Does the user need to prefix his/her request with the service providers name and then use their specific command set? If no, how does Bixby solve this issue?
Bixby Marketplace will allow end users to view available capsules and select certain capsules as their preferred choices. When an utterance is used that may hit multiple capsules, the user's preferred capsule is selected and used.
Details regarding the handling of real-time capsule conflicts will be made available when Marketplace launches.
Related
I am trying to share a capsule that I have built with another person who isn't a collaborator of the capsule on Bixby Developer Center, nor is my Samsung account connected to their device. When they try to test the capsule, it shows this error message.
You don't have access to this capsule revision ID.
I am looking for ways to let them run my capsule without sharing my Bixby Developer account or adding them as a collaborator.
In order to add a collaborator you must first invite them to your namespace/domain, and once the person accepts invitation you can add that person to a specific capsule in that domain.
This is a feature to protect client privacy. In order to execute revision override in IDE or on-device testing on mobile, the current login user must be a member of the team.capsule listed in the DEV center.
There are multiple ways to fix this:
add the person as a member. Details in https://bixbydevelopers.com/dev/docs/dev-guide/developers/managing-caps.managing-your-team. Please make sure add the person to capsule. Invite to the team is not enough.
OR
publish and get approved to marketplace. There would be no need for revision ID. All targeted region users will be able to add and use your capsule.
OR
Send capsule code to the other developer and he/she can test the capsule in IDE after changing the team.capsule namespace. However, this would not work if any config or secret involved.
I would personally suggest #1 is the easiest solution.
You must add the user as a collaborator for them to be able to use your capsule.
I want login system in my capsule so that i can provide user more recommendation based on their profile of interest. So far, neither I am able to find any document related to login facility nor any example. It would be appreciated if will get any document or example.
Bixby supports logging in through OAuth 2.0, and this is the best way to guide your users through a login flow.
You will need to provide your own service to handle this OAuth flow, as Bixby Developer Center does not offer any web hosting services.
https://bixbydevelopers.com/dev/docs/dev-guide/developers/actions.using-oauth
Also is there a possibility that user can user can use app as a guest
user if no login credentials?
When you define your endpoints, you can define Actions that require OAuth and other Actions that do not require OAuth and the latter ones will define the "guest user" flow that is capable within your capsule prior to logging in.
If you don't need all the features of OAuth, and only need to store a few things between sessions with the same user, you may use the $vivContext.bixbyUserId value as an anonymous, but unique identifier for a user, and store their preferences using that id as a key, in a 3rd party database that you maintain.
I've done this with the "My Brain" capsule, to store quick memories/notes for users, without any requirement that they login or establish an account. I've created a tutorial version of the My Brain capsule that outlines the steps you need to use AWS for this purpose. Please feel free to clone or fork it and customize it for your needs.
I have a running website, where users already have accounts. And I am trying to create a Google Assistant agent, accessible on Android, to help users access their information.
My issue is that I can't detect returning users on Android Smartphones, each time they have to sign in.
I tried Anonymous User Identity, but it is soon to be deprecated.
Is there an other way to keep track of users?Using some kind of userId that I can store, so I can make "my own Acount Linking" linking the person/Smartphone with already existing user accounts.
There are a few angles to your question.
Is there any way to keep track of users?
Yes... but...
You can store a userId that you generate in the user storage area. You do need to treat this like you would a cookie, so some jurisdictions might impose restrictions on this, but this is one approach to moving from the anonymous ID that is being turned off soon.
But...
How do I let them log into my service through the Action?
That is the problem. The General Policies states the following limitation for collecting user data:
Authentication Data
(including passwords, PINs, and answers to security questions)
Don't collect authentication data via the conversational interface (text or speech).
After a user's account has been linked, PINs or passwords may be used as part of a second verification process.
So you need to use Account Linking to connect to the existing account on your service.
How can I do Account Linking if I don't require Google Sign-In?
You can still use Google Sign-In for Assistant if it will (or may) provide the information as part of the profile that match what you have. So it doesn't need to use the same account - just have the same email (for example).
But that still may not be enough.
For other cases, you can look into setting things up to work with an OAuth server that you control.
So why use Google Sign-In if I setup an OAuth server that uses Google Sign-In?
Google Sign-In is good for a more streamlined flow, if you can use it. It can be done completely with voice, such as with a smart speaker, instead of requiring the user to go to a phone to complete the login. So if you have the user's email address in your account system, and you also get this from Google Sign In, then you can connect the two accounts.
In some cases, such as if the user is expected to have logged into the account on your website first, they won't even need to do that. If both the voice client and web client use the same Google project, then authentication will take place automatically.
I am using LUIS for a chat bot.
I created an action. I require certain entities to be present and would like to prompt the user to enter the entities if they're missing from the action.
How do I do this?
All the tutorials online show setting it up from the bot builder web UI but Microsoft has since deprecated setting up prompts from LUIS's web UI.
Instead of relying upon Microsoft to do this, I prefer to only use LUIS for intent analysis and entity extraction.
