There are other open source models that produce very good quality:
F5-TTS
FishTTS (they changed their license to make money)
I also did some experiments with CoquiTTS, but FishTTS was the most promising in german language samples.
Along with X-Whisper it is possible to use epubs along with narrated audio files to train your favorite narrator's voice instead of only using inference or generated voices. The output quality is really good, however, these cannot be released to the public :-) I'm especially targeting book series with many parts where the publisher has switched narrators or fully stopped releasing later parts.
Audible has also started releasing some of their more underdog books with an ElevenLabs narration in different languages. The AI is still noticable but the quality is pretty impressive.
So, could anyone sum up the "Am I owned" part of the problem to check which measures to take?
AFAIK I'm pretty likely owned if all of this is true:
- The following line shows at least one affected package:
echo "Affected Packages Found:"; comm -12 <(pacman -Qqm | sort) <(curl -s https://cscs.pastes.sh/raw/aurvulnlist20260611.txt | sort) | { read -r l && printf '%s\n' "$l" || echo "None. No known compromised packages are installed."; }
- I updated AUR in the last 24 hours
If I did not update AUR, in the last 2 days, it should be ok (at least for this specific problem).
If I don't see affected packages from the line above, it is probably ok, but maybe there are malicious packages that are not listed and yet I'm still be owned, so I have to be careful.
Is that correct and if not, what did I get wrong? And are there any checks that I can perform, that proof the status of the system?
Nothing is necessary if you didn't update AUR packages over the last 2 days. If you wait a day further, the maintainers will cleanup these as well, after taht you can upgrade.
> Here in Germany you have to be careful when setting up a homemade radio signal - it might be illegal depending on frequency and transmit power.
In Germany and everywhere else. The difference is how much it's enforced.
Note that this project isn't using that horrible Raspberry Pi GPIO PWM hack that shits all over RF but an off-the-shelf low power car FM transmitter product. I guess if someone knocks on your door you can point your finger to whoever in Germany sold you that.
At least in the U.S., it's a complete non-issue for an output power that can easily cover the size of a wedding reception as long as you're not using a wide-band transceiver.
You'll want to be "kind" to the extant spectrum and do a responsible frequency sweep to select the "quietest band" prior to broadcasting. And you'll only want to broadcast during the event itself.
The FCC has better things to do than to try and track down an ephemeral milliwatt infringer.
It's the tragedy of the commons. It's a complete non-issue for the offender because it's very unlikely they will face any consequences and less of a non-issue for their neighbor who suddenly can only receive this guy's Spotify on every channel instead of the public broadcast they wanted to listen (maybe exaggerating a bit, depending on the FM transmitter gizmo used, but maybe now it's all buried in noise when it was clear previously). Even the "size of a wedding reception" can cover several homes in a dense apartment block.
But don't underestimate the stubbornness and time some people can dedicate to complaining to authorities. You might have a neighbor that will send letters about how they have to pay mandatory monthly bills for the national public broadcast they now can't listen to. They will complain and complain enough that eventually the broadcaster will send someone over with a spectrum analyzer and then the ball starts rolling. There have been court cases over stuff like that in this corner of Europe.
But I agree, you can argue those offenders went out of their way to cause trouble. In the cases I read people kept doing stupid things even after several warnings and apparently only got their lesson only when dragged into court.
Yes, if you are careless it is possible for you to inconvenience your neighbours, you might even place them in actual danger if you mess with the right frequencies.
Don’t mess with radios if you’re not going to be mindful of your surroundings. But hey, we let people drive cars, those are vastly more dangerous.
While I somehow like the fact that Microsoft is trying to compete, their problem stays the same: There are too many people involved.
- Nvidia
- Mediatek
- Microsoft
- Windows team
- Surface team
- Marketing team
- ...
The main advantage of Apple is and will be, that they control the hardware AND the software / firmware completely and can make devices that feel completely cohesive.
