IBM, TrollTech Integrate Linux Voice Recognition 230
Paladin128 writes: "Talk about cool technology. Linux may get widespread voice recognition before Windows, as this article mentions that IBM's ViaVoice will be bundled with Qt, and allow the programmers to use BNF to create parsing rules, and bid voice input directly to Qt components via Qt signals and slots. This level of integration evidently wasn't possible with Win32, thus there were performance issues. And since Qt is open source, the GNOME people could easilly find a way to integrate this technology into GTK+. Between adding voice to the handicapped accessability list, offering KDE in more languages than Windows is available in (I don't use GNOME so I can't comment on how it's doing here), and more customization than Windows can ever hope to offer (such as choice of desktops), Linux could really make some waves this year." Just don't mention "rm -rf" when you're near the microphone ...
Don't get cold. Don't cough. Never *rr-hm, rr-ph* (Score:3)
Let's see, which QT event should I bind *sneeze* to?
Reality checks:
- it's going to take just a few more CPU cycles you have, no matter how many you have
- it's going to take ages to get translated to all these fancy little European languages
- it's going to take longer to tweak up to usability than all those Eterm background pictures
- it's still slower than typing.
Embedded devices, yeah, but they don't have the muscle. And nobody wants to spend hours to teach their coffee machines or garage doors to listen.
We have each other to misunderstand ourselves, the machines don't really care anyway.
Anyway, where's the tarball? This is going to be soo fun. I'll just have to clean up my place so I can convince someone to come over and witness my geeky coolness once it's running...
Re:Deja Vu (Score:1)
I remember differently. I had a M100 (w/ decent RAM) at the time and could use it, even though Voice Type was said to be floating-heavy and Cyrices were said to be floating-weak.
It was simply awkward to use, headset and GUI and all.
OK, with a wireless headset and only intended to support the GUI, not replace the mouse, it could be very useful.
I can see it now.... (Score:2)
Re:Oowkaay, let's bring it on... (Score:1)
KDE and Qt can *never* be forced back to non-free. They're both GPLed. There's no way to undo that. If they tried integrating non-GPL code with Qt/KDE, they'd be violating the GPL. Therefore they have no choice but to release their code under the GPL.
I think you are wrong here. TrollTech is still the copyright holder of Qt. So nothing can stop them from relasing a Qt3 which is closed source again, BUT on the other hand everybody can work on qt 2.2.x and add what he likes. I am sure they (tt) will not do it (relase it under a closed liscence) but who know's perhaps they come up with two qt3--one closed with voice recognition, one open without.
Re:Think Big (Score:1)
You're missing the obvious (Score:2)
I can piano-play a hell of a lot faster than I can type.
How? Simple. PRACTICE! Yes, piano players practice the same piece over and over again when it is of said difficulty. Once you've practiced it enough, it is really easy to play it fast, because your motor memory kicks in.. it really just feels like your hands know where to go, and your brain decides how fast they do it.
Typists (useful ones, anyhow), tend to type different things every day -- this means that motor memory for a particular passage will never, never kick in. When it does (passwords, etc), you can expect 300+ wpm (bursts) from the "average coder".
Oh, and show me the "average piano player" (remember, we were talking about the "average coder") who can sight-read (no motor memory!) a piece at 220 in 4/4 that is solid 16th notes, with two-octave jumps in the right hand, and I'll eat my hat.
I still have a hard time believing that the "average coder" types 170wpm. I'm a pretty friggin' good coder, and I know how to type -- been doing it for over 15 years -- and 100 wpm seems to be several standard deviations above the mean.
--
Next Squirrel system on Linux? (Score:3)
Human Factors? (Score:1)
---------
Re:rm -rf (Score:1)
Re:Why voice recognition is overrated (Score:1)
Having voice as the sole or primary means of input and interaction is obviously a poort coice for power users but having more means of input is usually a good thing. How about being able to send voice commands to apps not in your (typing) focus? Being able to not be required to sit at your computer and walk around via (wireless) mic. You could get exercising in while still doing "work"!
Not to mention my mother who types about 10 wpm. Not everyone is as leet and skilled as you and the bubble of people you know.
You need a better keyboard / Emacs revisited (Score:2)
No, you don't. That's why you should be using a real keyboard, like the Sun Microsystems Type 5c, which has the control key beside the A key, and the escape beside the one.
And wrt emacs baiting: I guess you guys aren't smart enough to use meta-x global-set-key, huh?