You can store all the entities required to perform an operation(mapped to an intent) in some DB or just cache in a Map. Once you have Intent and entities corresponding to user input, you can match whether it contains all the entities or not. If not, just club all the missing entities and prompt user for remaining entities.
This might add some coding effort, but reduces a lot of dependency from cloud based applications. You also won't need to make any change if there is any change in endpoint URLs from LUIS or any of the cloud providers.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I recently entertained the idea of developing an app that aggregates Instagram data of a small community and displays it in different UI clusters, derived by certain analytics. While the API provides all the required endpoints for my requirements, I started re-inventing the app over and over again, to satisfy the Instagram platform policy, terms and conditions as well as the login permissions for the different scopes.
According to Instagram API documentation there are 3 categories for the scopes of all apps:
To help individuals share their own content with 3rd party apps: basic
This use case is meant for apps that allow the general public to login with Instagram to get their own content; for example, an app that allows people to print their own pictures. Apps that fall into this use case will only have access to the basic permission.
To help brands and advertisers understand and manage their audience and digital media rights: basic, public_content, comments, relationships, likes, follower_list
This use case is meant for products that don't have a public facing login integration, but are gated to brands and advertisers. The product must support either multiple brands and advertisers (e.g. a social media management platform) or multiple users within a single brand or advertiser organisation.
To help broadcasters and publishers discover content, get digital rights to media, and share media with proper attribution: basic, public_content, comments
This use case is meant for products that don't have a public facing login integration, but are gated to broadcasters and publishers. The product must support either multiple broadcasters and publishers, or multiple users within a single broadcasters or publisher organization.
Ideally, my app would benefit as many analytical endpoints as possible, particularly if I can process the list of followers and public content. This means my app should fall under group (2). However, the target community of this app was not consisted of brands and advertisers. Group (3) is also not an option, since my community is consisted of individuals. Then I was thinking that group (1) will fit my needs. But that was also not the case, since according to platform policy, I won't be allowed to put the media in different UI clusters:
You cannot replicate the core user experience of the Instagram apps or web site. For example, do not build a media viewer.
Then I started comparing the use cases with existing live apps. I noticed that if they would carefully follow the terms and conditions, as well as platform policies, they would also be unfit for all rules imposed by Instagram. Let me provide examples:
minter.io (broadcasters == individuals?)
minter.io focuses on Instagram analytics. Thus, it falls in group (2). However, anyone can register on this system, meaning any individual that owns an Instagram account. How is this a valid case when brands and advertisers are not gated? Furthermore, even if those are somehow filtered in some future phase (which they claim they do manually), why is it allowed to generate a report of a "competitor" account, when the ID of that account could be any individual, and not an advertiser?
pikore.com (discover / search function?)
Apart from having the similar issues of minter.io, where everyone can login, I fail to understand how is it possible for pikore.com to provide a "discover" functionality which is exactly what Instagram offers on its mobile apps? Is that not breach of platform policy? Or the fact that it is also able to display all media items of a given account mixed with advertisement? For example: pikore.com/arianagrande. This breaches also other terms stated in General Terms of Platform Policy:
24. Add something unique to the community. Don't use the Instagram APIs to replicate or attempt to replace the functionality or essential user experiences of Instagram.com or any of Instagram's apps.
25. Respect the way Instagram looks and functions. Don't offer experiences that change it.
26. Don't attempt to build an ad network on Instagram.
ElseWatcher (another media viewer?)
I absolutely adore this app. But the fact that the Instagram data is organized by location and date, it seems to me that it's another media viewer with extra functionalities.
socialbakers.com (free social tracker?)
socialbakers.com, while providing an amazing interface, it requests public_content scope for any individual user of instagram.com. On top of that, without providing any mechanism to gate the broadcasters, offers their services as "Free Instagram Analytics Tool".
Maybe I am wrong, but the way I see it, the Instagram API rules, are not applied consistently to all 3rd party apps. Can anyone explain whether those are inconsistencies indeed, or whether I got things the wrong way?
While at it, I would also like to know how is it possible to have the term clause "1. Instagram users own their media (stated here) in conjunction with "17. Don't apply computer vision technology to User Content, without our prior permission" (stated here). Does that mean that if I am an Instagram API user that agrees to these terms, and I perform computer vision on any image that also happens to be on Instagram, that I am breaching terms?
Have you seen this cases?
simplymeasured.com/freebies/instagram-analytics
pro.iconosquare.com/pricing
websta.me
unionmetrics.com/free-tools/instagram-account-checkup/
After June 1st all Instagram 3rd party apps should pass a review. The review should contain video screencast with
Provide a link to a video screencast showing the experience in your
app. Please show how your integration uses all permissions you are
requesting, any interface to moderate content or getting rights to
media, and any Instagram login experience. Since your app may be in
sandbox mode, you can use data from sandbox users to showcase the
integration.
I think, Instagram wouldn't have approved any app which violate their rules.