← All questions

#292 · billionaires only have 3 apps on their phone

youtube ↗AI & Automation

What are your thoughts on using real‑time voice agents like GPT Realtime 2.1, Gemini 3.1 flash preview, or Grock Voice Think Fast 2.0, given your skepticism about voice agents?

I’m still not a fan of voice agents overall, even with low latency, because there’s always a chance a human will notice something off and realize they’re talking to a robot, which usually leads to disgust. I don’t want to risk that trust with people calling to book appointments or rebook after paying. While I’ve tried models like GPT Realtime 2.1 and they’re faster and handle interruptions better, they still have gaps in contextual awareness and can bug out occasionally—something humans don’t do. My take is that, for now, the reliability and grace of a real person outweigh the speed benefits of these AI voice tools.

voice agentsrealtimeai

Related answers

youtube ↗AI & Automation

What are your thoughts on using a voice agent to delay and capture hot leads, e.g., waiting 15 seconds before engaging, handling simple tasks like scheduling, and sending callback texts?

Yes, using a voice agent to delay and capture hot leads is a smart, nuanced tactic. For instance, after a form submission, have the agent call within five seconds, acknowledge the form, and say a teammate will connect shortly—this buys time for a human agent while conveying impressive speed and forward‑thinking tech. The agent can simply greet the prospect and promise to patch them through in 10‑15 seconds, or handle basic tasks like scheduling a callback. The key is to be transparent that it’s an AI, not to deceive the prospect into thinking they’re talking to a human.

voice agentspeed to leadai
youtube ↗AI & Automation

The math seems off to me — voice agents cost way more than a human receptionist at high volume (500-1,000 calls). I don't think an AI receptionist is that great a trade, since it mostly just replaces the annoying 'press 1 for this, press 2 for that' Twilio-style menu experience, even though it does remember callers and is available 24/7.

That's actually a really interesting and nuanced way to think about using a voice system — using it specifically to replace the 'press 1 for this, press 2 for that' pre-qualification menu rather than trying to replace the receptionist outright. If you use voice agents in nuanced ways like that, yes, you'll get a better result and should use them. Most people don't do this though — most people just try to have a voice agent fully replace the receptionist, which is where it tends to underperform.

voice agentspre-qualificationrealistic use case
youtube ↗AI & Automation

Regarding voice agents for hot leads: instead of the agent taking the call immediately, what about having it wait ~15 seconds to give a human a chance to jump in first, since talking to a human is always better but someone is better than no one? In this setup, the agent would just handle simple tasks like scheduling a callback, and if the lead hangs up early, the system could text an instant callback offer. What are your thoughts on this use case?

It's a good, nuanced use case that most people don't realize. A similar variant: the moment someone fills out a form, kick off a countdown ('one of our team will call you in 5 seconds... 5, 4, 3, 2, 1') and have a voice agent call immediately, openly identifying itself as an AI scheduling assistant collecting a few quick details before connecting them to a real person — should take about a minute. The whole point is buying time for someone on your team to actually become available, while still giving the impression of extremely fast response and forward-thinking technology — being upfront that it's AI (rather than pretending otherwise) is part of why it works, since you're framing it as 'I'm connecting you in a second' rather than trying to fake being human.

voice agentsspeed to leadhot leadscall handling