And no, you don't have to move your fingers off the home row to use the meta on a real keyboard, either -- that's what the escape key is for.
Yeesh.
--
Re:World Record is: (Score:2)
Second is this quote: "In 1938...Blackburn first laid hands on a Dvorak keyboard. In only a few years her speed was up to 138 words per minute."
In 1938 this keyboard was clearly mechanical, thus 138 is a mechanical speed. From context it sounds like she never switched to electric so 150/170 are also mechanical speeds.
As for your claim: "A good mechanical typrwriter is a match for a good keyboard."
Have you ever even used a mechanical typewriter? FULLY mechanical? As in it doesn't plug into the wall at all? You are probably thinking of "mechanical" electric keyboards (i.e. dedicated typewriters not attached to a computer, but nonetheless electrically powered). REAL mechanical typewriters are VERY hard to type with.
An electric only requires you to close a relay and then the machine does the work of striking the paper. A mechanical requires you to impart enough force to strike the arm against the paper (a distance of several inches) AND lift the ribbon (and if you are shifting, you have to lift the weight of the carriage with your other pinky). The difference is incredible. I remember as a child trying to learn to type with my mother's mechanical typewriter. I had to quit because I couldn't press the keys hard enough. When I played with an electric in the store I was astounded at the tiny amount of force I needed to use to make the keys go. Also keep in mind that a mechanical requires you to wait for the arms to move out of the way (can also be a problem on the electric, but the distance is smaller) but a computer keyboard has no problem with that.
Conclusion: You made a foolish initial statement that you can no longer sustain.
--
MailOne [openone.com]
Re:This is bad news. (Score:1)
'Planning' is the right word (Score:1)
Re:Why voice recognition is overrated (Score:1)
Being able to use your computer without sitting in front of it would be great fun (especially if you do manage to rig the house for sound). You could do a whole bunch of stuff before you even get out of bed - call work (using your computer's voice-modem) to say you can't be bothered to go in today, get today's news headlines, play a few rounds of Internet VQuake (a new FPS based entirely on voice commands)...
It would also be handy while you're at the computer, if you're using the keyboard and mouse for other things. Voice commands could be used to trigger a range of macro commands, and would be much easier to learn than cryptic keyboard shortcuts. Sure, it wouldn't replace common easy-to-learn shortcuts like Ctrl-C - but it could give the keyboard a run for its money with things like 'Font: Helvetica 14pt'.
I bet it could work really well with the Gimp too - it always takes me ages to find which menu the script-fu effect I'm after is on, and being able to change brush tools without moving the mouse (or knowing the keyboard shortcut) would be handy.
-- Andrem
Free and Open Speech (Score:1)
Via Voice for Linux is stripped (Score:1)
1) no training is included, you must pay for that
2) none of the word recognition code is included
You would be better off starting from scratch. Who knows if/when they will release these "extra" features without the large price tag.
This is very similar to what Troll Tech did with the OpenGL widgets in QT, i.e. not release them in the GPL versions.
So beware, and investigate the RELEASED features before wasting your time.
Re:It is not for coding (Score:2)
I would have followed this statment with "there are no computer languages and programming tools that are designed with voice recognition in mind". As VR becomes more commonplace, I'm sure we will see better tools and languages that will take full advantage of all this. Also, if you have VR, your code will change. You will no longer have "int c" but "int count" and other longer, more descriptive names (that I try to do, but int c just comes out).
Re:Why voice recognition is overrated (Score:2)
My next step was to go wireless, but if I can go two way wireless even better!
--
Re:World Record is: (Score:1)
I have come to the conclusion that you are a classic /. troll. You are the weakest link...Goodbye!
You can't wait for me to get this (Score:2)
Anyone who has tried to figgure out what I'm saying on /. can't wait for me to get VR. My spelling is horrid at best, VR solves that problem. Who knows, I might even have a point worth reading once in a while - I've been moderated up a couple times anyway.
Spelling has always been my weak point. I like to think that I have good ideas despite that weakness. VR would solve the spelling and fat fingers problem.
Re:rm -rf (Score:1)
Re:Windows doesn't have voice recognition? (Score:1)
And BitchX for windows is the same as BitchX for linux, only difference is that it runs in a window and not at a console.
--
what about computer generated speech? (Score:1)
My amiga 500 back in 1988 came with a speech program. Now, 10 years down the road I have yet to hear ANY computer generated speech that is mildly better or more realistic.
