VisorCentral.com - New audio module coming soon!!!

Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »
Show 20 posts from this thread on one page

VisorCentral.com (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/index.php)
- Springboard Modules (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=10)
-- New audio module coming soon!!! (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/showthread.php?threadid=13400)

Posted by purplemd on 03-25-2001 06:50 AM:

Re: Re: To EricG

quote:
Originally posted by Gameboy70
Any policy that starts with the presumption of guilt is anti-consumer. As a humanist, I would add that it's antisocial. There are spiritual implications, which unfortunately never get discussed in IP debates, for a society founded on mistrust.

I am not a humanist but a Christian. The spiritual implication is this: Free will means men have the freedom to do wrong (or illegal) or the freedom to do right (or legal). Since everyone has this choice, it only makes sense for people to protect themselves against those who choose to do wrong (or illegal).

Individuals can choose to learn from past dealing with those who choose to do wrong (or illegal) or not...

Just my 2 cents...

Posted by lennonhead on 03-25-2001 06:56 AM:

Card Access-

Like someone else suggested: What about putting a memory slot in the module? This would be the perfect "add your own memory" MP3 player if it worked well.

__________________
<A HREF="http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats/team/team_69783.html"TARGET=_BLANK><IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/lenn0nhead/hvcslogo181x75.jpg"BORDER=1></A>

Posted by dalamar70 on 03-25-2001 08:58 AM:

Re: talking print module for visor

quote:
Originally posted by gcowan
Thank you!!! The Audible Advisor claims to be able to read the newspaper and, presumably, other print entities. It will be available this May according to the Web Site.

Thanks again, George

Did you get the "reading" information from their website or another source? From the site, it appears that they can only read the "Audible version" of WSJ, which is distributed on audible.com. That seems to imply it's not true speech synthesis for arbitrary text. Please let us know!

Posted by vtaia on 03-26-2001 04:04 AM:

Re: Re: To EricG

quote:
Originally posted by Gameboy70

Any policy that starts with the presumption of guilt is anti-consumer. As a humanist, I would add that it's antisocial. There are spiritual implications, which unfortunately never get discussed in IP debates, for a society founded on mistrust.

But if content providers want to restrict control of what they call intellectual property, that's fine -- as long as it doesn't interfere with the use of my physical property: i.e. the media I paid for. If violating my property rights is the way content providers avoid getting a day job, it just means they have one less customer. I can stomach proprietary software for the most part, since most handheld software is proprietary. But I draw the line a so-called "digital rights management" aimed at recordable media.

Just another thought.

Gameboy70, As an one who once held an atheistic/humanistic worldview, I have a quick question for you. From where do you derive the rights that you demanding?

Sanctity of life (you and I included) and property are foundational beliefs for free society and upholding the rights of others (those who produce music, software, and literature included)is as important as our defending our own.

To quote one of America's most foundational yet sometimes forgotten documents:

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Just some more thoughts.

Oh yeah, I think it is great to produce free and clear software, kudos ErigG. We all know many useful software tools that are birthed in this fashion.

Finally getting back on topic for the thread, I think the Audible Advisor looks great. Card-Access has done a super job at producing usable and compact springboards. We wish your company success and thank you for listening to people in forums like VisorCentral. Also, thank you so much for actually releasing the products you announce.

Still bummed about the six-pack fiasco,
Reid

__________________
Truth matters

Posted by gcowan on 03-26-2001 05:12 AM:

Text Reader or Reader Player?

Dear Dalamar 70:
I got the material off of their web site, no where else. Obviously, thought it said what I said or I wouldn't have said it. However, on re-reading, there is room for an alternative interpretation as you have suggested. If so, perhaps the manufacturer could be queried on this. How would/could we go about this? Or, are you absolutely certain that my impression is mistaken? This would/could be a "killer" product if it could read text directly from "printed" source while driving, etc.
Thanks, George

Posted by purplemd on 03-26-2001 07:47 AM:

There is software which will (on a PC) allow text to be "read" aloud.

I would guess that it could be saved and converted into some format which is compatible with something (like MP3 or wav)

Now the files might be large, but you might be able to "read" the WSJ into MP3 then play it.

Does this sound do-able? Likely? Worthwhile?

Posted by gcowan on 03-26-2001 01:25 PM:

Dear PurpleMD:
Thanks for your kind suggestion.

Going to trouble of multiple conversions is neither efficient nor useful. If it can't be simple like hot synching with, say, Avantgo and then listen to text, it is of no value to me.