That's the reason Framework has an advantage over all these Ad driven companies. They are working together with the Linux / Kernel developers to make their products fit - however it is still lacking the completely cohesive nature of the product, because they still loosely depend on Intel / AMD and other Hardware manufacturers.
An example: Every Apple device with a headphone jack since 2013 (probably long before) including iPods, iPhones and MacBooks has that little proprietary chip with ultrasonic chirp authentication integrated to control playback and volume by the EarPods headphone remote. Now there is a USB-C to 3.5mm Adapter as well as USB-C EarPods that still support this... No Windows Laptop has ever had this. The funny thing is, that Linux now supports these USB-C Apple thingies because they register as input and output devices and that the Apple 3.5mm Adapters now also support other brands headphones with Android.
My guess is, that Apple did not invent this to prevent others from implementing it or have something proprietary, but just because the iPod Shuffle used the same connector for Headphones and USB (see page 8 in [1]), so they somehow had to ensure, what type of cable is connected to prevent damage to the iPod.
Another interesting fact:
The iPod classic 2009 does support some of the features (play/pause, next, previous), but lacks support for fast forward and rewind (click + hold, 2 clicks + hold).
Yeah, apple, they can be huge a-holes simply because they can. Your integration story is nice, but same company does this actively: If you have airpods pro (2nd gen in this case) that kept working fine with apple phone, but then you got tired/annoyed/disgusted by their OS and ecosystem and migrated to Samsung S24 (my wife' story), those plugs effectively stop working via bluetooth.
Disconnects, no good ANC, pairing is beyond miserable. Use them again with another iphone and they work fine. Now somebody could claim apple engineers are so incompetent they can't implement basic bluetooth connection that plugs from china for 10 bucks can do better but I have problem believing that.
So that tight integration you praise so much can be absolute curse for arrogant behavior that apple is definitely not stranger to. Open standards and competition forces companies to behave nicely and ie buy bluetooth plugs without worry if any source device will work with it, not some wishful thinking. Main reason I never owned apple device and most probably never will, just insulting behavior towards me as paying customer.
User error? I also have 2nd gen Airpod Pros and they work fine with my S24 Ultra. The only thing that doesn't work is automatic connecting, which is actually a feature I'd like to turn off.
Yeah, but I hear that bluetooth is a bad massive standard and there are multiple versions of bluetooth, so one bluetooth earpiece not working with a rival device is believable.
I'm done with Apple for years, probably forever. It is hard to look at the MacBook knowing it's the best hardware and still not buy it, but I chose Openness and right to repair and will buy a framework 13 pro as soon as I can afford it.
Your story is exactly the reason I'm not buying Apple any more. However, knowing that Google does prevent the headphones longpress / hold from being handled in any audio app at the OS level is not really better and I simply have to admit, Apple does some things really well.
That said, the problem stays the same: Microsoft trying to release a notebook that can compete with Apples much smaller and tightly integrated portfolio is probably prone to fail.
I'm still glad for every alternative out there. Although I don't believe that Intel + NVidia will have a much better integration than amd strix halo in the HP Zbook G1a
Not a phone, but I use my old first gen AirPods Pro with my Windows laptop for work just fine using Bluetooth. I haven’t had any problems at all with them.
One thing I did was completely remove them from my Apple account and factory reset them, so they didn’t try to join my iPhone or my personal laptop. Maybe try that to see if it helps with your issues?
I agree, that the Framework 12 is too expensive - especially in comparison to the MacBook Neo.
However, not everything can be a huge success. I think that the Framework 13 Pro shows that they are very capable in the premium segment and evolving as a company. I can't even imagine taking such a huge risk just to make a difference while still providing relatively small quantities (in comparison to the big players) of repairable devices... So in my opinion the money is not wasted. It's the price for being part of a change.
In times of AI Slop, privacy nightmares and ads everywhere, I'm saving money for the Framework 13 Pro with Linux freedom right now and can't wait to get my hands on it.
I'd say you could try to apply directly over company homepages. Find out about companies that you know existed for longer than 5 years, where you like the concept of what they are doing and look on there official homepages for a career section.
