RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
> >I choose to learn to work within the confines of my condition. I can't >imagine rolling over and turning my back on the occupation I have loved >being involved with for over 20 years. Much less leaving my clients hanging >in the breeze. I have more of a condition that will change how I do things, >not one that has stopped me dead in my tracks. It is irritating, but I >prefer to not dwell on, "Why me?" There are many folks far worse off than I >am, this is a ripple in a large pond, hardly detectable in the overall >scheme of things. > > > You (Gil) may want to give the folks at the Center for Disability > > Rights in > > Rochester a call. They will probably be able to connect you to folks who > > will have insight not only into speech recognition software but > > into other > > adaptations to address your situation. > >Good advice. I never even thought to look for help from any such >organization. Never had to consider it in the past. Thank you. You're welcome, and you've got a great attitude. Ken www.stic-cil.org ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
> So it becomes a question of--do I cope with the imperfections in the
> assistive technology and take the time necessary to minimize
> them? Or do I
> give up doing the work I love? When push comes to shove, the vast
> majority
> of people faced with this situation do the former.
>
I choose to learn to work within the confines of my condition. I can't
imagine rolling over and turning my back on the occupation I have loved
being involved with for over 20 years. Much less leaving my clients hanging
in the breeze. I have more of a condition that will change how I do things,
not one that has stopped me dead in my tracks. It is irritating, but I
prefer to not dwell on, "Why me?" There are many folks far worse off than I
am, this is a ripple in a large pond, hardly detectable in the overall
scheme of things.
> You (Gil) may want to give the folks at the Center for Disability
> Rights in
> Rochester a call. They will probably be able to connect you to folks who
> will have insight not only into speech recognition software but
> into other
> adaptations to address your situation.
Good advice. I never even thought to look for help from any such
organization. Never had to consider it in the past. Thank you.
Gil
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ken Dibble
> Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 10:20 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
>
>
> At 10:06 AM 2/2/07, you wrote:
> > >> Voice recognition is getting more and more accurate by the
> day, but it is
> > >> important to realize that (1) it's still a very tough
> problem to solve and
> > >> (2) there are parallel efforts attacking the problem. The
> parallel tracks
> > >> are handling (1) an unlimited domain for a single speaker and (2)
> > >> a limited domain for any speaker.
>
>
> >To add onto Dave's synopsis (I did a bit of looking into this about 25
> >years, along with vision systems for robots), what Gil is looking for is
> >actually quite reasonably these days. The tales of woe are generally
> >from folks who have expectations beyond the current realm of technology.
> >
> >For a single person to train a system with a distinct vocab ("SQL" is a
> >language, not the followup to a hit movie), particularly with someone
> >who knows what they're doing and has the discipline to adapt a bit
> >(which fits Gil to a 't'), voice recog is definitely a reasonable
> >vehicle right now.
> >
> >One gets into trouble if one won't exercise a little discipline
> >(speaking too fast, background noise, slurring words, using slang, etc.)
> >And even then, with just a single speaker, systems will learn to adapt,
> >and translate "y'wl" to the more proper "you-all".
>
> Whil's right. There are people with very significant disabilities
> who rely
> on this software to do their jobs. It works well enough for them
> to earn a
> living.
>
> Another aspect of all this is the fact that most people work best
> with one
> particular communication channel. Just because a person can
> compose text or
> code quickly and well at a keyboard does not mean they'll immediately be
> able to do so orally--with or without extremely responsive voice
> recognition software. Each mode requires a very different form of
> concentration and thought. It will take a lot of practice to
> become good at
> composing in a different mode--but that's not the software's fault.
>
> So it becomes a question of--do I cope with the imperfections in the
> assistive technology and take the time necessary to minimize
> them? Or do I
> give up doing the work I love? When push comes to shove, the vast
> majority
> of people faced with this situation do the former.