When Apple first started, they had a text to voice reader, with only a few kilobytes which read reasonably well. Can't understand why this apparently simple technology cannot be translated here without all the problem(s)--the commercial value of such a product seems obvious.

Thanks again. George MD

Posted by krue on 03-26-2001 04:06 PM:

Audible

I use audible all the time with an MP3 Player and a Pocket PC. It is not synthisized speach - it is really just an audiobook converted to a highly compressed MP3 type format that can only be heard through Audible software. The book collection available is quite extenisive and the latest introduction of higher quality output (at the cost of higher file size) has been a wonderful improvement. You can try samples through your desktop on their site : www.audible.com

The book industry, unlike the music industry, has been very open to experimenting with new media formats. Audible and Peanut Press should be applauded for their efforts to give us access to books in these exciting new forms.

Posted by Toby on 03-26-2001 04:13 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by EricG
As a very good friend of mine says:

"Locks are for honest people..."

Ya know, I've never understood the "logic" of that sentiment. Locks are not for honest people. Locks are for lazy, dishonest people. Motivated and dishonest people will attempt to find a way to get around locks. Lazy and dishonest people will give up if there's a lock there. Honest people wouldn't make the attempt in the first place.

Posted by visor mania on 03-26-2001 04:41 PM:

There's nothin' wrong with protectin' yourself so long as you don't intentionally try and hurt others.

The whole problem with all of this is 'intent'. That is where responsibility lies.

i know that i rip off artists by downloading MP3s for free but also am not afraid to admit it or that i have a lock because my intent is to protect the family (and myself). A lock is a cheap way to protect yourself and others and so is the Digital Rights Movement. I try to pick that lock by downloading MP3s and though i know it's illegal i do it and am willing to take the consequences. In a way I'm a hipocrit just like all of you since we all twist our values to suit our needs.

Just try not to hurt anyone else and you're ahead of the game. If you do it, then apologize sincerely and move on. I guess since i don't see the artist it's ok to rip them off but if i knew them personally i probably wouldn't do it.

Posted by EricG on 03-26-2001 05:07 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Toby

Ya know, I've never understood the "logic" of that sentiment. Locks are not for honest people. Locks are for lazy, dishonest people. Motivated and dishonest people will attempt to find a way to get around locks. Lazy and dishonest people will give up if there's a lock there. Honest people wouldn't make the attempt in the first place.

Unless it's by accident (i.e. trying to open an unmarked locked door - {in reference to honest people})

It took me a while to truly grasp the sentiment of the statement, which you basically have.. if you think about it (which you did), honest people won't go any further if a door or object is locked, dishonest ones (especially motivated ones) will.. hence, locks are for honest people.

__________________
"One of the most important things you learn from the internet is that there is no �them� out there. It�s just an awful lot of �us�." -- Douglas Adams

Posted by EricG on 03-26-2001 05:14 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by visor mania
There's nothin' wrong with protectin' yourself so long as you don't intentionally try and hurt others.

The whole problem with all of this is 'intent'. That is where responsibility lies.

i know that i rip off artists by downloading MP3s for free but also am not afraid to admit it or that i have a lock because my intent is to protect the family (and myself). A lock is a cheap way to protect yourself and others and so is the Digital Rights Movement. I try to pick that lock by downloading MP3s and though i know it's illegal i do it and am willing to take the consequences. In a way I'm a hipocrit just like all of you since we all twist our values to suit our needs.

Just try not to hurt anyone else and you're ahead of the game. If you do it, then apologize sincerely and move on. I guess since i don't see the artist it's ok to rip them off but if i knew them personally i probably wouldn't do it.

The irony of this is you blame yourself for ripping off artists, just ask any "big label" artist and I'm sure they will tell you there are other "folks" out there that have ripped them off far worse than any "fan" ever could..

Prince & Courtney Love have had some real interesting things to say on this very topic, just to name a few "big" name artists. These are the people I will listen to, not the RIAA (or their puppet artists..)

I think you, I and the rest of the world has already been taken for a ride for a long time (artists included), I wouldn't worry about anything you have downloaded, think of it as getting back the money that was taken from you in the first place by price fixing the audio CD market for decades...