This is not strictly limited to your region, but I would start with companies you can at least call by phone for questions about the job listings.
This is cool, thanks for sharing. I recently compiled Rust / Slint on a LicheeRV Nano, which is RISC-V 64bit musl[1]. It's a little portable audio player I'm working on, the compile process is done via custom Cross docker image.
Currently I'm evaluating Battery Pal[2], because the TP4057 Module was not stable enough to power USB-C to 3.5mm Adapters reliably. So far it seems to work as expected.
Hmm, this thread and the reports of shady practices make me wonder if this will affect the partnership with GrapheneOS[1]. It seems that such things shouldn't really happen on a device where security is a top priority, whether intentional or not.
Why does it matter? The GrapheneOS team will make the OS images. So as long as the phone is unlockable, has up-to-date firmware bundles, etc. who cares?
GrapheneOS may be de-googled but it is not de-blobbed, they rely on the vendor to maintain certain drivers etc. Hopefully the driver maintenance team is very separate from the bloatware installation team, but someone could reasonably worry that they're tarred with the same brush.
I would guess that most of the driver development is done by Qualcomm for phones with Qualcomm SoCs. At least that is what I've seen looking at the firmware/driver bundles some Qualcomm-based phones.
(Of course, there is more, like camera firmware, etc. but they are typically provided through the hardware providers.)
I was just wondering that... GrapheneOS team consider Fairphone to be infosec plebs, but instead partner with a company that intentionally harms users' privacy for profit?
It may be worth noting that GrapheneOS in most cases to date are not the initiators for conversations around extra device support. They do not control which mobile divisions and engineering teams can come to them and back genuine interest with the resources needed to reach an acceptable privacy/security standard for support.
The question is really why are Motorola the only ones that have gone that extra mile so far and what does it say about the rest of the Android OEMs (including Fairphone, which unlike most is actually a younger project than GrapheneOS).
The issue with small players like Fairphone is that they rely on external ODMs to develop their hardware and basic software. They do get some IP rights but they actually lack the engineering manpower to actually maintain software. ODMs usually have special trade agreements with factories and Google to optimize the prices. Small companies cannot get such leverages.
You don't see how it doesn't make sense for Graphene to reject a company because it doesn't handle security according to their standards, but be OK with a company that is actively malicious?
They announced a partnership with Motorola. They are not just making an OS for their devices, they are partnering with them. There is a fundamental difference between taking a device and making an OS for it, and partnering with its manufacturer. The latter leads to the assumption that Graphene condones Motorola's security practices, and Motorola condones Graphene producing an OS for their devices. The former does not.
The details of the partnership are mostly disclosed in the joint announcements but GrapheneOS has no say or influence on Motorola's stock Android image and policy.
The main objective of the partnership is to do what you described in the former case, get Motorola up to a standard where GraphenOS could support the phone. They could not previously take a Motorola phone and build GrapheneOS for it because of numerous basic requirements they did not yet meet. I can guess that GrapheneOS only really condone the efforts Motorola will put in to meet their support requirements as a platform.
Motorola also gets to incorporate a subset of GrapheneOS's features and improvements as enterprise targeted Motorola features. GrapheneOS do not have any direct influence over the apps and policies for the stock GMS Android image Motorola ship with their phones. Motorola have no significant say in what GrapheneOS does with their OS. GrapheneOS can assist Motorola in hardening efforts at the OS and firmware layer etc.
The entire premise of GrapheneOS is total control of the device. There is no way they would release a Motorola phone with GrapheneOS installed, but with unremovable bloatware.
Along with X-Whisper it is possible to use epubs along with narrated audio files to train your favorite narrator's voice instead of only using inference or generated voices. The output quality is really good, however, these cannot be released to the public :-) I'm especially targeting book series with many parts where the publisher has switched narrators or fully stopped releasing later parts.
Audible has also started releasing some of their more underdog books with an ElevenLabs narration in different languages. The AI is still noticable but the quality is pretty impressive.
reply