Frankly, all computer generated speech that I have heard sounds quite terrible. Is there any development going on in this are to make it a bit more human-like?
Re:You need a better keyboard / Emacs revisited (Score:2)
Well the emacs-baiting was intended as a light-hearted quip, as I'm sure you'll appreciate. However, I've admired emacs' rich feature set from afar many times, and sat down to do the tutorial on three different occasions, and each time I ended up going back to vi, so I guess I'm *not* smart enough to use meta-x global-set-key
But, I don't like editor wars: I say, if you like it, use it.
--
Re:Why voice recognition is overrated (Score:1)
Re:You're missing the obvious (Score:1)
If you're having a hard time believing that the 'average coder' types 170wpm, I suggest you stop trying because it's clearly not true.
I agree that there's a bit of an apples and oranges comparison between piano music and typing. I don't think sight-reading should be compared with copy-typing though: it's much easier to process words as chunks than groups of notes in fast runs.
-- Andrem
Re:It is not for coding (Score:1)
I am a "handicap person" (a physically disabled person is what I assume you mean)--I can type at at best five words per minute--but I am certainly a "coder" [a professional software developer]. I do not make a lot of money, nor do I manage to work incredibly quickly (significantly slower than most able-bodied workers), but I manage (due largely to the largesse of the Australian government admittedly, but I hope that will change).
Please don't forget that large (-ish; let's be realistic!) group of people that I represent.
(Incidentally, I am quite excited at the prospect of, once appropriate voice recognition software becomes available, returning to using a Unix-like OS like Linux!)
[This comment may sound rather peeved; please note that I mean no disrespect to you personally! I understand how easy it is to forget about users like me... I did so for many years!]
Cheers, Chris
cool! (Score:1)
Oowkaay, let's bring it on... (Score:3)
It's... It's...
Re:You need a better keyboard / Emacs revisited (Score:2)
BTW, the meta x menu uses command-line completion, so you also have a hope in hell of guessing stuff.
Finally, if you want to be really wierd, you could run "meta-x viper", which will run a VI emulator inside of emacs... but don't type "meta-x dungeon" unless you have a lot of time on your hands.
--
Re:Why voice recognition is overrated (Score:4)
It's true that VR is not much use for able-bodied coders, but it is useful for able-bodied letter writers who don't type so fast.
You mean voice DICTATION is overrated (Score:2)
*type type type*
Bold on
*type type type*
Mail window
*check mail*
Read....Reply
*type type type*
--
MailOne [openone.com]
Re:Why voice recognition is overrated (Score:2)
Seriously, I find my typing goes noticeably downhill and becomes a serious effort under those conditions, but the dictation (Dragon NaturallySpeaking, FWIW) still works fine. If I need to send an e-mail or something, it's just easier.
It's not something I use most of the time but it's something I'm very glad to have around.
Re:Integration with WM nice, but not what *I* want (Score:2)
I can give one fabulous example - AutoCAD - that uses modifiable mouse pads. You've got a central drawing area on your tablet, and then you've got a huge number of areas outside this, where you can stick functions, and assorted pre-drawn pieces. This 'template' area can be changed at will.
Another (lesser) example is the good old MVS system. Your function keys vary depending where you are. Kinda nice, really, although I tend to drastically reprogram mine. Thus PF20 (Same as PF8, Page Down, by default) gets reprogrammed as 'Next' for one app (SDSF), 'Find not'blank' 8' in Edit (goes to next paragraph) and so on.
This article rates... (Score:2)
--
Voice recognition... (Score:2)
Do you just say "<TAB>" ?
I don't really like it.
If I type quicker than I speak and I want to replace my mouse with voice recognition, which is IMHO the only interesting way to exploit it, then I might want to focus on a different text zone using my voice but then, I might have problem deciding which word to connect to which action, isn't it?
--
Nope, those sound right (Score:2)
--
MailOne [openone.com]
It is not for coding (Score:3)
Re:Nice, but Linux still discrimates (Score:2)
I'm dislexic. Not just a little either. Had to ride the short bus the school for six years. I have an extremely hard time spelling anything right. Spell checkers that don't have the correct spelling for me are worthless (thanks aspell!)
I don't find Unix names all that hard. They are short. Easy to memorize. I don't have trouble with three letter words. I do when we hit five.
So don't you go changing /etc to some damn thing I can't spell
worth a damn in my name!
