7 ms·

It’s a nice engineering approach, but I’m interested in the motivation. Um and ah is distracting in a transcript, where you can naturally pause to take in infor

by wzdd 3mo ago

It’s a nice engineering approach, but I’m interested in the motivation. Um and ah is distracting in a transcript, where you can naturally pause to take in information; in speech however it can serve as a focusing point to indicate the next part is important. See https://medium.com/better-humans/dont-worry-about-saying-um-effective-public-speaking-includes-filler-words-e56304416a90 https://medium.com/better-humans/dont-worry-about-saying-um-... for example. The weirdly obsessive zeal that orgs like Toastmasters have about eliminating them is weird. Disfluencies aren’t necessarily bad even if the word starts with “dis”!

amelius 3mo ago
As with all things ... Don't be opinionated and make it an option for the user.
- saulpw 3mo ago
  So are you saying that every podcast should ship two episodes, an "unedited" version and an "umless" version? That's not really viable.
CGMthrowaway 3mo ago
You are almost certainly listening to a lot of audio with um's and ah's removed from it, without even realizing it. Via various methods including automated, manual, direction (re-takes), and talent-led (speaker consciously suppressing). If you knew how much, you might not feel the same way.
siriaan 3mo ago
Occasional ums and ahs are fine but when every other phrase starts with a long aaaaah it can be pretty unpleasant to listen to.
- sans_souse 3mo ago
  So, if this project's source Audio were Beavis and Butthead, you would be enthused?
- netsharc 3mo ago
  I saw a video where the speaker spoke his words quickly, but had long pauses every words. Luckily NewPipe has a "fast forward during silence option". Looking at it again he'd pause, probably trying to find the next word, doesn't find it, and goes "aaaah". So watching at >100% speed and with skip silences saved my sanity: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCO633KE7RA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCO633KE7RA
toast0 3mo ago
Having heard radio interviews with and without 'internal editing' to remove ums and ahs, most of the time I'd rather the edited version. It's more concise and focused, and I find it easier to comprehend. Too many ums and ahs and my mind wanders, and if it's radio, I can't go easily go back to try again. When I've listened to podcasts or audiobooks, I could never easily go back a little to try again either, and I gave up on them (even though I have some content I really want to listen to, it's too frustrating, so it's not happening). But I'm sure other people have different preferences. I also don't care for writing that could have been made a lot more concise. It's a lot of work to make things shorter, but I think it's worthwhile.
- venzaspa 3mo ago
  It just goes to show that people have very different views. I think when I hear people thinking out loud (ums and ahs) it's a marker that they are actually engaging with the question, thinking through an answer and not bullshitting without thinking.
  - td6 3mo ago
    I agree to you, when it's in person. I think what your describing is mostly the beginning of an answer. Just randoms "um" inbetween because your struggling to build sentences can get annoying both in person and online
    - doubled112 3mo ago
      "Ummm, I think I agree with this description" vs "I, think, umm, I agree with, umm, this description" The first one indicates something along the lines of "thinking, please stand by". The second one is a struggle.
    - inopinatus 3mo ago
      Just sit there in silence whilst you cogitate.
      - 3mo ago
mrob 3mo ago
>The weirdly obsessive zeal that orgs like Toastmasters have about eliminating them is weird. If you speak with disfluencies, you probably didn't sufficiently rehearse your speech. If you didn't rehearse enough, you probably didn't put much effort into writing it either, so why should I put much effort into listening? It's the same principle as AI slop.
- kaashif 3mo ago
  Not necessarily true, more rehearsal isn't the key to fluent oratory. Many people can speak off the cuff fluently and confidently, avoiding "like", "um", and other filler words. And even if you're not speaking fluently, leaving silences as punctuation is more effective, IMO. Many impressive speakers I've met actually cite Toastmasters! So their obsessive zeal actually does work. More rehearsal does work too sometimes, but it does sometimes lead to speeches "sounding too rehearsed".
  - cubefox 3mo ago
    > Many people can speak off the cuff fluently and confidently, avoiding "like", "um", and other filler words. I don't think that's true, we usually just don't notice filler words in the same way we are surprised that people usually don't even talk in whole sentences, in contrast to written text or movies (which also use written text).
    - deleted 3mo ago
      [deleted]
NooneAtAll3 3mo ago
> in speech however it can serve as a focusing point to indicate the next part is important it's... exact opposite? the main (attempted) use for ummms is to keep continuation of speech despite the pause. And the main complaint is exactly that it ruins the focus and doesn't give respite
- RobotToaster 3mo ago
  It can be a focusing point when someone wants to highlight the deliberate use of euphemism, removing those would be, um, unwise. Although that is probably the less common use.
  - latexr 3mo ago
    I think you’re both right. But you’re right regarding writing and your parent comment is right regarding speech.
bluebarbet 3mo ago
The most popular academic theory (IIRC) is that "um" and "uh" are conversational placeholders that say, "don't talk, I'm not finished speaking yet". Which obviously serves no purpose in a monologue. To me they just indicate lack of confidence on the part of the speaker.
- skrebbel 3mo ago
  There's a correlation between speaking with confidence and bullshitting / corner cutting. Hard, nuanced questions require more thinking time to produce a nuanced answer. But a bullshitter will just confidently answer subtly wrong stuff. But they won't say "uh"! Is that really better?
  - bluebarbet 3mo ago
    Sure, that figures. Much of this is surely subjective.
  - BobbyTables2 3mo ago
    The gifted ones seem to manage to intelligently babble for the beginning part while simultaneously forming the real answer.
goalieca 3mo ago
The younger generation seems to love listening at 1.2x or faster. I think it’s a preference for a fast information dopamine hit. I may argue it’s even a shallow approach that prefers against pausing and time for careful reflection. Meanwhile, book reading is at an all time low seemingly because no one has a preference or patience for careful study and reflection.
- ralferoo 3mo ago
  I'm not in the younger generation, but I listen to most of youtube (apart from songs and comedy) at 2x speed, and wish it could be even faster most of the time (that's a feature of premium, but I'm not paying for that). The problem is that people are producing longer videos because that earns them more advertising revenue. Many creators now speak so mind-numbingly slowly, that even at 2x speed it feels like it's about a normal presentation speed. In almost all cases, even at 2x speed, it would be quicker to just read a transcript (if that was available). The problem is really that people are incentivised to make everything into at least a 10 minute youtube video, when a short blog post that could have taken only a minute to read would have been sufficient to convey all the same information, and probably more useful as you could easily refer back to specific sections if you wanted.
  - yummybrainz 3mo ago
    FYI NewPipe allows up to 4x playback; PipePipe up to 10x! And both block ads, while PipePipe also integrates Sponsorblock.
  - t0bia_s 3mo ago
    It's medium used in wrong way. If you want getting information efficiently, read carefully writen text. If you want immersive story, watch feature film. If you want dialogue, use audio. Instead we use audio for info, text for stories and video for dialogues.
- landl0rd 3mo ago
  Podcasts and other media to which people often listen at faster speeds aren't produced with the professional fluency of a news broadcast from the fifties. The bitrate of information is relatively low. Of course many speed them up. The democratization of media created a lot of folks who've no idea how to disseminate information in a structured format and at an optimal rate.
bongoman42 3mo ago
A part of saying something like um is to continue your speech and prevent the other person or someone else in the group from interjecting.
BobbyTables2 3mo ago
An occasional “um” is one thing. But utterly exhausting when every response in an interview starts with it…