>
> You (Gil) may want to give the folks at the Center for Disability
> Rights in
> Rochester a call. They will probably be able to connect you to folks who
> will have insight not only into speech recognition software but
> into other
> adaptations to address your situation.
>
> And I wish you great good luck. You can do this.
>
> Ken Dibble
> www.stic-cil.org
>
>
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
At 10:06 AM 2/2/07, you wrote:
> >> Voice recognition is getting more and more accurate by the day, but it is
> >> important to realize that (1) it's still a very tough problem to solve and
> >> (2) there are parallel efforts attacking the problem. The parallel tracks
> >> are handling (1) an unlimited domain for a single speaker and (2)
> >> a limited domain for any speaker.
>To add onto Dave's synopsis (I did a bit of looking into this about 25
>years, along with vision systems for robots), what Gil is looking for is
>actually quite reasonably these days. The tales of woe are generally
>from folks who have expectations beyond the current realm of technology.
>
>For a single person to train a system with a distinct vocab ("SQL" is a
>language, not the followup to a hit movie), particularly with someone
>who knows what they're doing and has the discipline to adapt a bit
>(which fits Gil to a 't'), voice recog is definitely a reasonable
>vehicle right now.
>
>One gets into trouble if one won't exercise a little discipline
>(speaking too fast, background noise, slurring words, using slang, etc.)
>And even then, with just a single speaker, systems will learn to adapt,
>and translate "y'wl" to the more proper "you-all".
Whil's right. There are people with very significant disabilities who rely
on this software to do their jobs. It works well enough for them to earn a
living.
Another aspect of all this is the fact that most people work best with one
particular communication channel. Just because a person can compose text or
code quickly and well at a keyboard does not mean they'll immediately be
able to do so orally--with or without extremely responsive voice
recognition software. Each mode requires a very different form of
concentration and thought. It will take a lot of practice to become good at
composing in a different mode--but that's not the software's fault.
So it becomes a question of--do I cope with the imperfections in the
assistive technology and take the time necessary to minimize them? Or do I
give up doing the work I love? When push comes to shove, the vast majority
of people faced with this situation do the former.
You (Gil) may want to give the folks at the Center for Disability Rights in
Rochester a call. They will probably be able to connect you to folks who
will have insight not only into speech recognition software but into other
adaptations to address your situation.
And I wish you great good luck. You can do this.
Ken Dibble
www.stic-cil.org
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
> I've thought that this idea could be great...or it could cause you to > crash because of the technical content putting you to sleep. Or from laughing so hard as vaporware claims that my eyes may tear up and cause me to not see the car just 50' ahead of me, which I am approaching at 65mph, a closing ... Gil > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of MB Software Solutions > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 1:52 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought > > > Jeff Johnson wrote: > > We had a guy in our user group - Tim Anderson I think his name was. He > > scanned books like Code Complete. He said it didn't take long > once you got > > after it. He had a kid do it for him. He reviewed the text > and removed any > > diagrams that would not convert to speech. He then ran it > through a text to > > speech program. On the weekend and when driving around in his > car he would > > listen to these books. The voice was a little hokey, but the content is > > what was important. > > > > > I've thought that this idea could be great...or it could cause you to > crash because of the technical content putting you to sleep. > > -- > Michael J. Babcock, MCP > MB Software Solutions, LLC > http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com > http://fabmate.com > "Work smarter, not harder, with MBSS custom software solutions!" > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
Jeff Johnson wrote: > We had a guy in our user group - Tim Anderson I think his name was. He > scanned books like Code Complete. He said it didn't take long once you got > after it. He had a kid do it for him. He reviewed the text and removed any > diagrams that would not convert to speech. He then ran it through a text to > speech program. On the weekend and when driving around in his car he would > listen to these books. The voice was a little hokey, but the content is > what was important. > > I've thought that this idea could be great...or it could cause you to crash because of the technical content putting you to sleep. -- Michael J. Babcock, MCP MB Software Solutions, LLC http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com http://fabmate.com "Work smarter, not harder, with MBSS custom software solutions!" ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
Aight, uv convinced me. John -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Whil Hentzen (Pro*) Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 10:03 AM To: profox@leafe.com Subject: Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought john harvey wrote: > I beg your pardon, it's properly spelled y'all. I believe that's the singular formal. I was referring to the plural casual form. Sorry, if I'd been able to attach an audio clip of the message, it would have been more obvious. But my Windows computer says I'm pirating my own voice and it won't let me make a copy of the recording I made. Whil [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
> One gets into trouble if one won't exercise a little discipline
> (speaking too fast, background noise, slurring words, using slang, etc.)
