Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source.
Karen Lewellen wrote: > Clearly sent privately by mistake. you are stupid asshole - I explicitly said I post in private
Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source.
rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > Disregarding someone's request for privacy is rather disrespectful. > > When that happens for me, I reply with something that says, ~"keep it on > the list, please" Thank you
Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source.
On Tuesday, May 18, 2021 08:00:27 PM Karen Lewellen wrote: > For me personally, I have been through too many sex assault's I am sorry to hear that.
Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source.
Oh I can respect your stance, even if I do not fully resonate. If one wants privacy, best to say so, at the top, not several pages down. For me personally, I have been through too many sex assault's not to insure my request not to be contacted off list gets ignored, even if I am the only person Honoring myself enough to enforce the practice. Had the request for privacy been forthright clear, and first, things would be different, and I will honor it in future from this party for this exchange most likely. On Tue, 18 May 2021, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, May 18, 2021 05:53:19 PM Karen Lewellen wrote: Clearly sent privately by mistake. ... I send this in private, because of my private opinion here. I would prefer we discuss this in private and perhaps you can convince me that it is worth the effort. I do not know this tool and as I said before I wonder what happened to festival. Sorry to have disappointed your wish for privacy. speaking personally, at least for me, one needs to ask before writing privately, when I am posting on a public list. If I am not asked to be contacted privately, I reply publicly as I did here. besides, others more versed in this situation may know about festival. ... Again, if your intent was private asking permission of me first might have been wise, or at least saying such was your desire above the text of mine you referenced. Disregarding someone's request for privacy is rather disrespectful. When that happens for me, I reply with something that says, ~"keep it on the list, please"
Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source.
On Tuesday, May 18, 2021 05:53:19 PM Karen Lewellen wrote: > Clearly sent privately by mistake. ... > > I send this in private, because of my private opinion here. I would > > prefer we discuss this in private and perhaps you can convince me that > > it is worth the effort. I do not know this tool and as I said before I > > wonder what happened to festival. > > Sorry to have disappointed your wish for privacy. speaking personally, > at least for me, one needs to ask before writing privately, when I am > posting on a public list. > If I am not asked to be contacted privately, I reply publicly as I did > here. > besides, others more versed in this situation may know about festival. ... > Again, if your intent was private asking permission of me first might > have been wise, or at least saying such was your desire above the text > of mine you referenced. Disregarding someone's request for privacy is rather disrespectful. When that happens for me, I reply with something that says, ~"keep it on the list, please"
Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source.
Clearly sent privately by mistake. In context a bit. On Tue, 18 May 2021, deloptes wrote: No - they start and run it until government=tax payers money flows in Really? Can you please point me to governmental funded Linux projects for any disability population? I will share your list with the one where the abandonware comment was made. I have not personally found any governmental funded Linux project, my sense has been that much of the work is voluntary. Still you seem firm in your facts, so can you document the governmental funded Linux Accessibility projects of which you know? That argument is the strongest against your date concerns. I am afraid you do not understand how the business goes. Which business? Accommodating a physical experience with adaptive tools? That is the focus here, and as outlined by those starting the petition, they have strong reasons for seeking to build on Eloquence based on the quality of that tool. > 2002?! boy - STT was funded by DARPA since 1996 I did say early years, not the earliest of years. meaning that tools created in 2002 were much closer in scope and function to those begun in the 1990s, certainly more so than now. > Might be true for the TTS part - because no military/NSA/CIA/FBI application. Its funny you should express this idea. On one of the blindness related Linux lists, someone is trying hard to get more naturally sounding voices as options for Linux. One of the members noted that according to their research some speech synthesis sounded less human because it was built into Military equipment and the like, with the less human sound used to insure it got attention. So there seems to be history behind poor quality tts used by the military /CIA /FBI etc. By contrast I recall being told that the dec-talk voices were created to help vets who lost the ability to speak due to service. Again, in theory, a broad application for the use of speech synthesis in government. I know I played a lot and had contact with researchers who developed the TTS voices of festival. It must have been 2002-2005. I lost track of that. Not sure I follow unless festival was governmental funded research? This and the pervasive nature of this particular tool in technology provided at least stateside by the rehab system makes securing eloquence quite fundamental for many in this population. Its a life fortifying tool missing in many ways, certainly missing in a default capacitor for Linux. So, not signing due to the alternative of seeking publicly funded efforts, or because you feel the date is an issue, speaking personally, is misplaced good intent. No it IMO it is the next level of BS and I am recently fed of BS. What happened to festival - it was quite good and promising - why you go and bag at the door of Microsoft and do not improve festival Its not my petition, so i suppose that use of you is generalized. How many years have you used festival in place of a computer monitor? That is the position of these individuals, or some of them. Eloquence became their eyes, used for years, in the screen reading tools that allowed them to access computers. Perhaps festival has become abandonware. Perhaps the public funding for it went away? Perhaps this petition is the result of trying to make festival into a tool with the quality of eloquence. I am not sure I follow why seeking a better tool for some, need reflect on festival, assuming anyone is still developing that tool, something I believe you say you last knew of in 2005 more than 15 years ago now? It might be out of context, but "inclusive" is a word that I avoid - in fact I am conservative and get allergic reaction when I hear it. How would you describe the experience of not getting access to goods or services because of how your body works then? For example, if you could not shop, vote, get a job, or go to school using computers because you read, write, interact, or communicate differently? Even if the ability to provide access is technically possible, but excluded? > I send this in private, because of my private opinion here. I would prefer we discuss this in private and perhaps you can convince me that it is worth the effort. I do not know this tool and as I said before I wonder what happened to festival. Sorry to have disappointed your wish for privacy. speaking personally, at least for me, one needs to ask before writing privately, when I am posting on a public list. If I am not asked to be contacted privately, I reply publicly as I did here. besides, others more versed in this situation may know about festival. Have you tried searching for the project? I got so disappointed by the fake mean and stupid development of history since I wrote my thesis in 2006 that I did not follow this topic in the past years. It might be a sign from God that you wrote this, so that I look again into what happened, "God works in unexpected
Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source.
