[HN Gopher] Plover: free, open-source stenography engine
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Plover: free, open-source stenography engine
        
       Author : tosh
       Score  : 191 points
       Date   : 2023-01-08 11:01 UTC (11 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.openstenoproject.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.openstenoproject.org)
        
       | ndsipa_pomu wrote:
       | So, I've now learnt that I've been pronouncing "plover" wrong (I
       | thought it rhymes with "clover", not "lover").
       | 
       | Also, is it just me that immediately thinks of Colossal Cave
       | Adventure? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossal_Cave_Adventure
        
         | everybodyknows wrote:
         | American Heritage dictionary says either pronunciation is
         | acceptable:
         | 
         | https://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=plover&submit.x=...
        
           | vouaobrasil wrote:
           | Perhaps, but almost every birder would look at you strangely
           | if you pronounced it like pl-oh-ver. Plover rhyming with
           | lover is universal amongst birders.
        
         | grahamplace wrote:
         | I've always said ploh-ver (rhymes with clover), but that comes
         | not from any birding experience, but from drinking Andytown's
         | Snowy Plovers[1]. I believe the staff there has always said
         | ploh-ver as well, but it's been a while and I could be
         | mistaken.
         | 
         | Seems like jury is out amongst birders[2]
         | 
         | [1] https://thebolditalic.com/the-snowy-plover-is-the-
         | tastiest-d...
         | 
         | [2] https://www.10000birds.com/ploverpronunciationpoll.htm
        
       | andry_ad wrote:
       | Can somebody share their experience learning Plover as non-native
       | English speaker?
        
       | meibo wrote:
       | I would love to try this some time, and then I remember that I
       | spend 90% of the time on my PC programming, and then I get sad
       | and settle with my qwerty.
        
         | rgoulter wrote:
         | There's plenty of room to do improve on standard QWERTY
         | keyboard in a technically interesting way.
         | 
         | Although not related to chorded-input like Plover uses, I'd
         | suggest something like https://github.com/manna-harbour/miryoku
        
         | namibj wrote:
         | While good so much for APL, plover is quite suited to writing
         | something like python.
         | 
         | Also it would be likely that you wrote more words then dense
         | code, just did to comments and team communication.
        
           | charcircuit wrote:
           | No, plover is suited to transcribing speech. It is not
           | suitable for writing code, although it is possible to
           | shoehorn it into that use case.
        
       | mjklin wrote:
       | I was considering learning Plover and even bought a keyboard to
       | learn, but that was about the time that Otter.ai and other
       | speech-to-text tools started becoming excellent. So I thought,
       | what's the point?
       | 
       | Can anyone convince me? I may still like to learn, but consider
       | that it's much more difficult than touch typing. _Each word_ has
       | its own combination that must be memorized (or sometimes a series
       | of words). Think of the difference between learning the Roman
       | alphabet vs learning Chinese characters. There is seemingly no
       | end to it.
        
         | bad_username wrote:
         | Otter.ai is great, but it still makes mistakes, and it tends to
         | make them in domain- or project-specific telerminology which
         | typically is the most important to get right. Which means you
         | need to proof read and fix the transcripts. This can later take
         | the same amount of time as the meeting itself. If there's a way
         | to make an accurate transcript on the fly, then it's better
         | than voice to text.
        