> And even then, with just a single speaker, systems will learn to adapt,
> and translate "y'wl" to the more proper "you-all".
... Siberian Huskies howling at me in the background because they expect me
to feed them... ...
I have had to take a strong stance re: not feeding the Huskies. They are so
darned clever. They learned that if I am talking on the phone (or into a
microphone perhaps?) that by howling and bitching about wanting food I would
feed them snacks just to shut them up. I decided I was no longer going to
be "the trained animal", and refused to feed them for a few weeks (only
Lynda would feed them morning and evening), and explaining to whoever I was
chatting with why they were hearing such nonsense in the background. They
kind of learned to not howl (as much ), but from time to time they test
me. Too smart for their own britches! So, your comment re: background
noises is quite appropriate for my circumstances. Thank you!
Gil
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Whil Hentzen (Pro*)
> Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 10:07 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
>
>
> >> Voice recognition is getting more and more accurate by the
> day, but it is
> >> important to realize that (1) it's still a very tough problem
> to solve and
> >> (2) there are parallel efforts attacking the problem. The
> parallel tracks
> >> are handling (1) an unlimited domain for a single speaker and (2)
> >> a limited domain for any speaker.
>
> Dave's nailed it on the head.
>
> To add onto Dave's synopsis (I did a bit of looking into this about 25
> years, along with vision systems for robots), what Gil is looking for is
> actually quite reasonably these days. The tales of woe are generally
> from folks who have expectations beyond the current realm of technology.
>
> For a single person to train a system with a distinct vocab ("SQL" is a
> language, not the followup to a hit movie), particularly with someone
> who knows what they're doing and has the discipline to adapt a bit
> (which fits Gil to a 't'), voice recog is definitely a reasonable
> vehicle right now.
>
> One gets into trouble if one won't exercise a little discipline
> (speaking too fast, background noise, slurring words, using slang, etc.)
> And even then, with just a single speaker, systems will learn to adapt,
> and translate "y'wl" to the more proper "you-all".
>
> Whil
>
>
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
john harvey wrote: > I beg your pardon, it's properly spelled y'all. I believe that's the singular formal. I was referring to the plural casual form. Sorry, if I'd been able to attach an audio clip of the message, it would have been more obvious. But my Windows computer says I'm pirating my own voice and it won't let me make a copy of the recording I made. Whil ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
I beg your pardon, it's properly spelled y'all.
John
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Whil Hentzen (Pro*)
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 9:07 AM
To: profox@leafe.com
Subject: Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
>> Voice recognition is getting more and more accurate by the day, but it is
>> important to realize that (1) it's still a very tough problem to solve
and
>> (2) there are parallel efforts attacking the problem. The parallel tracks
>> are handling (1) an unlimited domain for a single speaker and (2)
>> a limited domain for any speaker.
Dave's nailed it on the head.
To add onto Dave's synopsis (I did a bit of looking into this about 25
years, along with vision systems for robots), what Gil is looking for is
actually quite reasonably these days. The tales of woe are generally
from folks who have expectations beyond the current realm of technology.
For a single person to train a system with a distinct vocab ("SQL" is a
language, not the followup to a hit movie), particularly with someone
who knows what they're doing and has the discipline to adapt a bit
(which fits Gil to a 't'), voice recog is definitely a reasonable
vehicle right now.