by wzdd 3mo ago

amelius 3mo ago

As with all things ... Don't be opinionated and make it an option for the user.

saulpw 3mo ago
So are you saying that every podcast should ship two episodes, an "unedited" version and an "umless" version? That's not really viable.

CGMthrowaway 3mo ago

You are almost certainly listening to a lot of audio with um's and ah's removed from it, without even realizing it. Via various methods including automated, manual, direction (re-takes), and talent-led (speaker consciously suppressing). If you knew how much, you might not feel the same way.

siriaan 3mo ago

Occasional ums and ahs are fine but when every other phrase starts with a long aaaaah it can be pretty unpleasant to listen to.

sans_souse 3mo ago
So, if this project's source Audio were Beavis and Butthead, you would be enthused?
netsharc 3mo ago
I saw a video where the speaker spoke his words quickly, but had long pauses every words. Luckily NewPipe has a "fast forward during silence option". Looking at it again he'd pause, probably trying to find the next word, doesn't find it, and goes "aaaah". So watching at >100% speed and with skip silences saved my sanity: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCO633KE7RA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCO633KE7RA

toast0 3mo ago

Having heard radio interviews with and without 'internal editing' to remove ums and ahs, most of the time I'd rather the edited version. It's more concise and focused, and I find it easier to comprehend. Too many ums and ahs and my mind wanders, and if it's radio, I can't go easily go back to try again. When I've listened to podcasts or audiobooks, I could never easily go back a little to try again either, and I gave up on them (even though I have some content I really want to listen to, it's too frustrating, so it's not happening). But I'm sure other people have different preferences. I also don't care for writing that could have been made a lot more concise. It's a lot of work to make things shorter, but I think it's worthwhile.

