Transcript from Multi Voice Recognition to be used as Evidence
The challenge for Frank Levin's attorney in this case is to make a multi voice recognition transcript valid as proof of evidence in itself, since the conversation was not recorded. Frank had his voice recognition software in "text mode only" on his cell phone, so during the conversation no talk was saved; only a text file was created. The case is assumed to mainly be about the reliance in this technology which in the long run could benefit the development of voice recognition software.
Multi voice recognition has become widely popular for the last years, especially within the business world, since it allows all meetings to be recorded and transcripted simultaneously, with every quote related to the correct person. When the meeting is over, everyone gets a transcript of the meeting, easily searchable for the correct information. More and more people are also creating official "talklogs" where they record everything they say and publish it as diaries.
Argument: Voice recognition software has developed from demanding hours of the person to use it to create a profile for the software to recognize a voice and put it in text while speaking, to just a few minutes. In 2010 there will be software that can generate text without making a personal profile first. This opens up the possibility for multi voice recognition simultaneously to be used at meetings etc. to create a transcript while talking.
Questions: In what other ways can more advanced voice recognition be used? If voice recognition software will be used to record speech in a cell phone with an instant transcript, basically any conversation can be available in text. Will there be a practical need for that? Will "talklogs" become readable reality shows?