Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Star Trek's LCARS Could Become Your Virtual Assistant (cnet.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the beam-me-up-Scotty dept.

H_Fisher writes: It has arguably inspired many other technological innovations in the fifty years since its premiere, and now another Star Trek-inspired touch could be coming to your device: the voice of Majel Barrett from the Star Trek universe's LCARS computer system. CNET reports: "The voice of LCARS was provided by Majel Barrett, who was married to Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry. Although Barrett sadly passed away in 2008, she took several roles on the show over the years, including nurse Christine Chapel in Star Trek: The Original Series and Betazoid ambassador Lwaxana Troi on Star Trek: The Next Generation. According to a tweet by the official Roddenberry account yesterday, this has provided enough phonetic data to perhaps get Barrett's voice appearing in upcoming new 2017 TV series Star Trek: Discovery -- and maybe even a Siri-like virtual assistant."

12 of 145 comments (clear)

  1. Aaaand a million nerds just came in their pants by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 4, Funny

    I've always been able to spot other trekkers by how people react to me referring to any digital female voice as Majel.

    --
    A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
  2. Feels a bit ... too much by Calydor · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Maybe I'm just old and boring, but I really don't like the way that being dead is no longer the end for appearing in new things you never knew about. Between the holographic appearances of ... was it Tupac? And now this, it all just feels a bit too morbid to me.

    --
    -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
  3. Is using a dead womans voice... by Viol8 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... a fitting tribute to the actress or just that little bit creepy? I can't decide.

    1. Re:Is using a dead womans voice... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Informative

      They could do that today. They did it with Hitler for a documentary by digitally putting his face into an actor.

      I kinda wish they would actually. Bring back Firefly, finish Angel, do some more Next Generation stories with the characters from that era.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Is using a dead womans voice... by azcoyote · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I miss Firefly too, but I think it's dangerous to assume that we can simply get back to the past. Whenever I watch Next Generation now, I realize how much it is a product of a bygone era, e.g. its extremely optimistic technological future (who would really work without money?). We can artificially bring back names and faces, but it would never be the same show again; in fact, it would probably just annoy the original fans for being different.

      --
      Incipiamus, fratres, servire Domino Deo, quia hucusque vix vel parum in nullo profecimus.
  4. I've always thought this by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When watching ST I always figured there were more than enough lines for her to be the computer forever in the series and the movies. Some people talk about it being morbid or creepy, but I think it's more of a tribute to her. We don't see her as replaceable even in death. My mom was always excited when she was on the shows as Lwaxana Troi and would always comment that she was Gene's wife and that she was the nurse on TOS. I doubt she could be a Siri or Cortana type assistant due to the words/products we use in speech that were never said by her and I don't think they recorder her just making phonetic sounds to combine into every word imaginable, but I would love to hear her on Star Trek again.

    1. Re:I've always thought this by bickerdyke · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's how the synthetic voices of Siri and Cortana are made, too. Voice actors read texts, the recordings are split up into phonemes and these are then used to synthesize the actual words we can hear. These computer voices aren't made on a word-by-word basis anymore.

      The recorded text however are nonsense texts that are specially designed to contain a maximum phonem variety in a minimum of recorded text and that way of course it's known how many vairants of each phonem are available exactly where in the recording. So, with enough recorded material it should be possible to extract the same phonem variety. It's just more work as you have to find them first

      --
      bickerdyke
    2. Re:I've always thought this by plover · · Score: 3, Informative

      The number of actual complete words recorded can improve the overall quality of the synthesized voice. Phonetically pasted-together words are still not quite as good as complete, well formed words. (That's why they always have the talent read the full set of numbers instead of synthesizing words like "eleven".) Reading a phonetically complete subset of words is a good way to capture the most usable portion of the voice in the minimum amount of time. That's important when you're paying the talent by the hour, but it's not necessarily going to produce the overall best results. Having access to the full body of work will not only provide the needed phonemes, but will include a good vocabulary of higher quality words.

      Of course, having a slightly choppy computer voice is one way of overcoming the uncanny valley. Holding a conversation with a dead person might be unnerving for some people. Hearing the little clips and weird tone changes as the voice is reassembled would be a constant reminder that you're actually talking to a computer, not a person, and might be of some comfort.

      --
      John
    3. Re:I've always thought this by bickerdyke · · Score: 4, Funny

      Of course, having a slightly choppy computer voice is one way of overcoming the uncanny valley. Holding a conversation with a dead person might be unnerving for some people. Hearing the little clips and weird tone changes as the voice is reassembled would be a constant reminder that you're actually talking to a computer, not a person, and might be of some comfort.

      So we are recreating the voice of a dead person as a computer voice to honor the person who actually gave a computer a human voice. That's no uncanny valley, that's a first class uncanny round-trip!

      --
      bickerdyke
  5. Re:Any Happily Passed Aways? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Although Barrett sadly passed away in 2008, she took several roles on the show over the years . . .

    Wow, although she was dead, she still took on several roles?!? She must have been one amazing lady!!

    Great journalism skills you got there.

  6. Re:Wishing for a spin-off by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'd love a darker series Colonists crash landing on an alien planet disconnected from the rest of the federation Losing most of their technology. Finding out they're not alone and there is a semi-hostile primitive species there. Then they have to struggle, how hard do they try and stick with the prime directive, and non-interference, how does it impact their own survival.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  7. Re:Foretold by ebyrob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In 2086, copyright will be lifetime + 140 years (or 160 years for works for hire). Steamboat Willie can never enter the public domain after all...