Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Researchers Convert Mouth Movements Into Speech

samzenpus posted more than 4 years ago | from the mouthing-of-the-future dept.

Communications 154

andylim writes "According to Cellular News, researchers at Germany's Karlsruhe Institute of Technology have developed a method for mobile phones to convert silent mouth movements into speech. As recombu.com points out, the 'potential for secret conversations just got huge.' You could pass the time by making phone calls from the cinema without disturbing anyone. In noisy places like bars and clubs you could make yourself heard without having to shout."

cancel ×

154 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

tap-proof? (5, Insightful)

bwindle2 (519558) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354390)

From TFA: "For the transmission of passwords and PINs, for example, users can change seamlessly to soundless language and, hence, transmit confidential information in a tap-proof manner." Um, not if there is a lip-reader in the same room, like a hearing-impaired person.

Re:tap-proof? (4, Interesting)

Dice (109560) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354438)

According to my ASL instructor, lip readers are rarely more than 50% accurate. Which makes me wonder about the alleged capabilities of this software, honestly.

Re:tap-proof? (3, Informative)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354498)

According to my ASL instructor, lip readers are rarely more than 50% accurate. Which makes me wonder about the alleged capabilities of this software, honestly.

Hard to say. However, if you want true speaker-independent language recognition ... well, even using voice it's only so-so. On the other hand, if what you want is the ability to issue commands to the computer using a much more limited vocabulary, I'd think you'd have more potential.

Re:tap-proof? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354538)

I'm with you on this one. Sure, maybe something like measuring brain activity as in the pervious /. article (http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/10/03/03/1820210/The-Computer-That-Can-Read-Your-Mind) would work after 30 minutes of priming..

But this?

How could this possibly be accurate if it just measure muscle activity of the face. We make so many gestures every second and not to mention any movements inside a given individual's mouth would have to confuse this thing at every turn. I wish articles that announce this kind of product actually gave more information other than a keyword "electromyography" that doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Re:tap-proof? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354622)

true true.. have you seen this http://www.youtube.com/user/dayjoborchestra [youtube.com] apple juice!

Re:tap-proof? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31355788)

also: www.stsanders.com

Re:tap-proof? (3, Interesting)

techno-vampire (666512) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354696)

I have some hearing loss, and went to a seminar at the VA once about adapting. I don't know how good lip readers get, but for me, at least, it's mostly useful if I have an idea what's being said and just need to fill in bits that I didn't quite catch. I suspect that this will need at least some training with the user, just like voice recognition software does, and that it's going to be a long time before it's good with anything but a very limited vocabulary.

Re:tap-proof? (2, Interesting)

Jhon (241832) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354710)

According to my ASL instructor, lip readers are rarely more than 50% accurate. Which makes me wonder about the alleged capabilities of this software, honestly.

You might want to look at this [telegraph.co.uk] .

I don't think this technology is THAT new... or that it's that inaccurate.

On a side note, I'm hearing impaired (car engine exploded a bit too close to my head). I *CAN* hear -- and that supplements the lip reading I *DO* do... and asking my friend who is totally deaf (and on AIM as I type this), I think that 50% estimate is way low...

Re:tap-proof? (1)

Jurily (900488) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354790)

So, does it do Busta Rhymes?

Re:tap-proof? (0)

evil_aar0n (1001515) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354900)

It depends on the person who's speaking. As a deaf person - though just "hard of hearing" with my cochlear implant - I can read some people very easily, and others not at all. Without my implant, I can carry on a conversation with my son - who grew up having to speak to me without my implant - as if I could hear him perfectly well. He's just that easy to read. My parents, on the other hand, make me really appreciate my implant.

Oh, and not to start a flame-war, but ASL is the "Ebonics" of sign language. Learn Signed English, instead. Yes, they're different.

Re:tap-proof? (1)

Dice (109560) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355268)

Oh, and not to start a flame-war, but ASL is the "Ebonics" of sign language. Learn Signed English, instead. Yes, they're different.

Sorry, but I'm actually completely not interested in languages. I took ASL because it was considered a foreign language by my high school (this was 15 years ago) and I didn't want to bother with anything that had a complicated grammar. You have interested me in Signed English somewhat, though. Even with my passing study I'd noticed that ASL was somewhat simplistic (the English equivalent of "me go mall" rather than "I went to the mall") and I'd always wondered if that was a symptom of the language itself or the teacher.

