Earlier quoted context omitted.
Never saw yours before, but I discovered "Handsfree for Web" a few months after I started - and thought he had ripped mine off. But I no longer think so. Yes, seems like many commands are the same. Shame that so much wheel reinvention is going on. One thing that makes LipSurf "special" is the deep integration with sites. I wanted to use Duolingo, Reddit, HN and some others more with voice - so they get special plugin…
I want hands free for CAD. Imagine being able to vocalise and build a model. I did have a HN user who said they be happy to collaborate with me to build it but I dropped the ball and have since killed that email address.
Firefox Voice
91–100 of 166 posts
Re: Firefox Voice
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, Mozilla is not what it used to be. I guess it's just wishful thinking that makes it so easy to forget.
hoping they are able to continue their efforts and be more respectful. they are the only company that i am fully lenient with to "allow analytics" in hopes that they are able to improve and compete with the more nefarious competitors.
It's the same kind of utter disdain I see in the GNOME design.
Re: Firefox Voice
#93I've looked into open source voice assistants before. I found mycroft, Jarvis and a few others, but either got bogged down in dependencies or configuration. Many supported shipping your data to Google or Amazon if you configured it, or an open source voice recognition tool. I hate this idea that our voice has to be shipped somewhere to be processed. I remember a lot of the speech-to-text tools in the early 2000s were…
Probably because getting the payloads shipped for server side processing provides a constant stream of training material updates? That's my cynical take, at least.
But there's got to be more. Paraphrasing H.L. Mencken[0], for every complex problem there is an answer that is straightforward, easy to accept - and wrong. I remember how in the late naughties Nokia had an early version of on-device speech recognition: long-press the trigger key and you could call people by uttering out a saved "voice tag". IIRC the feature picked the right entry roughly 1/3 of the time.
For what comes next I'm relying on hearsay, but from what I heard at the time, the feature was originally developed at MIT. Nokia then financed the team to optimise their code and underlying detection model to be ported to ARM and to fit the constrained memory/CPU envelope. Because Nokia definitely had collaboration with MIT at the time, this is at least plausible.
If people are expected to use speech-to-text in real life, it has to work within very strict boundaries. Low latency and high accuracy are table stakes. At least some level of contextual awareness would be nice. As long as predictive text input routinely provides us with meme-worthy failures, I won't expect anything better from (fundamentally noisier) speech inputs. And if server-side processing is the only way to get performance from dismal to somewhat functional, practical applications don't have much of a choice. Plus, you don't have to ship your model to end user devices.
For what it's worth, I dislike voice interfaces. But when they do work, I dislike them less than Byzantine and user-hostile phone menu systems. I guess that qualifies as progress.
0: https://quoteinvestigator.com/2016/07/17/solution/
1: https://nokia-e71.helpdoc.net/en/nokia-e71-user-guide/phone/...
Re: Firefox Voice
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is what they are working on, but that needs high-quality training data: https://commonvoice.mozilla.org/en This is just another way of gathering that data. (If consented to.)
Mozilla DeepSpeech is trained on about 2000 hours of audio that is mostly spoken by American males. It has little ability to handle noise or accents and has a 5.97% Word Error Rate on LibriVox (which is noiseless, plain spoken english). Meanwhile, Google, Microsoft & IBM have tons of fresh audio coming in constantly to use in augmenting their models. Baidu was able to build a competitive English Speech to Text model…
Re: Firefox Voice
#95I guess Mozilla's own speech to text ( https://github.com/mozilla/DeepSpeech ) isn't good enough, so they have to use Google's?
Presumably the reason they want you to opt-in to saving recordings is so they can train DeepSpeech.
Like, there's nothing stopping firefox from just using wav2letter. It's BSD-licensed.
Re: Firefox Voice
#96Re: Firefox Voice
#97Re: Firefox Voice
#98I don't understand the utility of it. Yes, I can see how this might be considered cool and hip, but.. which my problem as a user does it solve, exactly?
I have been waiting fot this for years.
I want to use voice to control browser. Like I am doing something and say " hey firefoxy / googley open reddit on the side".
You got to broaden your thinking. Other people like other shit.
Re: Firefox Voice
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
hoping they are able to continue their efforts and be more respectful. they are the only company that i am fully lenient with to "allow analytics" in hopes that they are able to improve and compete with the more nefarious competitors.
Mozilla and "respectful to their users" are not two sentences that belong in the same ballpark on the same planet in the same galaxy in the same galactic group. Anytime there's a choice between two options, one giving users more control and one stripping it away, they choose the latter. It's the same kind of utter disdain I see in the GNOME design.
- https://www.cnet.com/news/mozilla-backpedals-after-mr-robot-...
- https://venturebeat.com/2015/06/09/mozilla-responds-to-firef...
- https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2019/09/08/firefox-a...
Re: Firefox Voice
#100I've looked into open source voice assistants before. I found mycroft, Jarvis and a few others, but either got bogged down in dependencies or configuration. Many supported shipping your data to Google or Amazon if you configured it, or an open source voice recognition tool. I hate this idea that our voice has to be shipped somewhere to be processed. I remember a lot of the speech-to-text tools in the early 2000s were…
Try Nuance Dragon options (no affiliation, just a good tool). They have software that works offline, without cloud. They have a very competitive voice recognition quality for the supported languages. There are some products that are explicitly cloud-based (like mobile ones), but there are also desktop versions that do all the processing, inferring and even learning of your voice and new dictionaries on your local mac…