venzaspa 3mo ago
It just goes to show that people have very different views. I think when I hear people thinking out loud (ums and ahs) it's a marker that they are actually engaging with the question, thinking through an answer and not bullshitting without thinking.
- td6 3mo ago
  I agree to you, when it's in person. I think what your describing is mostly the beginning of an answer. Just randoms "um" inbetween because your struggling to build sentences can get annoying both in person and online
  - doubled112 3mo ago
    "Ummm, I think I agree with this description" vs "I, think, umm, I agree with, umm, this description" The first one indicates something along the lines of "thinking, please stand by". The second one is a struggle.
  - inopinatus 3mo ago
    Just sit there in silence whilst you cogitate.
    - 3mo ago

mrob 3mo ago

>The weirdly obsessive zeal that orgs like Toastmasters have about eliminating them is weird. If you speak with disfluencies, you probably didn't sufficiently rehearse your speech. If you didn't rehearse enough, you probably didn't put much effort into writing it either, so why should I put much effort into listening? It's the same principle as AI slop.

kaashif 3mo ago
Not necessarily true, more rehearsal isn't the key to fluent oratory. Many people can speak off the cuff fluently and confidently, avoiding "like", "um", and other filler words. And even if you're not speaking fluently, leaving silences as punctuation is more effective, IMO. Many impressive speakers I've met actually cite Toastmasters! So their obsessive zeal actually does work. More rehearsal does work too sometimes, but it does sometimes lead to speeches "sounding too rehearsed".
- cubefox 3mo ago
  > Many people can speak off the cuff fluently and confidently, avoiding "like", "um", and other filler words. I don't think that's true, we usually just don't notice filler words in the same way we are surprised that people usually don't even talk in whole sentences, in contrast to written text or movies (which also use written text).
  - deleted 3mo ago
    [deleted]

NooneAtAll3 3mo ago

> in speech however it can serve as a focusing point to indicate the next part is important it's... exact opposite? the main (attempted) use for ummms is to keep continuation of speech despite the pause. And the main complaint is exactly that it ruins the focus and doesn't give respite

RobotToaster 3mo ago
It can be a focusing point when someone wants to highlight the deliberate use of euphemism, removing those would be, um, unwise. Although that is probably the less common use.
- latexr 3mo ago
  I think you’re both right. But you’re right regarding writing and your parent comment is right regarding speech.

bluebarbet 3mo ago

The most popular academic theory (IIRC) is that "um" and "uh" are conversational placeholders that say, "don't talk, I'm not finished speaking yet". Which obviously serves no purpose in a monologue. To me they just indicate lack of confidence on the part of the speaker.

skrebbel 3mo ago
There's a correlation between speaking with confidence and bullshitting / corner cutting. Hard, nuanced questions require more thinking time to produce a nuanced answer. But a bullshitter will just confidently answer subtly wrong stuff. But they won't say "uh"! Is that really better?
- bluebarbet 3mo ago
  Sure, that figures. Much of this is surely subjective.
- BobbyTables2 3mo ago
  The gifted ones seem to manage to intelligently babble for the beginning part while simultaneously forming the real answer.

goalieca 3mo ago

The younger generation seems to love listening at 1.2x or faster. I think it’s a preference for a fast information dopamine hit. I may argue it’s even a shallow approach that prefers against pausing and time for careful reflection. Meanwhile, book reading is at an all time low seemingly because no one has a preference or patience for careful study and reflection.

ralferoo 3mo ago
I'm not in the younger generation, but I listen to most of youtube (apart from songs and comedy) at 2x speed, and wish it could be even faster most of the time (that's a feature of premium, but I'm not paying for that). The problem is that people are producing longer videos because that earns them more advertising revenue. Many creators now speak so mind-numbingly slowly, that even at 2x speed it feels like it's about a normal presentation speed. In almost all cases, even at 2x speed, it would be quicker to just read a transcript (if that was available). The problem is really that people are incentivised to make everything into at least a 10 minute youtube video, when a short blog post that could have taken only a minute to read would have been sufficient to convey all the same information, and probably more useful as you could easily refer back to specific sections if you wanted.
- yummybrainz 3mo ago
  FYI NewPipe allows up to 4x playback; PipePipe up to 10x! And both block ads, while PipePipe also integrates Sponsorblock.
- t0bia_s 3mo ago
  It's medium used in wrong way. If you want getting information efficiently, read carefully writen text. If you want immersive story, watch feature film. If you want dialogue, use audio. Instead we use audio for info, text for stories and video for dialogues.
landl0rd 3mo ago
Podcasts and other media to which people often listen at faster speeds aren't produced with the professional fluency of a news broadcast from the fifties. The bitrate of information is relatively low. Of course many speed them up. The democratization of media created a lot of folks who've no idea how to disseminate information in a structured format and at an optimal rate.

bongoman42 3mo ago

A part of saying something like um is to continue your speech and prevent the other person or someone else in the group from interjecting.

BobbyTables2 3mo ago

An occasional “um” is one thing. But utterly exhausting when every response in an interview starts with it…