Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #235296 > unrolled thread

help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source.

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source. Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net> - 2021-05-17 22:10 +0200
    Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source. deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2021-05-17 22:50 +0200
      Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source. deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2021-05-17 23:50 +0200
      Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source. Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net> - 2021-05-18 20:30 +0200
        Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source. Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net> - 2021-05-19 00:00 +0200
          Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source. rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-05-19 01:40 +0200
            Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source. Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net> - 2021-05-19 02:10 +0200
              Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source. rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-05-19 04:20 +0200
            Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source. deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 07:40 +0200
          Re: help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source. deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2021-05-19 07:50 +0200

#235296 — help ask microsoft to make eloquance tts open source.

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.
Link is not the best in lower graphics  but hopefully others can sign.
Thanks,
Karen

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#235298

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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235299

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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235307

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

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.
>
>
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235336

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 places, Through unexpected people, at unexpected 
times his wonders to  perform."

but I am afraid I will find only devastation and
> will be disappointed again. We/Our souls (metaphorically speaking) were
> sold to the devil especially since 2008 when he (the devil) got us by the
> throat. I see only devastation and our (my culture=the culture of Leonardo
> da Vinci or Beethoven or Lomonosov, or Allen Turing or Alexander Bell)
> falling apart. So I do not expect anything good for the near future.

Well you know what they say about  faith, and expectation.  If you lead 
with  limited expectations, you may taint what the power of faith might 
create if that makes sense.
Who knows, if you lead with innovative vision, you may be the means for 
change.

> It might be a bit odd to hear this, but it could be you are the one to show
> me the light and the way :)
>
Happy to be a vessel for divine grace of course, but at the end you must 
choose on what you will place your focus.  Current limitations, or current 
possibilities.

> So can you send some links to read about the tool and explain why it is
> better than festival and what is going on with festival.

As expressed, I do not use eloquence.
I need not personally  benefit to extend compassion to those seeking this 
goal.

It is possible?  I can connect you with some who can address  your 
festival questions though.
My suggestion is to choose your preferred search tool and seek the ways 
eloquence has been used by various populations.

>
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.
  > regards

Best,

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235340

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"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235342

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, rhkramer@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"
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235351

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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235353

rhkramer@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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#235354

Karen Lewellen wrote:

> Clearly sent privately by mistake.

you are stupid asshole - I explicitly said I post in private

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web