One gets into trouble if one won't exercise a little discipline
(speaking too fast, background noise, slurring words, using slang, etc.)
And even then, with just a single speaker, systems will learn to adapt,
and translate "y'wl" to the more proper "you-all".
Whil
[excessive quoting removed by server]
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
>> Voice recognition is getting more and more accurate by the day, but it is
>> important to realize that (1) it's still a very tough problem to solve and
>> (2) there are parallel efforts attacking the problem. The parallel tracks
>> are handling (1) an unlimited domain for a single speaker and (2)
>> a limited domain for any speaker.
Dave's nailed it on the head.
To add onto Dave's synopsis (I did a bit of looking into this about 25
years, along with vision systems for robots), what Gil is looking for is
actually quite reasonably these days. The tales of woe are generally
from folks who have expectations beyond the current realm of technology.
For a single person to train a system with a distinct vocab ("SQL" is a
language, not the followup to a hit movie), particularly with someone
who knows what they're doing and has the discipline to adapt a bit
(which fits Gil to a 't'), voice recog is definitely a reasonable
vehicle right now.
One gets into trouble if one won't exercise a little discipline
(speaking too fast, background noise, slurring words, using slang, etc.)
And even then, with just a single speaker, systems will learn to adapt,
and translate "y'wl" to the more proper "you-all".
Whil
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
heh-heh, Ed, you especially will continue to be plagued by me! Gil > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ed Leafe > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 8:40 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought > > > On Feb 2, 2007, at 7:37 AM, mrgmhale wrote: > > > So, no, y'all aren't getting rid of me that easily! heh-heh... > > Damn!! > > -- Ed Leafe > -- http://leafe.com > -- http://dabodev.com > > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
Gil: Sorry to hear about your medical issues. Sounds like you have a good approach to dealing with it. Good luck! We had a guy in our user group - Tim Anderson I think his name was. He scanned books like Code Complete. He said it didn't take long once you got after it. He had a kid do it for him. He reviewed the text and removed any diagrams that would not convert to speech. He then ran it through a text to speech program. On the weekend and when driving around in his car he would listen to these books. The voice was a little hokey, but the content is what was important. HTH Jeff Jeff Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 623-582-0323 Fax 623-869-0675 > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of mrgmhale > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 3:56 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought > > Greetings All! > > I need some assistance from my esteemed ProFox colleagues. About 3 weeks > ago I managed to pinch a nerve quite badly while running some cable. > After > a week of severe pain & numbness I finally gutted out and went to see my > primary care physician. He concluded I indeed had a pinched nerve, and > confirmed my father's long distance diagnosis re: the problem coming from > C-6 (my father is a retired physician). He ordered x-Rays (and prescribed > some interesting pain killers ). One week later I visited the doc and > saw the x-Ray results. Not good, but could be far worse. I have several > spurs and the start of arthritis & deterioration in several vertebrae in > my > neck, several discs that are pretty flattened out, and the prognosis is > not > good. It is not reversible, the neck vertebrae will get worse with time, > surgery is not yet a viable option, but the pain ought to be lessened over > time until I do something silly and pinch a nerve yet again. My father > predicted this would happen 25 years ago after a lady ran a red light in > Redlands, CA, and broadsided me pretty good (bad). He told me that > between > age 50 & 60 I would have neck problems, and spur growth due to the > accident. > He sure nailed that prophecy! Luckily I took out one hell of a strong > (and > very expensive) disability policy about 15 years ago in case he was right. > > So, until this past Monday I have been in tremendous nerve pain, and > pretty > much relegated to providing clients with phone support, and minimal work > on > keyboard entry due to the severe pain and constant numbness in my left arm > and hand. This week the pain has not been as bad, but the perpetual > numbness in the left hand drives me nuts, and still makes keyboard work > challenging. You would not believe the typos! Thank goodness for spell > check. I guess my days of pulling cable, pulling PCs apart, romping all > over the place to visit clients, installing network equipment, etc., are > pretty much over. And my coding days in terms of hours per day will > likely > be limited as well. I am sure glad my commercial VFP apps are stable, and > for my past decision to use a recurring license billing structure for my > business! > > Anyway, I