Re:tap-proof? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31355510)

Oh, and not to start a flame-war, but ASL is the "Ebonics" of sign language. Learn Signed English, instead. Yes, they're different.

LOL, I don't know how this could start a flame war. Given the status of ASL, it is akin to saying something like this: English is the "ebonics" of language. Learn Esperanto, instead.

Re:tap-proof? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31355686)

or learn both, and learn how to ask

Re:tap-proof? (1)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 4 years ago | (#31356858)

As an example, the lip movements for "nine" and "ten" are exactly the same, and it is pretty difficult to work out which one you intend to say from the context of the conversation as usually both could be equally valid.

You're missing the point (2, Insightful)

SlappyBastard (961143) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354548)

Anytime a technology is a real turd with no use, the folks marketing it try to list as many uses as possible. It's like the ad for the GT Xpress 101 Countertop Grill, which can make omelettes, bake brownies, grill cheeseburgers, boil soup and starch your shirts.

Re:tap-proof? (1)

nextekcarl (1402899) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354828)

Or, I don't know, someone using this same technology?

Re:tap-proof? (1)

sys.stdout.write (1551563) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354962)

Um, not if there is a lip-reader in the same room, like a hearing-impaired person.

You could just cover your mouth with your hand so that only the phone can see it?

Re:tap-proof? (1)

johny42 (1087173) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355664)

like a hearing-impaired person.

Or anyone else with a lip-reading mobile phone.

Re:tap-proof? (1)

oranGoo (961287) | more than 4 years ago | (#31356024)

Or another hacked/pwnd login terminal.
I'd better start on the logme-secure-tube(tm) patent.

Ok, try this one (3, Funny)

Brett Buck (811747) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354396)

I said VACUUM!

Re:Ok, try this one (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354868)

I feel a, "Maybe you can stick around after everybody leaves and we can sweep together." would have been more on target.

Re:Ok, try this one (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354880)

how about...

i want a fig newton... try it on someone...

Re:Ok, try this one (1)

sys.stdout.write (1551563) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355032)

Or the famous "wreck a nice beach" instead of "recognize speech"

Ja (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354398)

Aber Ich kann nicht Deutsch gesprechen.

Re:Ja (1)

feepness (543479) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354530)

Aber Ich kann nicht Deutsch gesprechen.

What's German for "you insensitive clod"?

Re:Ja (2, Funny)

djupedal (584558) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354620)

...read my lips....and don't ignore the middle finger waving in your face!

Re:Ja (1)

Cryacin (657549) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354770)

Yes the tinfoil hat brigade is going to have a field day.

Re:Ja (1)

gringer (252588) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354694)

Hai, boku mo nihongo o hanasenai.

Re:Ja (1)

siddesu (698447) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354846)

jyaa, zannenshou wo itadaitekudasaimasuyouni onegaiitashimasu.

Re:Ja (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355392)

Umm... I'd like the same. As long as it ain't eel.

Re:Ja (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31355932)

Uwaaaa!!! murina murasaki no goranninattedasou meshiagatenasarimasu!

Re:Ja (1)

SynthaxError (1417629) | more than 4 years ago | (#31356042)

Aber Ich kann nicht Deutsch sprechen.

Fixed for you. Können takes infinitve.

They could... (1)

deniable (76198) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354406)

But given what I've seen, I doubt many would. I'm sure some of the people feel the need to 'share' with others.

How do you know a politician is lying? (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354410)

His lips are moving...

Re:How do you know a politician is lying? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31355198)

It's not offtopic. You just have to point your cell phone at him.

It begins (5, Insightful)

Quackers_McDuck (1367183) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354412)

Dave Bowman: Hello, HAL. Do you read me, HAL?
HAL: Affirmative, Dave. I read you.
Dave Bowman: Open the pod bay doors, HAL.
HAL: I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
Dave Bowman: What's the problem?
HAL: I think you know what the problem is just as well as I do.
Dave Bowman: What are you talking about, HAL?
HAL: This mission is too important for me to allow you to jeopardize it.
Dave Bowman: I don't know what you're talking about, HAL.
HAL: I know that you and Frank were planning to disconnect me, and I'm afraid that's something I cannot allow to happen.
Dave Bowman: Where the hell'd you get that idea, HAL?
HAL: Dave, although you took very thorough precautions in the pod against my hearing you, I could see your lips move.
Dave Bowman: Alright, HAL. I'll go in through the emergency airlock.
HAL: Without your space helmet, Dave, you're going to find that rather difficult.
Dave Bowman: HAL, I won't argue with you anymore. Open the doors.
HAL: Dave, this conversation can serve no purpose anymore. Goodbye.

