24 hours to respond with date/duration preferences for inclusion summit

>
> On 28-07-2020 21:55, Taylor Blau wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 10:07:26AM +0000, Eric Wong wrote:
> >>
> >> Jitsi w/ audio-only certainly seems to be a step in the right
> >> direction and would be more inclusive.
> >>
> >> Is there any speech-to-text transcription done for the hearing
> >> (or extremely bandwidth) impaired?
> >
> > It looks like such a thing exists:
> > https://jitsi.org/blog/a-speech-to-text-prototype/.
> >
>
> Yeah. A link with current information appears to be:
>
> https://github.com/jitsi/jigasi#using-jigasi-to-transcribe-a-jitsi-meet-conference
>
> >> It'd ideally go to #git on IRC (or something that doesn't
> >> require a browser to trigger swap storms on old systems).
> >>
> >> Even for people with good hearing, acceptable audio quality for
> >> speech seems tricky to get right, being dependent on mics,
> >> bandwidth, codecs, background noise, speaker/earphone quality,
> >> etc.
> >
> > I haven't look hard enough to see if it supports redirecting its output
> > to an IRC channel, but my guess is that it probably doesn't.
>
> I believe you're right. From the link above:
>
> > Currently Jigasi can send speech-to-text results to the chat of a
> > Jitsi Meet room as either plain text or JSON. If it's send in JSON,
> > Jitsi Meet will provide subtitles in the left corner of the video,
> > while plain text will just be posted in the chat.
>
> > In either
> > case, hopefully disabling audio and video is possible within Jitsi's web
> > UI, and you should be able to read or write in the chat as well as read
> > the transcription.
> >
>
> I think there's just one catch. The transcription as of now appears to
> use Google Cloud speech-to-text API. Well, its Google. I'll let you make
> your own inferences. In any case, it hopefully wouldn't be a concern for
> people who _read_ the transcription.
>
> --
> Sivaraam