Re:You mean voice DICTATION is overrated (Score:3)
Maybe Emacs users would benefit, since it probably *is* quicker to say "bold" than it is to type "meta-x-embolden-text" or whatever
Emacs baiting aside, though, this is great news for a segment of the disabled market, but I really don't see the mainstream applications. Not to mention how awful a place the average open-plan office would become if voice-recognition took off...
--
Integration with WM nice, but not what *I* want... (Score:3)
For example, use the Star Trek test. They've got very powerful computers (nevermind that they can be infected with weird space-borne contaigons), but what do they use voice controls for? Asking questions, controlling their environment, etc. When they need to program a new subroutine for the deflector dish, though, they use the keyboard.
Which brings up another question: Has anyone done any serious investigation into context-modifiable keyboards? My understanding on Star Trek is that their keyboards change their layouts depending on who's there, and what they're doing. I've always thought something like that would be fantastic, say, for switching into Quake or a flight sim -- make your keyboard LOOK like a control panel, so you don't have to remember that "." is strafe or whatever...
As for voice control, I'd really like to be able to control house systems (see my ÜberTiVo posting under the Set Top Box thread). To say "Play 1812" and have the system start playing it for me. Or "Where's my dinner?" and have the computer tell me to cook it myself (hey, gotta be realistic here). Or to just start rambling on, stream-of-conciousness, in a rant or rave about what's really annoying or cool, so I can edit it down to a letter later. That is what I think we need, and it's more on the application side than on the OS side.
Of course, we may already have good solutions for this, I just haven't been able to play with them yet... :(
Re:rm -rf (Score:2)
let me clarify on my previous statement - to the bozos who were alarmed by my posting:
I didn't want their creepy fingers prying into my files - allow me to add that these were my own personal files, and copies of remote CVS repositories. I destroyed nothing that was of any value to the employer, they were going to wipe the drive and install NT anyways.
Re:You mean voice DICTATION is overrated (Score:2)
--
Re:Linux has vi, Windows doesn't? (Score:2)
I only use R/A when I'm doing large regexp replaces. That happens often enough, though, that I learned the keyboard shortcuts to do it quickly. (Why, you ask, would any programmer do that, seeing as how it's rather dangerous? The particular piece of code I was working on when I learned the trick contained a number of rather large tables of the form
{Name, CONST_, "Name", ,
where it was easy to create a list of the Name fields. That's the kind of thing that old vi-warriors know calls for regexp replace all.)
Wait a minute... (Score:4)
I used OS/2. Version 4 came with a version of voice recognition, and I ran it on a 100MHz Pentium with only 32Meg RAM. It ruled in the proper place.
First, the system is good for first drafts of text documents like long reports. Don't expect to get a perfect copy the first time through. The output from the voice input will require some cleanup. But guess what, so does anything I type.
Very few people type anything close to 80wpm. I only get around 40. Voice type allowed around 100wpm. For those l337 haX0rz that can type and think that everyone should be able to...go out and see the sun every now and then!!
I would write up my report in note form, basically just outlining what I wanted to say. Anything that I had to quote got a reference to the text I would quote from. Then I locked the bedroom door to keep out noise from wife and kids, gathered my notes and references around and started talking. An hour later I had the first draft of a ten page report. I've spent 4 doing it manually.
You may not have a need for it, but if you're in school or any other place where you have to produce long reports and you don't type with flaming fingers, then voice input can be a real boost to productivity.
Tre Cool (Score:2)
I'd keep a copy of Qt around if this happens. I just hope it runs on FreeBSD, I'm not going back to linux just so I can talk to my workstation.
Now I will need to design a Qt-based WM which supports dual-focus, so that I can have keyboard focus on one window, and voice focus on another... Then I can talk while I type and get work done twice as fast.
Oh, yeah, Windows has dragon, like some other poster said, but it isn't integrated.
A new year calls for a new signature.
Re:You mean voice DICTATION is overrated (Score:2)
But you have to take you hands off the home row to do this. Sure, it's a lot faster for the hunt-n-peck type. But for people who type relatively quickly AND work with several keyboards with different layouts, stopping to find ctrl and then hit "b" takes WAY too long. At least, compared to just saying with no pause in my typing.
--
MailOne [openone.com]
There's a problem (Score:2)
As for what that means performance-wise, I have no idea at this point. We'll just have to wait and see.
-
The IHA Forums [ihateapple.com]
Re:Nope, those sound right (Score:2)
Re:Misdirected hostility (Score:2)
Re:It is not for coding (Score:2)
As for use for a coder - you just got done rewriting a majorly troublesome routine. You sit back to relax for a second and say "Okay...build" and let it go. You go get some soda and your computer says "Build successful" so without moving you yell "Run it" and it runs.