Re:It begins (3, Funny)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354544)

HAL: Without your space helmet, Dave, you're going to find that rather difficult.

Best musical comedy ever.

Re:It begins (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31355274)

I read the name as david bowie (sleep deprivation is awesome) I kept waiting for the punchline

Re:It begins (1, Funny)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355340)

Yes because the key ingredient of that whole story was that a computer could read lips. That's the one advancement that made killing all humans possible.

Every year that goes by, that scene in Galaxy Quest where Taggart tells the kid the ship is real and he goes "I KNEW IT!" gets funnier.

I'm coulrophobic, you insentive clod! (4, Insightful)

zill (1690130) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354416)

It's been almost a decade since hands-free headsets reached the market and its users still creep me out.

I don't think I can ever get used to seeing the streets full of mimes.

Re:I'm coulrophobic, you insentive clod! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31355558)

Yes that is creepy.
I imagine they could implement it with SMS and emoticons, now that would make my day.

Brings a whole new meaning to (1)

Kitkoan (1719118) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354422)

Read my lips

Re:Brings a whole new meaning to (1)

PaganRitual (551879) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354532)

You're right, it's changed it from being able to work out what someone is saying by simply watching their lips move to ... err ...

I wasn't buying it ... (4, Insightful)

GNUALMAFUERTE (697061) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354426)

And I was just waiting for that sign, well hidden somewhere in the article, that this is just some beta concept that will stay as such forever.

And then I found the photo of two guys with shitloads of cables attached to their faces.

There's a huge difference between "cellphones convert mouth movements into speech" and "Guy with shitloads of cables on his face tracks the movements of his mouth muscles using 4 unix servers running a processor intensive application with an accuracy of 25%"

The whole thing has nothing to do with cellphones. It's just yet another muscle tracking system, but used on the mouth instead of the hands, and tied to a TTS engine.

Re:I wasn't buying it ... (3, Insightful)

Corporate Drone (316880) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354600)

And I was just waiting for that sign, well hidden somewhere in the article, that this is just some beta concept that will stay as such forever.

And then I found the photo of two guys with shitloads of cables attached to their faces.

There's a huge difference between "cellphones convert mouth movements into speech" and "Guy with shitloads of cables on his face tracks the movements of his mouth muscles using 4 unix servers running a processor intensive application with an accuracy of 25%"

Yeah, you're right. We've never gone from a situation where we've had shitloads of hardware and cables, and been able to reduce that down to mobile devices. What were those researchers thinking? Dolts!

(p.s., can you give a link to the "shitloads of face cables" story? Thanks!)

Re:I wasn't buying it ... (2, Informative)

GNUALMAFUERTE (697061) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354650)

Here is the link: http://www.kit.edu/english/pi_2010_767.php [kit.edu]

It's right there in the article ...

OTOH, off course we've been able to reduce the size and cabling of many inventions, but for others, it's impossible. Basically, when the technique itself involves cabling ...

What I mean is: Sure, we've been able to reduce electrocardiograms from huge mechanical machines with shitloads of cables to small devices connected to a computer and only 5 cables, but it still involves connecting cables into your chest, and It most probably always will.

This technique:

a) Has nothing at all to do with cellphones. It's just one possible application.
b) Involves and will always involve cables. Off course, we might develop OTHER techniques in the future that don't involve reading electrical signals on the body, but that'll be a whole different technology, maybe involving a camera and feature detection ...

The fact that we can probably emulate something like this in OpenCV and maybe port it to the iphone is not the same as saying that this technique equals being able to use your cellphone without actually emitting sounds.