         | Twisol wrote:
         | I also picked up a basic steno keyboard earlier in 2022 (the
         | EcoSteno, I think). I'm no good with it yet (I'm still working
         | through layout drills, honestly), but for me, the draw isn't in
         | transcription or text input specifically, but in chord-based
         | control over my computer more generally.
         | 
         | A standard computer keyboard layout has ~100 keys. You can use
         | various modifier keys (Ctrl, Alt, Shift, Meta) and combinations
         | thereof to assign multiple meanings to each key, which morally
         | organizes the keyboard into layers depending on which modifiers
         | are active, but most layers are inconvenient to reach --
         | anything beyond two modifiers gets annoying and sees limited
         | use. You're almost always on the unmodified layer.
         | 
         | A stenotype board has only ~20 keys, but the unit of input is
         | an entire set of keys rather than a single key. In principle,
         | you can comfortably enter chords of up to 10 keys at once,
         | giving ~184,756 (20 choose 10) inputs. This is modified a bit
         | by ergonomics, but it's still orders of magnitude more
         | possibilities than an idealized keyboard with modifiers
         | (something like 1,600).
         | 
         | That kind of space for addressing commands begs for some kind
         | of principled organization. The Plover community calls
         | assignments of commands to chords "dictionaries", and they
         | generally follow an internally-consistent set of rules called a
         | "theory". If you're working with English input, for example,
         | you'll learn a theory that lets you almost always reason out
         | the chord for a word.
         | 
         | There's nothing that limits stenographic input to
         | transcription, though. You can assemble, say, a dictionary of
         | Emacs commands, and assign related commands chords that share a
         | common subset of keys. (Emacs is kind of like this already
         | IMHO, but I am _not_ a fan of the modifier+key system -- it
         | feels like the addressing space is too small, and I 'm afraid
         | to customize the default keymap.)
         | 
         | Moreover, you aren't limited to single-chord input either.
         | Multi-chord input is common; you can easily define entries in
         | the dictionary which are based on a sequence of chords. I
         | believe (but lack the experience to confirm) that English
         | dictionaries tend to be organized around syllables or syllable
         | clusters; the normal English stenotype layout specifically has
         | sections for initial consonent, vowel, and terminal consonant,
         | and theories tend to organize around that structure. Again,
         | there's no reason you can't apply the same tools to non-
         | transcription inputs.
         | 
         | I think this is a really cool input system, and for my
         | interests, complementary to a regular QWERTY keyboard. I still
         | want to learn a proper English theory (to avoid having to
         | switch frequently between multiple keyboards!), but I mostly
         | just want to have the option of chorded input in the first
         | place.
        
         | falcolas wrote:
         | Speed.
         | 
         | 150 wpm talking vs 200-250 wpm with stenography.
         | 
         | Putting on my narrator's hat for a moment, I'd also point out
         | that speaking clearly for hours on end is hard, and not
         | something you can do without preparation (copious amounts of
         | water, a room with little background noise, a good microphone,
         | etc). Any of the preparation that's skipped makes it harder to
         | speak clearly and be understood.
        
         | vasco wrote:
         | > Can anyone convince me?
         | 
         | I find it extremely cringy to talk to a machine and get very
         | annoyed at correcting transcription errors in the middle of a
         | sentence or paragraph after it was transcribed. If you don't
         | find it cringy to use voice assistants I guess you're just a
         | different type of person and would prefer talking instead of
         | typing.
        
           | melling wrote:
           | I also get annoyed at correcting voice errors. Wish it was
           | better.
           | 
           | However, I don't find it cringy. Seems like that would be a
           | more natural interface. It would make mobile devices more
           | productive, for example.
           | 
           | Hang out in a park and write, develop software, etc on a
           | tablet or phone. Removing the keyboard from the computer
           | makes it seem more natural to me.
        
           | dinkleberg wrote:
           | Cringy? That is an interesting take.
           | 
           | I can sympathize with the dislike of voice assistance as they
           | are pretty universally crap. But recording yourself
           | monologuing and having it AI transcribed can feel really
           | natural.
           | 
           | I still default to typing, but whenever I'm feeling writers
           | block, I'll just start thinking out loud and record it to get
           | started and it works quite nicely.
        
             | vasco wrote:
             | > Cringy? That is an interesting take.
             | 
             | Yeah I'm not sure if I'm just weird or what, but from the
             | start with voice assistants I've been utterly confused that
             | people want to talk to machines using a shitty interface
             | and broadcasting to others what they are doing (not even
             | talking about the NSA, just people in my vicinity). Imagine
             | being in my room, saying out loud each URL I wanted to
             | visit. It feels as cringy as if instead of turning a page
             | silently in a book while I'm sitting in my room reading, I
             | would instead disrupt that silence and focus by telling the
             | book "TURN PAGE". That's how it feels to me when I hear
             | someone say "OKAY GOOGLE", I almost physically recoil.
             | 
             | It's like you have a nice silent interface that will be
             | perfectly interpreted, and decide instead to be loud and
             | imprecise and have to guess if the machine is going to
             | understand you. I think maybe rather than cringy another
             | word would be that it feels in bad taste. It's half about
             | the "style" and half about the lack of "function" of the
             | medium. It's effectively worse in terms of reliability and
             | you look like someone that doesn't know how to use a
             | computer all at the same time.
        