have never been a raving fan of Speech-To-Text programs due to > some very poor results in years past despite claims of "up to" 98% > accuracy. > But I am likely going to need to move in that direction. I have come > across > fairly recent reviews, and it seems Nuance's Dragon Speaking Naturally v-9 > may be worth the investment. But I do not know how well it may work in a > Fox coding environment. I invite any and all comments re: other > Speech-To-Text software my fellow FoxHeads may have used for Word, Outlook > and even Fox coding. > > I thank you for your anticipated input, which I am certain will provide > some > powerful insights as in all other matters we manage to go over as a group. > > > Regards, > > Gil > > > Gilbert M. Hale > New Freedom Data Resources > Pittsford, NY > 585-359-8085 - Office (Rolls To Cellular) > 585-202-4341 - Cellular/VoiceMail > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- > multipart/mixed > text/plain (text body -- kept) > application/ms-tnef > --- > > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
On Feb 2, 2007, at 7:37 AM, mrgmhale wrote: > So, no, y'all aren't getting rid of me that easily! heh-heh... Damn!! -- Ed Leafe -- http://leafe.com -- http://dabodev.com ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
> This one has been going the rounds for years! I first heard it > in the days > of DOS I never heard it myself, but the article made sense as I was reading it (http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=416). The Urban Myth you are referring to sounds like a fun story to spread around, though ... Re: me continuing with ProFox, hell, y'all are the only portal I have to the Real World ... Other than our 3 Siberian Huskies I have nobody else! (certainly not true, Lynda is awesome)... Seriously, I see no need to roll over and quietly go away. I just have to adapt to my new circumstances, and remain grateful for the 52 pain free years I have had. And, not every day is going to be horribly painful, especially in contrast to fates that befall other fine folks through no fault of their own. Our ProFox members who work within the medical community know that far better than me. Pretty all this week the pain has been moderate, and tolerable, regardless of the constant numbness. Things could be far worse. My arm isn't going to wither away and fall off at least, and my brain is functioning in any less capacity than before despite some of the pain killers I been taking the first few weeks ... So, no, y'all aren't getting rid of me that easily! heh-heh... Gil > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of John Weller > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 4:50 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought > > > This one has been going the rounds for years! I first heard it > in the days > of DOS, reputedly shouted from the audience during a > demonstration of speech > controlled computers. Undoubtedly an urban myth. > > Hope you are better soon and can continue with ProFox. I, for one, would > miss your very reasonable and sensible replies to some of the more > 'excitable' (for want of a better word ) discussions here. > > Regards > > John > > John Weller > 01380 723235 > 07976 393631 > > > I came across a recent article advising one of the problems with the MS > > Vista voice recognition engine is that a web site (or eMail) > with certain > > embedded words can actually fire off commands that can cause > problems (PC > > says, "FORMAT DRIVE C:" kind of stuff). Funny as hell, but it > was written > > in a serious manner. > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
This one has been going the rounds for years! I first heard it in the days of DOS, reputedly shouted from the audience during a demonstration of speech controlled computers. Undoubtedly an urban myth. Hope you are better soon and can continue with ProFox. I, for one, would miss your very reasonable and sensible replies to some of the more 'excitable' (for want of a better word ) discussions here. Regards John John Weller 01380 723235 07976 393631 > I came across a recent article advising one of the problems with the MS > Vista voice recognition engine is that a web site (or eMail) with certain > embedded words can actually fire off commands that can cause problems (PC > says, "FORMAT DRIVE C:" kind of stuff). Funny as hell, but it was written > in a serious manner. ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
> All I can say is don't have a dog barking in the > background or have the TV/radio on... I came across a recent article advising one of the problems with the MS Vista voice recognition engine is that a web site (or eMail) with certain embedded words can actually fire off commands that can cause problems (PC says, "FORMAT DRIVE C:" kind of stuff). Funny as hell, but it was written in a serious manner. Apparently this has been a problem in the past as well with other OS platforms including Mac. Go figure. Gil > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bill Anderson > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 10:59 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought > > > MB Software Solutions wrote: > > Michael Madigan wrote: > > > >> All the automated phone systems use it, so someone's > >> got to be doing something right. > >> > >> > >> > > Good point. I've used some phone systems where the electronic operator > > was accurate about 90% of the time. > Companies are going to more and more of the voice recognition customer > support software. All I can say is don't have a dog barking in the > background or have the TV/radio on... > > Bill > > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
