One item I remember was that I said "Dr Kemeny" in relation to Dartmouth College (he was a famous mathematician, invented the BASIC programming language and was president of the college). It replaced those instances with "Jack Kennedy".
In another instance, I said that "Evidently, you have a reading comprehension problem.". It replaced it with "Evidently, I have a ...", completely reversing the meaning.
There was zero problems with the microphones or audio, and it was not rushed or mumbled talk. There were 80+ other examples over a few hours of talking, and some from other speakers. And those were just the obvious ones I could catch.
Another massive problem with this technology is that a human stenographer can notice when s/he missed something and didn't hear and ask the speaker to repeat or clarify what was said, and will often during a pause request clarification on spelling of names, addresses, etc. In contrast, this "AI" technology just barges ahead ASSuming that it knows what it is doing and inserts literally whatever sounds good in the transcript, completely silent that it doesn't have a clue.
Having seen this up close, I'm of the strong opinion that anyone foisting this software on the market without huge warnings that this is not usable for any critical functions is, basically a fraud. They know or certainly should know that these failures not only exist but are common and systemic, yet they barge along like it is OK. It is not.
One item I remember was that I said "Dr Kemeny" in relation to Dartmouth College (he was a famous mathematician, invented the BASIC programming language and was president of the college). It replaced those instances with "Jack Kennedy".
In another instance, I said that "Evidently, you have a reading comprehension problem.". It replaced it with "Evidently, I have a ...", completely reversing the meaning.
There was zero problems with the microphones or audio, and it was not rushed or mumbled talk. There were 80+ other examples over a few hours of talking, and some from other speakers. And those were just the obvious ones I could catch.
Another massive problem with this technology is that a human stenographer can notice when s/he missed something and didn't hear and ask the speaker to repeat or clarify what was said, and will often during a pause request clarification on spelling of names, addresses, etc. In contrast, this "AI" technology just barges ahead ASSuming that it knows what it is doing and inserts literally whatever sounds good in the transcript, completely silent that it doesn't have a clue.
Having seen this up close, I'm of the strong opinion that anyone foisting this software on the market without huge warnings that this is not usable for any critical functions is, basically a fraud. They know or certainly should know that these failures not only exist but are common and systemic, yet they barge along like it is OK. It is not.