               | upsidesinclude wrote:
               | "Okay google" is so gross. Totally the apex of imposed
               | advertising.
               | 
               | Physically recoil in fact, like a bitter taste in my
               | mouth.
               | 
               | However, as opposed to some assistant turning imaginary
               | 'pages' in .epub, sitting alone in focused dictation is a
               | really great way to explore your mind and have free
               | roaming thought processes.
               | 
               | It is also not new in any sense, e.g., Dostoyevsky
               | dictated _The Idiot_ to a stenographer.
        
               | dinkleberg wrote:
               | Ah, I get what you mean. For any interaction, I fully
               | agree with you. I would hate to be in a room with someone
               | who is interacting with their machine through voice.
               | 
               | I was reading the parent of your post as using these
               | speech-to-text tools for dictation, not for interaction.
               | I think they can be quite useful for dictation (if they
               | can interpret your voice well).
        
               | melling wrote:
               | That brings up the other natural user interface that's
               | missing, which is gesture recognition.
               | 
               | https://atap.google.com/soli/
               | 
               | I suppose it'll take another generation before people
               | start to wonder why everyone used to hunch over a
               | computer "in the old days"
        
             | retrac wrote:
             | I wouldn't use the word cringy myself, but I think I get
             | where they're coming from. Reading the output of speech
             | recognition a few seconds behind is jarring. Constant game
             | of anticipation. Will it get that name or term right? Nope.
             | Now I have to pause dictation, go back, and fix it. It's
             | more involved than tapping backspace a couple times, the
             | feedback is less instant, and that means more things I have
             | to keep in my working memory, which is non-existent.
        
         | eggy wrote:
         | You don't need to memorize each word's combination, although
         | you eventually will as you type them frequently enough. It's
         | shorthand for typing, where you can transcribe any word. You
         | are chording syllables and in many cases, entire words, but you
         | are not spelling each letter of a word. I am no steno expert,
         | and my speed is not there yet, but I am benefiting from less
         | finger movement and stress. It is also neat to rewire your
         | brain to do something different. I am learning Colemak layout
         | as well for touch typing.
        
         | tsuujin wrote:
         | Sometimes you need to both type and listen to other people
         | talking, so talking over them would be pretty rude. Also typing
         | with text to speech in a public place would really rob you of
         | privacy.
         | 
         | Honestly for me steno is about ergonomics. It seems like steno
         | should be harder than normal typing but you're making so many
         | fewer strokes that it takes a ton of strain off of your hands.
         | Typing faster is a happy side effect.
        
       | elil17 wrote:
       | I've found that ZipChord offers the best trade of between
       | convenience (does not require N-key rollover, can continue to
       | type normally on a QWERTY keyboard for most words) and speed. It
       | lets you type a chord of several characters at once to type a
       | word (e.g. I have "eml" set to type my email address and "bw" to
       | type "between").
       | 
       | The recent 2.0 beta release is a game changer, it has gotten
       | really good at distinguishing character entry from chording (e.g.
       | if you type need and hit the e and d key at the same time by
       | accident, it won't trigger your "ed" chord).
       | 
       | Only works on windows though.
       | 
       | https://github.com/psoukie/zipchord/releases
        
       | melling wrote:
       | Over the past decade there have been some interesting discussions
       | about Plover on HN
       | 
       | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
       | 
       | The video in the first result was good:
       | 
       | https://youtu.be/Wpv-Qb-dB6g
        
         | dang wrote:
         | I found it hard to pick out the ones that are about this
         | project. This one is. Others?
         | 
         |  _Plover is a free, open-source stenography engine_ -
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27602077 - June 2021 (124
         | comments)
        
           | shric wrote:
           | I believe all of the results from the first page of GP's
           | search are about this except the ones that mention "browser
           | fileshare".
        
             | dang wrote:
             | Ah thanks! Here's a better list:
             | 
             |  _Plover is a free, open-source stenography engine_ -
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27602077 - June 2021
             | (124 comments)
             | 
             |  _Plover: Thought to Text at 240 WPM (2013) [video]_ -
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8510409 - Oct 2014
             | (119 comments)
             | 
             |  _Plover: Thought to Text at 240 WPM_ -
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6936210 - Dec 2013 (4
             | comments)
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-01-08 23:00 UTC)