Kr$na(@krishdotdev):This might be the first time talking to AI avatars felt so different. I went into the Griffin demo expecting another impressive AI avatar. But after a few minutes, I honestly stopped paying attention to the avatar. I was just…talking to it. I could interrupt it, move around, show it things, and it actually reacted to what was happening. That’s probably what surprised me the most. It didn’t feel like I was talking to an avatar. It felt like I was having a conversation.

2026.10.01 17:33

This might be the first time talking to AI avatars felt so different. I went into the Griffin demo expecting another impressive AI avatar. But after a few minutes, I honestly stopped paying attention to the avatar. I was just…talking to it. I could interrupt it, move around, show it things, and it actually reacted to what was happening. That’s probably what surprised me the most. It didn’t feel like I was talking to an avatar. It felt like I was having a conversation.

NO1ennn@N01ennn

2026.10.01 17:21

me after a video call with the first AI that passed the Turing test tavus gave me early access to griffin, and i'm still processing it 48% of people who talked to it live thought they'd talked to a real human. every system before it, tavus's own included, topped out at 2% it's not a chatbot with a face. it's a human interaction model: video in, video out, fully duplex. it listens while it talks and reads your pauses and expressions, not just your words: > waves back before you say a word > notices someone walking in behind you before you turn around > cuts you off mid-ramble and tells you what you left out NVIDIA's independent benchmark: griffin 3.83 out of 5. a real human: 3.92. next best system: 2.80 and this was griffin-lite, the research preview. the more powerful model isn't out yet @tavus @hassaanrza