Even if they did use '+', that should still definitely be allowed. I immediately get turned off when a service actively disallows a '+' because then I start to wonder why they don't want me to be able to filter their messages in my inbox.
It's the only sane and easy (but obviously not bullet-proof) way of catching spammers out.
Nope. Just letters and numbers. Same with my password.
I tried with my Gmail address and it worked fine. That address has no numbers in it. I used the same password. If you aren't prohibiting Hotmail addresses then it must be the numbers in the email address that are triggering some validation.
Regardless, I have access now. Looking forward to trying your product!
Don't reveal your powerlevel in HN, dude. Now you've not only reduced the search space for your Hotmail password, yoy've clued an attacker in that that's also your Gmail password!
I use Pass [0] to generate unique/random passwords for each site I sign into, I don't use the same password for all sites. I was just describing what I used for this instance (only characters and numbers), not what I do every time. I appreciate your concern though!
This technology didn't work out for me. After spending time and effort in providing what it needs, the results I got back in return, were terrible for the time invested. In any case, good to see such attempt at evolving what is potentially possible in the future.
Yes! This is what our lawyers suggested to protect ourselves.
We delete all the recordings when you click delete, so we can't recreate the voice anymore. However, this is still necessary in case we share some generated sentences in social media or so (like we're doing on twitter now).
> However, this is still necessary in case we share some generated sentences in social media or so (like we're doing on twitter now).
This is something that you should only do with the permission of the user who provided the voice. You don't need generalized permission to do that for every user, and given the nature of the technology, you shouldn't ask for such permission.
> This is what our lawyers suggested to protect ourselves.
Generally speaking, a lawyer's advice is going to be optimized for maximum protection in possibly unforeseeable circumstances, not for what might actually be needed or even reasonable to request of every user.
Generally speaking, companies aren't going to go out of their way to rein in their lawyer. Most people won't even read that fine print, unfortunately.
Hi! Thanks for testing it! For many voices it works well with only 30 recordings. For some, you need a bit more. It seems that quality of the audio (no background noise, clear and loud voice, lots of intonation) is what matters the most.
It's important to make people realize that this technology is here. It's impossible to stop the technological advances but at least we can reduce their impact by making it well known.