Either that, or you yell Run It and it hears "cat
VR is wonderful for things like this. Dication sucks.
Re:Misdirected hostility (Score:2)
DWIM originally appeared in Interlisp for DEC 36-bit machines. It was a terrible idea. Despite claims to the contrary in the documentation, sometimes it would destroy work by misinterpreting something. I once typed "EDIT" while in a mode where "EDIT" wasn't permissible, and DWIM typed "=EXIT", throwing me out of Interlisp without saving. DWIM was too closely tuned to the typing error patterns of its originator.
To do this right, a corrector needs information about the potential consequences of what it is doing. For example, knowing whether something is easily undo-able is crucial.
Speech-rec could be good for chinese chars (Score:2)
Although it's not very hard to type pretty fast in an alphabetic script, it's a lot harder in chinese. The fastest you can get at the moment basically requires a special type of keyboard, one with all 200-odd radical components of characters on, and you type all the components that are in the character you want, and the software works out which character that is.
However, this technology is reportedly very hard to learn, and not at all widespread. Most people who type chinese characters use software where you type the sound of the character (in the roman alphabet) and it gives you a list of characters to pick from.
Chinese speech recognition could be much better than this. It could pick up on the tones a speaker uses much better than the roman alphabet can, and it wouldn't require them to know a foreign script.
This is all in theory though. I don't know how good the software out there is at the moment. There are over 1,000,000,000 people who can read chinese characters, but not many of them have a computer.
Re:There's a problem (Score:2)
So when will they get their interface right?
60 - 140 wmp? Shirley, you're joking! (Score:2)
People may *say* they type 140 wpm, but that's actually extremely fast, and when you're coding, you're using a lot of top-row special characters, which tend to slow even skilled typists down. And remember, actual typing speed = wpm - errors.
Try this test, folks. Time yourself. Do a typing test and subtract the errors you make from your score. My guess is that most of us won't get anywhere near 140 wpm. I touch type and I still only max out at about 70 wpm - and that's when I'm typing notes like this, not coding.
I still haven't decided how I feel about voice recognition, but 60-140 seems like a tremendously inflated speed range to me.
Some voice recognition trivia... (Score:2)
can anyone confirm this? even if it's not true though, it makes for a fun story :)
-----
Re:Why voice recognition is overrated (Score:2)
I had ViaVoice for a while. For coding it is pretty worthless because you have to switch to the military alphabet to do most variable names, and lots of keywords, and unix commands, and....
It did Ok for email messages, and was pretty allright for web browsing. Then again a good optical mouse with the scroolwheel is almost as good, and not that bad on my RSI.
If integrated in the UI it would probbably be useful for lots of things where you have to look over a button panel before deciding what to "click" on. I look forward to seeing it work, but doubt it will allow a whole lot more hands-off use. Er, let me clarify, it won't make hands-off as effecent as hands-on. People that can't use their hands, or shouldn't may well get a lot out of it.
Besides, it's just palin cool.
Misdirected hostility (Score:2)
First off, I say this with no hostility or sarcasm, I am sorry that dyslexia has affected you or someone you know.
However, why should I as a user type Configuration instead of etc?
Feel free to write your own distro with aliases if you need to.
If you NEED long friendly names, most of the world has heard of an alternative OS called Windows. It prob even came preinstalled on your computer!
What you are asking is for the bloat to be removed, yet you insist that others suffer with the bloat of longer names that accomodate your disability.
This is equivalent to saying "No I don't just want every building to have wheelchair ramps, I want EVERYONE to have to cruise around in a wheelchair, just like me, damn it! Its just not fair!"
Re:You mean voice DICTATION is overrated (Score:2)
Hitting a key-combo for format codes has the advantage of being synced with your typing -- you know exactly when and where it will occur.
--
Re:Why voice recognition is overrated (Score:2)
That said, I've had the opportunity to work with code that was written based on the 'per line' model. My Gawd, I've never seen so much empty space!
But yeah, keyboards rock, especially if you like macros. One combo, and 50 keystrokes get played out ...
I did have one real problem when I tried to implement that kind of efficiency in DragonSpeak. Started subbing one and two syllable words for multi-syllabic, and for frequently occuring phrases. Terible when that carries over into everyday conversation! The worst part is, I've discovered there were others who do the same thing, with the same consequences.
