Re: RE using AI minutes

RE "it is much more complicated than it first appears": I agree.

RE "it would be wonderful for the scribes" to be replaced by AI: I disagree 
heavily.

A couple of your notes mention having a human reviewer or shadow-scribe to an 
AI scribe. This makes the human scribe's task _harder_, not easier. Now the 
human needs to constantly scrutinize the text output of the AI and be able to 
correct the past, while simultaneously keeping up with the present verbal 
conversation - and hopefully still have the capacity to participate if they 
have anything to add.

I consider myself decent at transcribing but recognize that multitasking while 
scribing is challenging, and I would absolutely rather do the work myself than 
constantly be tracking past, present, and future in both written and spoken 
word at the same time.

--Ken

On Tuesday, March 11, 2025 2:26:04 AM EDT Gregg Vanderheiden RTF wrote:
> The topic of AI came up in F2F
> 
> to keep from using up too much time there here are some thoughts on ideas
> 
> 
> 1)  A good way to handle foreign language speaker not being as well 
recognized
> - use AI to transcribe
>  - have “backup” scribe that only steps in when recognizer faile
> 
> 2) for Off minute comments you can turn off the mike to the AI transcriber off
>  (see note below - where we need a special AI tool not just the one in zoom 
-
> for a number of reasons.
> 
> 3)  If we use AI summaries -we NEED to implement it in a fashion that 
provides
> a method for “in meeting” instant correction of mistakes.  In fact we need
> that for the human done minutes which also often misunderstand and sometimes
> scribe exactly the opposite of what the speaker said
> 
> 
> 4) Remember the distinction between transcript and minutes
> AI can do both but tends to do the summaries only after a meeting.  This is
> too late for someone to notice that the summary is not complete - is
> inaccurate - misinterpreted - or is opposite of what was said Suggestion
> Need a special tool to change the transcript into summaries on a per 
commenter
> basis - like a scribe does that summarization would go into the IRC
> BETTER though would be for these summarizations (minutes) to appear in a
> separate document that is group correctable so that the commenter can 
correct
> the AI summary. per #3 above
> 
> 5) Speaker ID
> This is often cited as an AI shortcoming.  But it is just as much a problem 
in
> human minutes. our best solution to this for both is using queue  and having
> chairs announce each new speaker (as they do) Sometimes things get into a
> back and forth between two people
> Best solution is for each person to say their name before the speak each 
time
> ALSO
> If we have a human  “shadow scriber” that is just monitoring the AI - they
> could add speaker names where the AI does not.
> 
> 6) for hybrid meetings - I  suggest we purchase more microphones so there is
> no-one
> 
> 
> IF WE WERE TO USE AI  — given all the above and the comments I  think we
> should build (or find) one that does what we need. When you think about it -
> it is much more complicated than it first appears  to replace or even augment
> the human scribe.   But it would be wonderful for the scribes once you do.
> 
> Gregg

Received on Tuesday, 11 March 2025 11:48:41 UTC