Excellent description. Thanks! Gil > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Dave Bernard > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 10:49 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought > > > OK, let me jump in here and see if I can help. > > Voice recognition is getting more and more accurate by the day, but it is > important to realize that (1) it's still a very tough problem to solve and > (2) there are parallel efforts attacking the problem. The parallel tracks > are handling (1) an unlimited domain for a single speaker and (2) > a limited > domain for any speaker. > > "Domain" is essentially the body of work that the recognizer can > understand. > By limiting a recognizer to a specific domain, such as "the art > world", you > can accurately handle many types of speakers without training the > engine on > particular speaker voices. This is because you are arming the recognizer > with lots of hints about what is likely to be said, easing accurate > recognition across many types of speakers. > > The flip side is the only way to handle an unlimited domain (that > is, where > there is no way to tell ahead of time what the speaker will utter) is to > have the recognizer learn a particular speaker's voice very, very well. > > These approached are known as speaker-dependent (Dragon) vs. > speaker-independent (Microsoft Speech Services, e.g.) technology. > > An IVR system, such as an automated attendant, needs to be > speaker-independent for obvious reasons. Therefore, the domain it supports > is very limited, often "yes", "no", "one", etc. It is also why you are not > yet seeing widespread deployment of airline reservations systems that > understand "Do you have any flights from Atlanta to Chicago next Wednesday > night?" It's much more difficult to do this reliably in a > speaker-independent way. > > And remember this, too: voice recognition (converting sounds to > text) is not > the same as natural language understanding (ascertaining the meaning of > text). Both are large problems that are still in the early stages of > perfecting. > > Michael Madigan wrote: > > All the automated phone systems use it, so someone's > > got to be doing something right. > > > > > Good point. I've used some phone systems where the electronic operator > was accurate about 90% of the time. > > > -- > Michael J. Babcock, MCP > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
> Good point. I've used some phone systems where the electronic operator > was accurate about 90% of the time. I find the phone system voice recognition accurate almost 100% of the time for me... "Representative!"... Almost always gets me to a real human being ! Gil > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of MB Software Solutions > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 10:28 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought > > > Michael Madigan wrote: > > All the automated phone systems use it, so someone's > > got to be doing something right. > > > > > Good point. I've used some phone systems where the electronic operator > was accurate about 90% of the time. > > > -- > Michael J. Babcock, MCP > MB Software Solutions, LLC > http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com > http://fabmate.com > "Work smarter, not harder, with MBSS custom software solutions!" > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
> All the automated phone systems use it, so someone's > got to be doing something right. > I bet they aren't using Dragon software at $99 - $200 a seat. Likely something coded in India ... Gil > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Michael Madigan > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 10:14 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought > > > All the automated phone systems use it, so someone's > got to be doing something right. > > > > > --- MB Software Solutions > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Vince Teachout wrote: > > > Sorry to hear about your pain, I hope you recover > > fully, and quickly. > > > > > > I can't give you any actual usage based feedback, > > but the last time I > > > looked seriously into purchasing one of these > > programs (including > > > Dragon), the feedback Google brought up was all > > negative. The consensus > > > was "it ain't there yet." YMMV. > > > > > > > It's been over 10 years since I first heard about > > this stuff, and it's > > still not ready. I don't think it ever will be in > > our working lifetimes. > > > > -- > > Michael J. Babcock, MCP > > MB Software Solutions, LLC > > http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com > > http://fabmate.com > > "Work smarter, not harder, with MBSS custom software > > solutions!" > > > > > > > > ___ > > Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com > > Subscription Maintenance: > > http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox > > OT-free version of this list: > > http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech > > ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, > > are the opinions of the author, and do not > > constitute legal or medical advice. This statement > > is added to the messages for those lawyers who are > > too stupid to see the obvious. > > > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