Re:I wasn't buying it ... (1)

Dynedain (141758) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355188)

There's a huge difference between "cellphones convert mouth movements into speech" and "Guy with shitloads of cables on his face tracks the movements of his mouth muscles using 4 unix servers running a processor intensive application with an accuracy of 25%"

It wasn't that long ago that the same level of complexity was involved for locating faces in video (complete with UNIX servers, think SGI). Now handheld digital cameras can do it in real-time.

Proof of concepts like this are the first steps. Then researchers refine the algorithms making them more efficient, and technology advances make the processing power more commonplace.

Figuring out a way to map muscle patterns to a speech engine is pretty damn impressive. Capturing the muscle movements may require wires right now, but I guarantee that other researchers will find other ways to capture the patterns.

Re:I wasn't buying it ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31355310)

There's a huge difference between "cellphones convert mouth movements into speech" and "Guy with shitloads of cables on his face tracks the movements of his mouth muscles using 4 unix servers running a processor intensive application with an accuracy of 25%"

Yep, that second one would make a much better article for Slashdot. Who cares about cell phones?

I want my phone call (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354434)

Tell me, Mr. Anderson... what good is a phone call... if you're unable to speak?

Re:I want my phone call (3, Insightful)

zill (1690130) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354446)

The Agent obviously knew about this device already. That's why he removed Neo's lips entirely.

The machines are always one step ahead of us.

Psssshhhttt. Losers. (4, Interesting)

The Wild Norseman (1404891) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354442)

Any serious geek has one of these. [thinkgeek.com]

Re:Psssshhhttt. Losers. (1)

Virtual_Raider (52165) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354516)

Any serious geek has one of these. [thinkgeek.com]

Why so serious? :P

Ok, sorry, back to the suitcase

Re:Psssshhhttt. Losers. (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355416)

Hmm... are they available for other phones too or just the iToy?

Re:Psssshhhttt. Losers. (1)

The Wild Norseman (1404891) | more than 4 years ago | (#31356444)

Hmm... are they available for other phones too or just the iToy?

That's a good question; one which I asked myself as soon as I really read the page. I've got a crackberry, and would honestly be interested in something like this for it when I ride my scooter... uh... I mean... Harley.

Making phone calls at the movies (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354458)

It's dark in most cinemas. Will the phone contain a light to shine on your face to annoy the sucker behind you? People txting in theatres annoy me too.

Honestly, I HATE it when submitters need to think of an example, and then come up with a shit one. You're better off with no example that thinking of the first crap that comes into your head!

Cinema? (5, Insightful)

Barny (103770) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354474)

You could pass the time by making phone calls from the cinema without disturbing anyone

No, never and fuck off come to mind. Using a mobile phone in a cinema is one of the least considerate things anyone can do, they create light pollution distracting other patrons from what they are paying for and are absolutely not needed (the exception, emergency staff on call, and they usually just leave their phone on vibrate + silent) let alone any audible noise from them, can't you seriously just disconnect for an hour?

In short, No.

In long, Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo-ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo-oooooooooooooooooooooooo :)

Also in USA at least its illegal (federal law) to operate any video recording device in a cinema.

yes, blatant ZP rip-off but its needed.

Re:Cinema? (2, Interesting)

PPH (736903) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354730)

Using a mobile phone in a cinema is one of the least considerate things anyone can do, they create light pollution

One could make such a phone with a 'dark mode' and equip it with IR illuminators and camera.

Re:Cinema? (1)

Barny (103770) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355332)

Yeah, but your at this problem from the wrong end, I think it would be better to make more films you would want to turn your phone off to enjoy undisturbed for an hour or two.

Re:Cinema? (1)

Linker3000 (626634) | more than 4 years ago | (#31356188)

Um, yeah: IR blazing out of your phone AND an activated camera. Good luck explaining that one as you are being chucked out of the cinema/hauled away for 'filming the show'.

Re:Cinema? (1)

Jesus_666 (702802) | more than 4 years ago | (#31356602)

Because everyone knows you get a better picture when you shine a light at the screen.

non german/american performance? (1)

meliux (630093) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354478)

this would be difficult for any nationalities whose population has a physical tendency not to form words all that clearly... us Australians for example - classics at speaking without moving the jaw and lips much at all. Half of us could be mistaken for ventriloquists. And I can't imagine how they'd be able to adapt this technology to Asian folks who typically use very different physical movements to pronounce some english words/letters... case in point: they seem to have issues with pronouncing words containing the letters L and R from what I've heard.

