Exactly. If they have a setting somewhere for the minimum duration of a pause in the user's speech before starting replying, they should just crank it up.
In this other add [1], it's even worse, the user has to say "There's more to the story though" and almost looks annoyed + the agent overreacts to _that_ with a weird "Aaaaahh!".
Oh well... I'm sure they'll get it right eventually.
The ad with the grandmas is cute and funny, but from the first 20 seconds you can see that the voice annoyingly interrupts people while they are talking. It's almost as if it tries to reply too fast - faster than a real person would, and the results is that it replies while you're still talking.
Oh and there was also a small fail in the live translate demo: the grandma says "tell him that..." which the bot translates verbatim, whereas a real translator would of course understand that this is an aside not to be translated.
Well I guess at least I should be happy that they're transparent in their ads :)
I'm pretty sure that making new software that replicate the _functionality_ of other existing software is perfectly legal.
If not, how do you explain the thousands of Tetris clones? The thousands of Doom clones? The hundreds of Excel clones (forgot which was the first one, it's not Excel but that's besides the point, which is that's perfectly legal). Another commenter already mentioned Android SDK vs Java, which Oracle (fortunately) lost.
Yes, even the "copywriting" is fair game, unless it's pages and pages of text (e.g. don't copy/paste the documentation).
The design mustn't be identical but if it's essentially identical, that's legal - sometimes there aren't 10 ways to do something.
Now if the question is whether it's legal to publish software written by LLMs, given that they've been trained on other people's code - that's an entirely different question.