The best general style for using speech recognition is still for word processing ... first draft dictated, then go through with keboard to edit. (The cat prefers the first part, but the second interferes with lap time ;)
World Record is: (Score:2)
http://sominfo.syr.edu/facstaff/dvorak/blackbur
Re:Good news for disabled users (Score:2)
Solutions such as EmacsSpeak [cornell.edu] provide much more accessibilty for blind technical users.
Re:Since it IS done, it MUST be doable (Score:2)
200 cpm is pretty lame. Given an average 5 chars/word, that's only 40 wpm. Check the classifieds for typists/secretaries. Note the speeds being asked for. Minimum 40, usually 50, often 60 words per minute.
Instead of coming back with responses like "I just don't see..." or "I can't possibly believe..." why not go find a link that lists fast typing speeds as either wpm or cpm?
--
MailOne [openone.com]
Re:Why voice recognition is overrated (Score:3)
In any case, there are a million and one cool things you can do with voice recognition (well, until your HAL-9001 tries to kill you and you end up dead or on another plane of evolution, whichever comes first), and I'm sure the ideas I have right now are just the tip of the iceberg.
this is important (Score:3)
If I can have my speech recognized *accurately* then I can gain in productivity.
Real world proof are the articles of Charles W Moore at www.macopinion.com and www.applelinks.com
He creates all his articles using iListen for Macintosh.
If I can do the same with my linux boxen, then this is a dramatic leap forward for me.
A host is a host from coast to coast, but no one uses a host that's close
Re:Don't get cold. Don't cough. Never *rr-hm, rr-p (Score:3)
For that, all you need is command recognition. It's orders of magnitude simpler than dictation and can be done with little or no training.
Listen to ViaVoice's recordings of what it thinks you've said when playing with its correction feature and you'll see just how hard a job transcribing complete, dictated continuous speech with a wide vocabulary really is. Even deciding where one word ends and another begins is far from simple - but that sort of problem is so myuch simpler with a limited vocabulary and no continuous speech requirement. Both of which can be done with that sort of device.
I agree about coughing and, erm, well, thinking, er about what you, er, were trying to say. I always found I needed fair presence of mind to get something readable (especially if formal) down on the page. If you think the above is exaggerated, try dictation software and you'll see what I mean.
Re:I can see it now.... (Score:2)
Easy, you just talk into the mouse with a scottish accent.
--
Re:Think Big (Score:2)
So? There is still a relatively small set of similar queries to be done in Joe Average's life, so even if this has to be explicity programmed, it would still be incredibly useful, and wastly more useful than actually walking over to the computer and click on an icon or write something on the command line.
If I had moderator points, I would have modded the original comment high.... :-)
Re:Why voice recognition is overrated (Score:2)
The keyboard was fast enough to keep up with him, but the WP software itself wasn't. Go fig...
Re:Integration with WM nice, but not what *I* want (Score:2)
Some years ago there was a programmable keyboard made by Siemens (and probably a bunch of other companis, but that's the one I saw) that had a little LCD display in every key. The LCD's resolution was pretty crappy (8x8 or so), but you could program every key differently.
There just wasn't any software that used it, and pretty much nobody used any other than the standard layout, so it didn't pay off. Maybe nowadays you could try it again, for gamers. You would need a better resolution though.
Another thing that would be interesting would be keyboards where you change the shape of the keys, too. You're just not gonna get force feedback on the keys, and that's a big problem. Would be cool, nonetheless. ;)
Think Big (Score:5)
The true power of voice recognition is not in replacing the keyboard. It comes with allowing new forms of interaction with a computer. Consider the simple task of checking the weather. Pulling up a browser and heading to weather.com is no big task, but why would I want to sit at my computer and have to do that just so I can decide how heavy a sweater I'll need for the day? Why not just ask the computer to read me the forecast while I'm getting dressed?
Many people would assume in this scenario that one would call out: "Computer, browse to h t t p colon slash slash w w w dot weather dot com. Read page." How about simply calling a script intead that does all the hard work behind the scenes? "Computer, what is the weather forecast for today?" The use of predefined grammars, as the article describes, will make such queries very reliable as they will be much easier to recognize.
This may have been a simple example, but hopefully it gets the point across. Voice recognition is not going to replace typing. As many have said, some people can type much faster than they can dictate text. Once you start considering higher level interaction with the computer, however, the situation changes, and voice recognition systems will really show their colors.
-kris
Re:Misdirected hostility (Score:2)
You wouldn't. You would type Co<TAB>.