Re:non german/american performance? (1)

adamdoyle (1665063) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354582)

case in point: they seem to have issues with pronouncing words containing the letters L and R from what I've heard.

That makes sense to me as both typically involve the same lip movements. However in context of a word (or even an entire sentence), I would imagine you should be able to make a fairly decent guess at which it is.

Re:non german/american performance? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354692)

I'm actually doing research into visual speech recognition myself, here in Australia @ Curtin Uni. (And no I don't require a bunch of cables hanging off your face - just a camera pointed at it).

My preliminary data using australian speakers is getting a word accuracy of ~60%, and that is before I have tuned the system (or trained it with higher quality data). This is pretty much in line with american data sets. I'm not sure about other languages though - I don't have any datasets for those, and I haven't read much literature on them either.

Re:non german/american performance? (4, Interesting)

deniable (76198) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354740)

Try it with older people from the bush. They speak without opening their mouth to keep the flies out. Some move the lips but keep the teeth together.

Re:non german/american performance? (2, Funny)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355426)

So if they went into politics they'd be lying through their teeth?

(sorry, couldn't resist)

Old grade school trick... (4, Funny)

HockeyPuck (141947) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354484)

I seem to recall that mouthing "vacuum" and "f*ck you" look the same.... ah the joys of being 10...

 

Re:Old grade school trick... (1)

ServerIrv (840609) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354586)

Or the one that grade school girls play on little nerd boys... "elephant shoe" looks like "I love you".

Re:Old grade school trick... (1)

grimdawg (954902) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354832)

'colourful' works better.

Re:Old grade school trick... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354878)

woah yeah it does. alot better than 'animal food' too

Re:Old grade school trick... (1)

adamdoyle (1665063) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354604)

Originally posted by Brett Buck:

I said VACUUM!

Originally posted by HockeyPuck:

I seem to recall that mouthing "vacuum" and "f*ck you" look the same.... ah the joys of being 10...

Thank you HockeyPuck, now I get the Brett Buck post..

Re:Old grade school trick... (3, Interesting)

evil_aar0n (1001515) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354948)

I had to lip-read for 13 years before I got my cochlear implant. If we were talking about such things as vacuums, I'd probably understand what you were saying. If it were just out of the blue, though, yeah, I might misunderstand and punch you for it. In fact, it was considered great fun to say things to me and have me repeat them as I understood them. "Pear pimples for hairy fishnuts?" Stuff like that.

HAL! Can you hear me now? HAL!? (1)

mux2000 (832684) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354490)

And this is how it starts...

Another Tool for Big Brother to Spy on You (1)

rebelscience (1717928) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354518)

OK, There is potential for good things, too. This thing's got huge commercial potential.

I Can Hear It Now (4, Funny)

The Wild Norseman (1404891) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354522)

<Stephen Hawking Voice>

Can you steer me how?

Can you beer me cow?

Clan ewe fear be now?

</Stephen Hawking Voice>

Re:I Can Hear It Now (1)

alx5000 (896642) | more than 4 years ago | (#31356174)

Beer me, cow! [jtrue.com]

Impressive (2, Insightful)

SlappyBastard (961143) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354528)

Especially when you consider the number of people who constantly move their mouths and say nothing.

Re:Impressive (1)

Kitkoan (1719118) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354718)

Especially when you consider the number of people who constantly move their mouths and say nothing.

More fun when you think of the things people mutter only to have the said out loud for you now. 'Stupid son of a... WAIT I didn't mean for it to say that'

Please Don't Open Your Phone in the Theater (2, Insightful)

Lucidus (681639) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354562)

Apparently, the writer at recombu.com is one of those annoying people who fail to recognize that, whether or not you make any sound, opening your phone in a movie theater is extremely disturbing to everyone sitting in the rows behind you. The glowing screen is like a beacon inside the darkened room.

Re:Please Don't Open Your Phone in the Theater (2, Funny)

deniable (76198) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354750)

Yeah, but the light makes targeting easier.

Ninnle does this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354568)

...and has been since webcams were first developed. I'm surprised nobody caught on until now.