__________________
"One of the most important things you learn from the internet is that there is no �them� out there. It�s just an awful lot of �us�." -- Douglas Adams

Posted by Toby on 03-26-2001 06:43 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by EricG
Unless it's by accident (i.e. trying to open an unmarked locked door - {in reference to honest people})

How many unmarked locked doors are there in the world in comparison to locked doors which are "marked", i.e. their real purpose is clear (someone's home, business, etc.)? I think you're stretching this beyond the bounds of reality trying to "prove" your statement.

quote:
It took me a while to truly grasp the sentiment of the statement, which you basically have.. if you think about it (which you did), honest people won't go any further if a door or object is locked, dishonest ones (especially motivated ones) will.. hence, locks are for honest people.

I don't think you're getting what I'm saying. It's not that I'm not fully grasping the statement. It's that the statement is basically meaningless. An honest person wouldn't be up to anything nefarious even if said unmarked door wasn't locked. The lock is superfluous when dealing with them. How many honest people do you know that wander around trying to open unmarked doors when they have no reason to be there? Again, I say that locks are only meaningful when one is dealing with dishonest people who are too lazy to try and circumvent them. If the honest person is tempted to nefarious purposes by an unlocked door, then they weren't really honest in the first place, IMO.

Posted by homer on 03-26-2001 07:31 PM:

Hmm. Where is this topic going?

I think a few of you are confusing intelluctual property rights and copy protection methods.

They work well in moderation, just as the locks on a store do. When the store is open, they do not hinder the consumer's experience in any way.

Copy protection, taken to the extreme, however, is an unfair burden on the user. For instance, Macromedia has a really nasty habit now of making you enter the serial number of the old product that you are upgrading to. So, when I upgrade my copy of Flash, I now need to go and dig for the old serial number. I can sorta live with that, but...oops...macromedia forgot to support SOME flash serial numbers. So, after the 5th try, I figure this out. Go to their web site, search for 10 mintues, find some information and then I need call them. I call them. They point me at a web site form to fill out. The form doesn't work. I call back, get transferred to a different department. They acknowlege the problems and then give me a fake serial number that I can use.

So, they've tried to prevent someone from stealing the software, and, in turn, passed the burden onto me. I wasted about an hour and a half TRYING TO INSTALL SOFTWARE I PAID FOR.

Ugh.

And, going back to the locks are for honest people, quote, this copy protection does NOTHING to prevent people from copying their software. Go on Hotline or Gnutella and in a matter of minutes you can download your own, cracked copy of the software.

So, I think the point that several people were making is that copy-protection methods are a burden on the honest consumer and are meaningless to the dishonest consumer. People steal. It happens. Live with it. Don't punish the honest people because of some dishonest people. I always like how the software industry claims that they lost x billion dollars last year because of piracy. No they didn't. The people that pirated their software would never pay for ANY of their software in the first place. Meanwhile, I'm sitting here having to schedule an hour of my time to install a program.

Which really has nothing to do with the topic at hand, but I just thought I'd throw my cents in...

__________________
We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
-David Byrne

Posted by EricG on 03-26-2001 08:24 PM:

Well put Homer..!

Toby - at the end of the day, I essentially agree with you...

__________________
"One of the most important things you learn from the internet is that there is no �them� out there. It�s just an awful lot of �us�." -- Douglas Adams

Posted by Toby on 03-26-2001 08:55 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by homer
Hmm. Where is this topic going?

Like pretty much everything else on the internet...it's going off the deep end.

quote:
So, I think the point that several people were making is that copy-protection methods are a burden on the honest consumer and are meaningless to the dishonest consumer. People steal. It happens. Live with it. Don't punish the honest people because of some dishonest people.

Do you lock your doors? Why? They're a burden on the honest people that come to visit you and are meaningless to the dishonest people that would like to rob you. ;>

quote:
I always like how the software industry claims that they lost x billion dollars last year because of piracy. No they didn't. The people that pirated their software would never pay for ANY of their software in the first place. Meanwhile, I'm sitting here having to schedule an hour of my time to install a program.

This is simply not true. There are businesses all over the place which use software without paying for it that only do so only because they can get away with it (for a time anyway). If there weren't, the SPA wouldn't have such a successful time with disgruntled employees turning in their deadbeat employers. I work for a fairly small company (only a couple hundred computers), and when I recently ran a licensing audit, various software companies wound up getting close to $100,000 for us to be legal. Extrapolate that even nation-wide, and a few billion might be easy to reach.

Posted by Card Access on 03-26-2001 10:04 PM:

Wow, this thread has grown a few sets of legs...

