatons who assist big data in asking and answering questions.

I've always been interested in technology, but specifically how we can use machines to engage the imagination. I started using computers when I was young and was fascinated by creating rules and instructions that allow a computer to engage in a dialogue with humans. The stories found in the data all around us can do just that.

If computers remain far worse than us at image recognition, a certain over-confident combination of man and machine can elsewhere take inaccuracy to a whole new level.

People are good at figuring out what's attractive, and computers are good at quickly searching and finding. You put them together, and bang!

I have problems with machines which aren't gestural.

As a science fiction fan, I had always assumed that when computers supplemented our intelligence, it would be because we outsourced some of our memory to them. We would ask questions, and our machines would give oracular - or supremely practical - replies.

As a society, we are underinvesting resources in research on the societal implications of AI technologies.

We want the digital world to bend to your physical life, your real emotional life as a person, and we don't want you to bend to computers.

I'm an investor in a lot of things that have to do with human-computer interaction.

Machines and people are both necessary for Facebook, Twitter, Wikipedia, Google, and neither is sufficient on its own.

I have sometimes thought the power of computers had exceeded our ability to use them, but Mr. Jobs and his team kept giving us devices that made indispensable things easier in ways you never thought of.

I've spent my whole life worrying about the human-computer interface, so I don't want to suggest that what we have today is even close to acceptable.

I am confident that we can do better than GUIs because the basic problem with them (and with the Linux and Unix interfaces) is that they ask a human being to do things that we know experimentally humans cannot do well. The question I asked myself is, given everything we know about how the human mind works, could we design a computer and computer software so that we can work with the least confusion and greatest efficiency?

I have a suspicion that the politicians' revival of the old behaviourist ideas and techniques will be helped and reinforced by a powerful ally - the machines we have built. The computers.

I think a lot of jobs, with that additional artificial intelligence, we can augment human capabilities and impact.

The government adoption of AI will not bring about a government being run by robots. Instead, our government will continue to be run by people, with help from algorithms dramatically improving government services for all Americans.

Techno-humanism aims to amplify the power of humans, creating cyborgs and connecting humans to computers, but it still sees human interests and desires as the highest authority in the universe.

In my view, the fact that computers caught up to humans and completely dominate humans in chess and some other domains already, that says there's evidence that, yes, in principle, they can be better programmers than humans.

Growth hackers are typically computer engineers that build great marketing ideas into the product during the development process.