> It's been over 10 years since I first heard about this stuff, and it's > still not ready. I don't think it ever will be in our working lifetimes. > That had been my disappointing observation since the mid-90s. I gave up on the hype, and figured it would be a long time before it really worked. Funny thing, in 1984 when I told my father that I was going to get into the PC industry by learning to program he told me about a newspaper article he read. Some guy (in LA?) had claimed to have perfected a voice-to-text program, and planned to sell it for $10 to anyone who wanted it. "How can anyone make any money if he can do that?, he asked. I introduced him to the concept of Vaporware, and how so soon into my fledgling effort I had already seen enough of that crap to know that often reality is more founded on intersecting points of desperation, FUD, greed, ignorance and outright "hucksterism". He really did not belive I knew what I was talking about, and dismissed my intentions as rather silly. Even funnier, my successes are measured by myself more in relationships than in cash flow. But I am not doing all that badly, not at all. But it was not until I picked up a Medical Center in Seneca Falls, NY, (in 2001) that my father finally decied I may just succeed at this computer thing after all. So what is so funny about that? I do all my work for the Medical Center on a Pro Bono basis. They have the money to pay me, but I admire their social outreach program, and the philosophy of the ownng physician. So this is one of the ways I try to give back a little something to society. My father has no idea I do my medically related work, which persuaded him to believe I was going to do okay, for free! I do not have the heart to tell him. Gil > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of MB Software Solutions > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 10:02 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought > > > Vince Teachout wrote: > > Sorry to hear about your pain, I hope you recover fully, and quickly. > > > > I can't give you any actual usage based feedback, but the last time I > > looked seriously into purchasing one of these programs (including > > Dragon), the feedback Google brought up was all negative. The > consensus > > was "it ain't there yet." YMMV. > > > > It's been over 10 years since I first heard about this stuff, and it's > still not ready. I don't think it ever will be in our working lifetimes. > > -- > Michael J. Babcock, MCP > MB Software Solutions, LLC > http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com > http://fabmate.com > "Work smarter, not harder, with MBSS custom software solutions!" > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
I knew of the Dvorak keyboard since the mid 80s, but had no idea there was a right hand version. That may work out well. Thanks! Gil > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kevin Cully > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 7:01 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought > > > First, I'm sorry that you're having so much trouble and pain. Here's > hoping for a quick and complete recovery. > > I can't comment on the Speech to Text programs but I was just > researching the Dvorak keyboard. There is a right hand version that is > optimized for one handed typing. This might be worth looking into. > Just my $0.02 > > mrgmhale wrote: > > I thank you for your anticipated input, which I am certain will > provide some > > powerful insights as in all other matters we manage to go over > as a group. > > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
MB Software Solutions wrote: > Michael Madigan wrote: > >> All the automated phone systems use it, so someone's >> got to be doing something right. >> >> >> > Good point. I've used some phone systems where the electronic operator > was accurate about 90% of the time. Companies are going to more and more of the voice recognition customer support software. All I can say is don't have a dog barking in the background or have the TV/radio on... Bill ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