Of course, the simple solution is surely just to set up symlinks to these directories. That way you don't have to type them correctly more than once. It's easy enough to do the same for application names.
On an almost related note, does anyone else remember an IBM mainframe application called DWIM, standing for Do What I Mean (not what I say)? It did a great job of detecting typos and suggesting what you might actually have wanted to type. I'm sure someone could come up with a shell that worked on similar principles...
A new driving hazard... oh boy! (Score:2)
Re:Windows doesn't have voice recognition? (Score:3)
Why this reflects good news (Score:2)
Until a year ago, there were four leading speech recognition firms out there: Lernout & Hauspie, Dragon Systems, IBM, and Philips (barely). Dragon was near bankrupcy, and L&H bought them last year [cnet.com]. Now L&H is being rocked by financial scandals (see this list of articles on them in CNET [search.com]), and may go under as well.
IBM, on the other hand, has supported their ViaVoice SDK for Linux [ibm.com] for a long time. They also sell their ViaVoice dication software for Linux [ibm.com].
Without IBM, speech recognition might die. I'm glad to see they're pushing it futher, especially on Linux.
P.S.: "Voice recogintion" identifies people; "speech recognition" turns what they say into text.
P.P.S. It's possible to bind sneezes, sniffles, coughs, etc., into "null text."
Re:Why voice recognition is overrated (Score:3)
Okay, somewhere in there is a wise-ass comment about the usefulness of voice-recognition for porn-surfing, but I won't stoop to that level... :-)
---
"They have strategic air commands, nuclear submarines, and John Wayne. We have this"
OS/2 already has this (Score:3)
The only drawback with the OS/2 version is that it only supports discrete, not continuous, dictation. This means that you need to pause between each word. For voice navigation, that's not a problem. You also have to go through a three-hour "training" session if you want it to work well.
So before you get all excited about how Linux might beat Windows, you should not forgot that OS/2 is real competitor here.
--
Re:Misdirected hostility (Score:2)
Okay, time to clean up Emacs' auto-saves...
% rm *~
*~ not found. Assuming you meant "rm *"
%
...hmm, I guess there weren't any auto-saves.
% ls
%
Hey, where's my code?
According to the story as told in the Jargon File [tuxedo.org], DWIM actually stands for "Damn Warren's Infernal Machine", at least in the opinion of the victim of such an accident, who then wanted to tie the author to his chair and enter the same command on his workstation. Twice.
David Gould
WHAT??? Code without TUNES?? Are you nuts? (Score:2)
I especially value it when I am doing literary stuff ("Mood music" if you will) or need to pick up the pace for a deadline. And then there's the selection of "We kick the world's ass" anthems that I save for emergencies when you have to either go into ultra-arrogance or lapse into despair (Warning: not for use when you may have to deal with actual humans intermittently!)
Since it IS done, it MUST be doable (Score:2)
I have an electronic keyboard that plays a certain piece of music at 220 beats/minute. That's 220/60 = 3.6 beats/second. Since all of the notes in the music are quarter (or shorter) that's 12-16 notes/second. I've seen this piece performed by an actual human at roughly the same speed my keyboard plays it. Amazing, yes. Impossible, clearly not.
Piano and typing use a lot of the same hand movements--in fact, typing is EASIER since the keys are closer together AND don't require much force to press down.
--
MailOne [openone.com]
Re:Windows doesn't have voice recognition? (Score:2)
ViaVoice is Open Source???? There was nothing, either in the linked article or in its comments, that would imply that. Can anyone provide a link to confirm?
Re:Linux has vi, Windows doesn't? (Score:2)
:%s/stupidity/intelligence/
is much quicker to type, than using the mouse to:
Edit|Search and Replace
Search "stupidity", Replace "intelligence"
But it isn't faster to type than ctrl-H, stupidity, TAB, intelligence, Alt-A. That's the key sequence in MSVC.
Not quite agree with you. (Score:2)
"ftutec buoyd fpaat"
getting"static void start()"
on the screen. Or"brmmpf fbhurrrgle"
becoming". profile"
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Windows doesn't have voice recognition? (Score:2)
Both Dragon's Naturally Speaking and IBM's ViaVoice run under windows. Dragon is *excellent* at taking dictation and writing letters. I've found it far superior to ViaVoice. On the other hand, it's not so good at controlling the rest of the computer. When it comes to moving windows, opening menus and applications and browsing the web, ViaVoice reigns supreme.
