So it sounds like there's a lot of opportunity for the Court Reporter to mishear something and repeated whereby making the record inaccurate. Reminds of the game of Telephone and how easily it is to misunderstand a word said , granted at a whisper volume.
Why can't the speech recognition come from the original recording? Seems much easier to do that and go back later to clean up problem words than to re-speak the whole thing.
I guess the main purpose of system like that is making sure the recording is loud and clear. In more modern solutions the mask is hooked up to a computer running special voice recognition software rather than to a recorder. Because the software is fine tuned to the voice of the court reporter, it's much less prone to errors than normal voice recognition programs.
This guy should go back to the Stone Age. Nobody types their own transcripts in this day and age. Stenotype and realtime transcription are what lawyers demand.
Steno reporters do NOT make something up for medical/technical words! We write it phonetically. This goober sounds like he’s making a case for digital reporting, which is absurd.
You're misrepresenting the statement. some words (particularly foreign or complex phrases you may not have heard) will require you to assign phonetics to the word on the spot. He's saying since he is repeating what he heard it's easier for him since he has more leisure later to ensure the correct phonetics in the official documents.
So all those times when I was a kid repeating what everyone said just to annoy them was really great training to be a court reporter.
Haha I like this guy!
Love how he recounts being shy/scared at first and inevitably moving on to *HON I CAN'T HEAR YOU SPEAK UP* 😂
Lol 😂 yes that part
So it sounds like there's a lot of opportunity for the Court Reporter to mishear something and repeated whereby making the record inaccurate. Reminds of the game of Telephone and how easily it is to misunderstand a word said , granted at a whisper volume.
Why can't the speech recognition come from the original recording? Seems much easier to do that and go back later to clean up problem words than to re-speak the whole thing.
I guess the main purpose of system like that is making sure the recording is loud and clear. In more modern solutions the mask is hooked up to a computer running special voice recognition software rather than to a recorder. Because the software is fine tuned to the voice of the court reporter, it's much less prone to errors than normal voice recognition programs.
Speech software struggles to distinguish multiple people at once with different accents or dialects
Because it creates jobs and keeps the court fees high.
This technology has been around a lot longer than speech recognition technology which is still lacking
Or if you are manually transcribing- just take it from the video record
Semi retired means hes just mailing it in
Very nice
This guy should go back to the Stone Age. Nobody types their own transcripts in this day and age. Stenotype and realtime transcription are what lawyers demand.
@@paulwilliams5339 And that was necessary to say, Paul Williams. People.
@@paulwilliams533912,000+ Court Reporters. "Nobody?"
How in the world can you listen and talk at the same time, this sounds rather inaccurate.
proper training probably
Steno reporters do NOT make something up for medical/technical words! We write it phonetically. This goober sounds like he’s making a case for digital reporting, which is absurd.
He doesn't mention anything about digital reporting in this video.
You're misrepresenting the statement. some words (particularly foreign or complex phrases you may not have heard) will require you to assign phonetics to the word on the spot. He's saying since he is repeating what he heard it's easier for him since he has more leisure later to ensure the correct phonetics in the official documents.
Ikr?
He said a "foreign" word. He's also souther.
He's talking about VOICE WRITING, not digital reporting. If you still don't get the difference, shame on you.