h a l f b a k e r yCogito, ergo sumthin'
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
remember when you could type text into a mac and the computer would speak in computer voice
I'm sure you could still do this today .
i have started to notice that from time to time I check my thoughts by repeating them back inside my head in a computer voice.
I know that this sounds somewhat
peculiar but I can't be the only person that experiences this.
This idea is a device or a series of devices enabled with the opportunity to speak an idea into it and it will then repeat it back to you in a computer voice as many times as you would like.
[link]
|
| |
Early voice control tool kits on Windows always
recommended that the system said back what you
understand to have been said by a human in order
to confirm it. Automated telephone systems do
this kind of things with numbers and places. |
|
| |
For a difference voice to speak what you've said
back, unless you are using an analogue voice
changer, it would have to be parsed, digested and
regenerated. I'm sure this could be done at the
moment but only if you say what a given system
expects you to say. So a system might be able to
take orders for breakfast but be unable to discuss
the merits of a good night's sleep to one. |
|
| |
For an example of this search
for the results of someone trying to write the
poem "Jabberwocky" into an early Apple Newton.
It fails to handle the nonsense words. |
|
| |
I must admit that I've often had to abandon
experiments with voice controlled computing
because the system is often expecting an
American accent, which I can't reliably muster. |
|
| |
So my idea could sound like it was being repeated by Stephen
Hawking. How affirming! If the device could run the idea through
Halfbakery, then the voice could be selected by buns vs. bones for
a brilliant vs. doltish voice. However, then the thought would not be
scrubbed, really. |
|
| |
I like the name 'Thought Scrubber'. I'm not numbered among the
potentially 1's of people sharing this mental practice of yours and
hesitate to go down that path, but, the device sounds like a blast.
I'd like to get three or four of them going at once in a sensory
deprivation chamber all saying the same idea, out of synch for 20
minutes. |
|
| |
hate to be a naysayer but vocal inflection using pitch and delay are congruous to written punctuation marks: they make what is often a potentially ambiguous string of words, into a parseable communication stream. |
|
| |
A written version is sort of baked, in the way many websites allow you to preview your comments before posting them, or emailing a message to yourself before sending it to the eventual intended recipient. |
|
| |
That computer voice inside your head is simply 8th of 7's wetwire uplink that controls us... Ohh I've said too much, sorry overlor! <BZZZTD! whump> |
|
| |