What IBM was never able to do was to tightly integrate that sort of GUI control into the system. This is what IBM is doing with QT.
Re:A new driving hazard... oh boy! (Score:2)
You think that's bad? Check out VOCP [sourceforge.net], which is a voice mail system that allows you to get a shell. Yep, it decodes DTMF and allows you to type in commands. The whole thing is extremely cool.
So I'd rather the voice recognition for the driving admin thank you.
Re:Think Big (Score:2)
e.g. "tv on sky1"
e.g. "play music by britney"
Why voice recognition is overrated (Score:3)
Most writers I know type anywhere from 60-170 wpm. I type on the lower end of this scale, about 80-90 wpm. Again, this is significantly faster than I can comfortably speak.
When *editing* code or text, however, voice commands cannot hold a candle to a combination of mouse and keyboard commands, especially with newer trackballs and 'wheel' mice.
"Page up. Page up. Page up. Stop. No, go up. Stop! Not delete! Damnit!"
Re:Oowkaay, let's bring it on... (Score:2)
And finally, if you're still too worried, try a less retentive distribution. I got a kick out of Debian calling me a criminal for giving my friend a copy of KDE1 (it would have been wrong to say no), and I can't wait for them to do it again.
Re:Wait a minute... (Score:2)
I didn't do much dictation with it, but it was great when you were trying to play solitaire with your hands full eating a greasy double cheesburger...
GNOME has had this for a couple years. (Score:2)
Re:Why voice recognition is overrated (Score:2)
Anyway, I think we will see mainstream use of VR, in not too long in connection with applications used on living-room machines and things like that. The Nokia Media Terminal for instance, that was recently shown on /., I mean, I would much rather like to talk to that machine while sitting comfortably in my best chair than a have keyboard or a remote controller in my hand. I think that's going to be a very important application of VR.
Also, in the kitchen, I mean "damn, I've got my hands full turn off that hot plate, will ya? thanks". Nice, eh? :-)
Re:World Record is: (Score:2)
2) The previous poster said this was a MECHANICAL typewriter. Electronic is MUCH MUCH faster.
--
MailOne [openone.com]
Re:World Record is: (Score:2)
You obviously have no clue what you are talking about. Errors ARE subtracted from wpm rates.
--
MailOne [openone.com]
rm -rf (Score:2)
Just don't mention "rm -rf" when you're near the microphone ...
Hah - I actually tried this the day I left my former employer. It was only my desktop workstation, but I didn't want their creepy fingers prying into my files, so I did su -l, rm -rf / - the command returned an error claiming I didn't have a lock on a certain process, and it couldn't complete the command.
If I hadn't been lazy, it would have been nice to code up some wipe tool that was used in Cryptonomicon...
Re:Why voice recognition is overrated (Score:2)
Well, I think one thing that you are forgetting here is that when you are typing code, you are for the most part not typing at your highest speed, unless you have a much faster mind than I do. Chances are you are typing out a few lines, then thinking.... so on and so forth.... for writers, this is different, as they can go a bit more stream of conscience than a coder can.
If you wanted to use it for dictation, you could also do that. My father uses speech recognition for dictation and finds it alot easier to do than writing things out by hand. Admittedly, he can type much faster than he speaks, however it tends to drain him less than typing it out does, and he is able to do more (though it takes a little extra time) than he would if he was just typing it out (less brain drain).
Where I see the big advantages coming through in this is in the overall OS control. I don't see this controlling everything (unless you so wanted it that way, in which case be my guest), but I can see this helping in my "multitasking" of many different things at once. You could for instance be typing away at a letter and realize that you need to bring one up to reference it, but you don't want to click through and find it because you're on a roll. You simply tell the computer "bring up letter X in the background" (
One of the big problems that happens with new technologies is that everyone says that this is going to replace some device that is used every day (remember people have declared that the PC was dead for about 10 years now if I recall the first time I heard that). In reality, what will happen is that people will discover a way to use it to work a bit faster than they did before, using their every day means + the new technology rather than just the new technology itself.
Re:Linux killer app? (Score:2)
The OO desktop beats anything else I have ever seen. Add on ObjectDesktop and it got even better. Over the past few years using Linux/BSD and KDE, I've been thinking how to do the same thing under Unix. I've come to the conclusion that you can make it LOOK like Warp easily enough, but it will take a hell of a lot of work to make it act like it.
Re:Good news for disabled users (Score:2)
Re:Voice recognition... (Score:2)
--