Hi again, While your point about publicly funded efforts may be a fine one, locating those owners now presents a challenge. On the one hand companies behind solid speech synthesis, like digital equipment corporation who branded the superior dec-talk speech have themselves sold items to others. my understanding from a post on another list is that in this case Microsoft aquired nuance who owns part of Eloquence. Additionally many in most recent years end up establishing a pattern of abandonware. starting a project, only to stop it later. That argument is the strongest against your date concerns. In the early years, including 2002, speech synthesis was crafted with the firm understanding that more often than not this technology must serve as the eyes, ears, hands, brain, voice, or a combination of a human. It was not a toy, not created to manage a single function and the like. Perhaps the present of public funding, instead of volunteer efforts allowed well trained scientists to take part. Still the resulting quality was such that has not been managed for frankly decades. This and the pervasive nature of this particular tool in technology provided at least stateside by the rehab system makes securing eloquence quite fundamental for many in this population. Its a life fortifying tool missing in many ways, certainly missing in a default capacitor for Linux. So, not signing due to the alternative of seeking publicly funded efforts, or because you feel the date is an issue, speaking personally, is misplaced good intent. If you do not sign, please at lease circulate. change.org is not a fully inclusive platform meaning many with a vested interest cannot sign, or so I am told. Karen On Mon, 17 May 2021, deloptes wrote: Karen Lewellen wrote: Hi everyone, Sharing because while tts is indeed ??part of adaptive technology for many, and Linux default speech synthesis is not always of the best quality, the use of tts across devices serving the general public is ??becoming more extensive as well. There is an effort at change.org asking Microsoft to makes its tts engine eloquence, open source. https://www.change.org/p/microsoft-open-source-eti-eloquence If this resonates, please sign and circulate. its one of those ??situations where adaptive technology and general technology can intersect in a positive way. It resonates a lot - as I wrote thesis on dialogue systems and I got very disappointed by the facts I came across. IMO all technologies that were financed with public money (i.e. DARPA) should be made publicly available. In fact AFAIK there is only one engine (the mother of all) that was developed by Phillips and IBM - who knows who owns the pattents now ... I would be surprised if Google, Microsoft and Amazon funded research themselves. In fact there was a Linux version of IBMs ViaVoice but was so bad and was killed later around 2005. We are in THE MIDDLE AGES right now. Only people got too stupid to understand. I will no subscribed because it does not make any sense to request something from 2002 - you/we should request everything that was publicly funded to be available/benefitting the public or revolt.
Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source.
deloptes wrote: > It resonates a lot - as I wrote thesis on dialogue systems and I got very > disappointed by the facts I came across. IMO all technologies that were > financed with public money (i.e. DARPA) should be made publicly available. > In fact AFAIK there is only one engine (the mother of all) that was > developed by Phillips and IBM - who knows who owns the pattents now ... I > would be surprised if Google, Microsoft and Amazon funded research > themselves. > > In fact there was a Linux version of IBMs ViaVoice but was so bad and was > killed later around 2005. We are in THE MIDDLE AGES right now. Only people > got too stupid to understand. > > I will no subscribed because it does not make any sense to request > something from 2002 - you/we should request everything that was publicly > funded to be available/benefitting the public or revolt. I am sorry I was speaking about STT which is much more complicated. The TTS (festival) has its roots also in publicly funded projects and programs and had the same faith as the STTs. It is a shame what happened.
Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source.
Karen Lewellen wrote: > Hi everyone, > Sharing because while tts is indeed part of adaptive technology for many, > and Linux default speech synthesis is not always of the best quality, the > use of tts across devices serving the general public is becoming more > extensive as well. > There is an effort at change.org asking Microsoft to makes its tts engine > eloquence, open source. > > https://www.change.org/p/microsoft-open-source-eti-eloquence > > > If this resonates, please sign and circulate. its one of those situations > where adaptive technology and general technology can intersect in a > positive way. It resonates a lot - as I wrote thesis on dialogue systems and I got very disappointed by the facts I came across. IMO all technologies that were financed with public money (i.e. DARPA) should be made publicly available. In fact AFAIK there is only one engine (the mother of all) that was developed by Phillips and IBM - who knows who owns the pattents now ... I would be surprised if Google, Microsoft and Amazon funded research themselves. In fact there was a Linux version of IBMs ViaVoice but was so bad and was killed later around 2005. We are in THE MIDDLE AGES right now. Only people got too stupid to understand. I will no subscribed because it does not make any sense to request something from 2002 - you/we should request everything that was publicly funded to be available/benefitting the public or revolt.