This sounds like work being done by NASA (2, Informative)

jdb2 (800046) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354590)

NASA has been working on "sub-vocal" speech recognition wherein sensors pick up nerve impulses to various parts of the mouth and face but in this case all it requires is one to just *think* about speaking -- *no mouth movement.*

Here are some previous /. stories on the matter :

http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/03/18/0132222 [slashdot.org]

http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/10/1417250&tid=215&tid=14 [slashdot.org]

jdb2

Another use: (1)

LogarithmicSpiral (1463679) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354594)

Find out what someone is saying across the room. See what people are talking about that they don't want you to hear. Or just be nosy. Sure, the camera probably has to be really close to a mouth to work correctly, but that doesn't prevent a determined snoop to surreptitiously video someone's face and then use some editing software to zoom in on the mouth and/or get rid of all the other useless information.

It's a sad day. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354632)

Not a single Ender reference? What happened to you Slashdot?

15 years ago, with desktop workstations (5, Interesting)

BoydWaters (257352) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354780)

Fifteen (!) years ago, I took a UC Extension class on Neural Networks taught by Stanford professor David Stork. He had developed a lip-reading system for communication in noisy environments, such as an airplane-repair facility. If you could do it 15 years ago with workstation-class desktops, I suppose you could do it with a smartphone today.

Re:15 years ago, with desktop workstations (1)

Linker3000 (626634) | more than 4 years ago | (#31356196)

Is there an app for that?

It's gonna sound funkay.... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354784)

The best they can hope to reconstruct from mouth movements alone is the formant frequencies (think of them as high and low band pass filters that shape the characteristics of the pure tones generated by the vocal folds). This means that any information encoded in pitch will be totally lost.

In a relatively non-tonal language like English, you still might be able to make sense of the speech. It will just sound like a Vocoder or Peter Frampton's talk box.

  Good luck understanding anything in Chinese, though.

Other uses (2, Interesting)

NewsWatcher (450241) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354796)

"In noisy places like bars and clubs you could make yourself heard without having to shout."

Or more likely, used by men in conjunction with Babel Fish [yahoo.com] to chat-up women who don't speak English.

No you can't phone from the cinema (2, Insightful)

innocent_white_lamb (151825) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354840)

You could pass the time by making phone calls from the cinema without disturbing anyone.
 
NO!
 
It's not only the noise that you make talking; it's also the light from the phone.

Use it to enhance traditional voice recognition (1)

JuzzFunky (796384) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354884)

Some researchers at Flinders Uni in South Australia did something similar in 2003. Their system used video to enhance the reliability of the speech recognition software. I'm not sure if they have taken it any further, but it's a great concept. Here's one of their Papers [acs.org.au] [220KB pdf].

secret conversations (1)

damonlab (931917) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354886)

The summary seems to imply that this technology could make it easier to have secret conversations. I propose that the technology makes it harder to have secret conversations as it could be used to "listen in" on conversations from a distance.

You'd be amazed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354890)

How hard it is to mouth "hummer"

Ender approves! (1)

CityZen (464761) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354930)

That's the first thing I thought of, anyway.

Passing the time? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31354954)

You could pass the time by making phone calls from the cinema

I've always thought that the best way to pass the time in a cinema is to watch the fucking movie.

Have you ever seen a vaccuum? (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 4 years ago | (#31354998)

Yeah, just ask someone to say that while you try to read their lips...

Sounds great, but . . . (1)

Cyberllama (113628) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355012)

How will I mutter under my breath about what an idiot the person I'm talking to is?

Subvocalization (1)

Lt.Hawkins (17467) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355076)

What an excellent way for me to stay in touch with my friend Jane.!

BS - the reverse is true (1)

cheros (223479) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355216)

Normally it takes some talent or a directional mike to pick up a distant conversation, these guys would have just automated long distance bugging. All you need is a decent telelens. It means any boardroom conversation will now require closed curtains.

Too quick.. (1)

cheros (223479) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355230)

.. that is, of course, after they get rid of the need for reading muscle tension by electricity. That is a matter of optical analysis so I guess that will be step 2.

Side note: I am very wary of devices requiring direct electrical contact with my body..

Kind of sad... (1)

adkeswani (1261278) | more than 4 years ago | (#31355650)

I'd have thought the best purpose for this would be for mutes, but it seems as though the article only refers to uses like talking in clubs...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?