OK, let me jump in here and see if I can help. Voice recognition is getting more and more accurate by the day, but it is important to realize that (1) it's still a very tough problem to solve and (2) there are parallel efforts attacking the problem. The parallel tracks are handling (1) an unlimited domain for a single speaker and (2) a limited domain for any speaker. "Domain" is essentially the body of work that the recognizer can understand. By limiting a recognizer to a specific domain, such as "the art world", you can accurately handle many types of speakers without training the engine on particular speaker voices. This is because you are arming the recognizer with lots of hints about what is likely to be said, easing accurate recognition across many types of speakers. The flip side is the only way to handle an unlimited domain (that is, where there is no way to tell ahead of time what the speaker will utter) is to have the recognizer learn a particular speaker's voice very, very well. These approached are known as speaker-dependent (Dragon) vs. speaker-independent (Microsoft Speech Services, e.g.) technology. An IVR system, such as an automated attendant, needs to be speaker-independent for obvious reasons. Therefore, the domain it supports is very limited, often "yes", "no", "one", etc. It is also why you are not yet seeing widespread deployment of airline reservations systems that understand "Do you have any flights from Atlanta to Chicago next Wednesday night?" It's much more difficult to do this reliably in a speaker-independent way. And remember this, too: voice recognition (converting sounds to text) is not the same as natural language understanding (ascertaining the meaning of text). Both are large problems that are still in the early stages of perfecting. Michael Madigan wrote: > All the automated phone systems use it, so someone's > got to be doing something right. > > Good point. I've used some phone systems where the electronic operator was accurate about 90% of the time. -- Michael J. Babcock, MCP ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
Michael Madigan wrote: > All the automated phone systems use it, so someone's > got to be doing something right. > > Good point. I've used some phone systems where the electronic operator was accurate about 90% of the time. -- Michael J. Babcock, MCP MB Software Solutions, LLC http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com http://fabmate.com "Work smarter, not harder, with MBSS custom software solutions!" ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
All the automated phone systems use it, so someone's got to be doing something right. --- MB Software Solutions <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Vince Teachout wrote: > > Sorry to hear about your pain, I hope you recover > fully, and quickly. > > > > I can't give you any actual usage based feedback, > but the last time I > > looked seriously into purchasing one of these > programs (including > > Dragon), the feedback Google brought up was all > negative. The consensus > > was "it ain't there yet." YMMV. > > > > It's been over 10 years since I first heard about > this stuff, and it's > still not ready. I don't think it ever will be in > our working lifetimes. > > -- > Michael J. Babcock, MCP > MB Software Solutions, LLC > http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com > http://fabmate.com > "Work smarter, not harder, with MBSS custom software > solutions!" > > > > ___ > Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com > Subscription Maintenance: > http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox > OT-free version of this list: > http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech > ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, > are the opinions of the author, and do not > constitute legal or medical advice. This statement > is added to the messages for those lawyers who are > too stupid to see the obvious. > ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
Vince Teachout wrote: > Sorry to hear about your pain, I hope you recover fully, and quickly. > > I can't give you any actual usage based feedback, but the last time I > looked seriously into purchasing one of these programs (including > Dragon), the feedback Google brought up was all negative. The consensus > was "it ain't there yet." YMMV. > It's been over 10 years since I first heard about this stuff, and it's still not ready. I don't think it ever will be in our working lifetimes. -- Michael J. Babcock, MCP MB Software Solutions, LLC http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com http://fabmate.com "Work smarter, not harder, with MBSS custom software solutions!" ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
Sorry to hear about your pain, I hope you recover fully, and quickly. I can't give you any actual usage based feedback, but the last time I looked seriously into purchasing one of these programs (including Dragon), the feedback Google brought up was all negative. The consensus was "it ain't there yet." YMMV. ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: [NF] Speech-To-Text software opinions sought
First, I'm sorry that you're having so much trouble and pain. Here's hoping for a quick and complete recovery. I can't comment on the Speech to Text programs but I was just researching the Dvorak keyboard. There is a right hand version that is optimized for one handed typing. This might be worth looking into. Just my $0.02 mrgmhale wrote: > I thank you for your anticipated input, which I am certain will provide some > powerful insights as in all other matters we manage to go over as a group. ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
