81–90 of 124 posts
You can DL it here: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/lipsurf-voice-cont...
I would like to see Linux lead here. Have a standard voice interface where a voice-to-text process feeds a stream of text to the DE, which can then forward it to the active application (as text). I want this to be a separate "voice" stream so it is not confused with the keyboard. This would allow the eventual creation of a voice assistant at the system level, but also allow individual applications to adopt voice comm…
Windows Voice Recognition has been around forever (out of the box since XP), it's UI is "serviceable" but not great. (It was slightly better when Cortana was briefly "out of the box" in Windows 10, but has reverted some since.) But I don't think you need to pay for Dragon (or its high memory consumption) if you don't mind taking to learn the quirks of Windows Voice Recognition directly. Most of Dragon's quirks are Windows' quirks anyway papered over with a UI that makes it seem like they are adding value.
Also yeah, one of the answers to "how is it that no one has built something better?" is: Well, Microsoft tried with Cortana, got a huge blowback that "no one" wanted Cortana on their PCs, and gave up.
For keyboards, you lose positional logic (wasd in games). You lose shortcuts. You lose control over capitalization and formatring. You lose punctuation. You lose non-text input (code, dictating code sounds like like a horrible pain). You lose function keys. And, of course, you lose speed (think of instant things you do with shortcut keys, like alt tab). Not to mention, that you lose the ability to work in silence.
Make the recognition quality gorgeous, and it will still be a less flexible product than what we use today. It has value for accessibility, but people will likely choose keyboards over dictation based on UX alone.
As far as human computer interfaces go, keyboard and mouse probably win comfortably in both bandwidth and latency against speech to text in almost all tasks. Former also requires a less physical effort and is creates less noise for others. My guess is that this shrinks the demand for good quality voice HCI significantly and those who really need it end up being overlooked.
Here's some examples where bandwidth and latency wins with speech:
1. "Play here comes the sun" vs. opening spotify, waiting, clicking the search box, typing here comes the sun, pressing enter, waiting, scanning the page and clicking the right song.
2. "Send email to John asking him if he would like to Play golf" vs. opening Gmail, waiting, clicking compose, start typing john, click the right email, tab to subject... etc.
There are cases where keyboard and mouse input is better... e.g. editing text, graphics production and editing, etc.. But certainly not in "almost all tasks" as you say. I think speech is the 3rd big computer interface that complements the mouse and keyboard and will make computers more productive and convenient for everyone regardless if you have a disability.
The problem is, even if you do build amazing speech to text, it will br slower and less expressive than a keyboard + pointing device (mouse, touch, pen). For keyboards, you lose positional logic (wasd in games). You lose shortcuts. You lose control over capitalization and formatring. You lose punctuation. You lose non-text input (code, dictating code sounds like like a horrible pain). You lose function keys. And, of…
Dictation, for instance, is an easy-win for voice input. Clicking buttons can be more convenient with voice when we're talking to Smart TVs or, perhaps, if our hands have pizza grease all over them and we don't want to touch the keyboard.
The complexity of doing that is IMO a good explanation of why commercial audio recognition is worthless to someone who programs a computer instead of interacts with humans over a computer.
http://plover.stenoknight.com/2013/03/using-plover-for-pytho...
Google and Siri are good at what they do. They aren't good at other things, such as dictation. I see the big problem in voice interaction is that a human being will ask you questions to clarify what you said if they don't understand and current systems don't even try. (Actually the search paradigm lets you do some refinement, "Ok Google" works amazingly well on Android TV.) Superhuman accuracy at dictation doesn't tr…
Whenever I use the Google Assistant, I'm shocked by a) How good the speech-to-text is at figuring out my words, and b) How bad the application layer is at using those words I tend to over-enunciate, so I don't get many bad bugs in the parsing... but that doesn't stop the Google Assistant from delivering completely the wrong response to the words that it's showing me it has correctly recognized, or simply spinning end…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
tab completion handles goofy and long file names quite handily ... and lot faster than speaking
Tab completion relies on a limited context. If you're trying to type gearyStreetFinancialReport and the two names in context are gearyStreetFinancialReport and unrelated, you're right, but if there's a very large number of choices, it benefits you less. And new names aren't going to be in context, so even in the best case of my example, you're going to end up typing: 'cp g-[TAB] divisaderoStreetFinancialReport' I'd e…
typing and shell help is always going to be faster than speaking
`c g-[TAB] g-[TAB]` then replace the couple characters at the front with 'divisadero'
there's no way you can do that faster speaking