As for a few questions that have managed to creep in between the lines:

1. What about adding a memory slot and making it a MP3 player...?

This is something we have considered, but currently the goal for *this* product is to keep it from feature-creep (something engineers like us tend to do) and get a device targeted to the Audible.com consumer to market. Also, to this end, the device will be targeted to monaural output, which isn't really suited to MP3 listening enjoyment.

2. What formats will it support?

Initially, the device will target support for Audible.com formats (Acelp-net, specifically). Since it contains a programmable DSP, however, we have the option to add support for others as the need arises.

3. What about synthesizing speech...?

The AudibleAdvisor is technically capable of this, but this is really not an engineering question... I'll turn the question around to you consumers: The basic speech synthesis algorithm which has floated around since the likes of the Commodore 64 still sounds the same today. There are better algorithms, but they require a lot of memory and special heuristics and most importantly, lots of licensing $$$. You've probably heard the 'basic' algorithm when you had your first Bound Blaster, etc (sbtalk, I think). So, the question is, if you had a book/e-mail read to you with such a synthesizer, would you use it or find it a novelty in the end?

Card Access

Posted by EricG on 03-26-2001 10:13 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Card Access

3. What about synthesizing speech...?

The AudibleAdvisor is technically capable of this, but this is really not an engineering question... I'll turn the question around to you consumers: The basic speech synthesis algorithm which has floated around since the likes of the Commodore 64 still sounds the same today. There are better algorithms, but they require a lot of memory and special heuristics and most importantly, lots of licensing $$$. You've probably heard the 'basic' algorithm when you had your first Bound Blaster, etc (sbtalk, I think). So, the question is, if you had a book/e-mail read to you with such a synthesizer, would you use it or find it a novelty in the end?

Card Access

I think it would complement the product.. while some may not use it, others would.. I often use text to speech software (and have over the years on various platforms (i.e. SAM (software automatic mouth) on the C64).. Also, the visually impaired may find it of use as well.. Those folks often get overlooked in all this technological rush to fame and glory.. I used to sell (years and years ago) Sharp calculators, Sharp only added speech as a novelty, but that "gimmick" helped a lot of people out, mostly of the folks buying it were the visually impaired, and after talking to Sharp, they had no idea it was of use (like that) to anyone!.. I'd add the feature, you never know who you might be helping out (without even trying)..

__________________
"One of the most important things you learn from the internet is that there is no �them� out there. It�s just an awful lot of �us�." -- Douglas Adams

Posted by Toby on 03-26-2001 11:19 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Card Access
{...} 3. What about synthesizing speech...?

The AudibleAdvisor is technically capable of this, but this is really not an engineering question... I'll turn the question around to you consumers: The basic speech synthesis algorithm which has floated around since the likes of the Commodore 64 still sounds the same today. There are better algorithms, but they require a lot of memory and special heuristics and most importantly, lots of licensing $$$. You've probably heard the 'basic' algorithm when you had your first Bound Blaster, etc (sbtalk, I think). So, the question is, if you had a book/e-mail read to you with such a synthesizer, would you use it or find it a novelty in the end?

No thanks. I've no use for the guys from the "All Your Base" cartoons reading my email to me.

Posted by raptor on 03-26-2001 11:20 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Card Access
3. What about synthesizing speech...?

The AudibleAdvisor is technically capable of this, but this is really not an engineering question... I'll turn the question around to you consumers: The basic speech synthesis algorithm which has floated around since the likes of the Commodore 64 still sounds the same today. There are better algorithms, but they require a lot of memory and special heuristics and most importantly, lots of licensing $$$. You've probably heard the 'basic' algorithm when you had your first Bound Blaster, etc (sbtalk, I think). So, the question is, if you had a book/e-mail read to you with such a synthesizer, would you use it or find it a novelty in the end?

Card Access

Actually, this would do well to complement the device, I think. While I wouldn't use it for eBooks or anything (too cold and unemotional for my tastes), I think it would work great with 'personal' content like emails, news reports from websites, and other type of stuff. If I could somehow sift some of my AvantGo content through it to be read to me in the mornings on the way to work/school (through a tape adapter), I know that I'd use it.

How much money/time would this take to implement, though? If too much or too long, then it creeps more into the 'novelty' area. But if it's a matter of throwing a little bit of extra code so the hardware can handle it, then I think it's a good idea.

__________________
-Richard Powell

"Nice guys may finish last, but you know, the company's much better back here."

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:46 AM.

Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »
Show 20 posts from this thread on one page