To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I'm an OS News regular. Your podcasts may be spectacular but I wouldn't know because I won't waste my time listening instead of reading. Reading is faster and enables skimming which you can't do with audio.
Ergo I don't get why anyone would prefer audio to text (except as an alternative) so popularity of podcasts is beyond my understanding.
do you know of any tool that can produce text from audio feed? .. I think it is asking a bit too much to ask for somebody to listen to audio and then manually typing all words in the audio and proof reading it later on.
Most podcasts are usually given with timelines and you can skip only to sections you are interest in and they usually come with a summary so its easy to know if the podcast will interest you or not.
Then there's the browser back button, isn't there?
.
Since I've studied conversation analysis in great detail at university (as in, in VERY great detail), I know what an absolute horror transcribing is. In case you're wondering what it's like, let me paint a picture for you.
You've found the girl or boy (or both, I'm Dutch) of your dreams. On your romantic getaway to Praha, you're strolling along the Vltava (the Moldau for the language-impaired), and you have it all planned out.
The ring is burning a hole in your pocket, and with the moon shining bright, stars dancing in the night's sky, your hand slightly shaking, you go down on one knee. You take the ring out, and you pop the question. Her eyes well up, and visibly trembling, she says yes.
*Just as you're about to get up, she gets hit by Britney Spears' tour bus, gets hurled to a lampost, and dies, her dead, shattered body curled around it. Right at that moment, your phone rings, you pick up, and it's the police telling you your entire family died in a horrible car crash in South Carolina - he tells you they had a slow, agonising death by petrol fire.*
Transcribing is experiencing that section between asterisks over and over and over and over and over and over, while a huge smelly Russian guy is prodding you in your left ear with an uncooked hotdog sausage every ten seconds.
But hey, feel free to provide a transcription. We'd totally appreciate it.
Thom, I'd +10 that if I could. Having done transcription myself I agree with you how horrible it is. Well, actually, I don't think you painted a horrible enough picture, let me add:
*After the call about the fire, you are picked up by the local Mafia to whom you owe gambling debts. They take you somewhere dark and pull out a pair of pruning sheers, proceeding to cut something off for every grand you owe them. As it happens, you owe them $21,000...
There. Now the picture is horrible enough. 
I've always had good luck with speech recognition, the problem for controlling a computer has always been speed of input.
Worst case scenario, I'll end up benchmarking open source speech recognition programs with charts with little indicators labelled "Bad", "Horrible", "Tax Fraud", "Felony", "Crime against Humanity (execution pending)","Deceased (executed during testing)", "Ashes scattered to prevent zombification".
Unless they script their podcasts, that would require a ridiculous amount of effort. Unless someone who works on the site is a professional stenographer, transcribing each podcast would probably take around 6-8 hours (for someone who can type 80-90 WPM).
What I like about the podcasts is that you can listen to them while doing something else, and still get the gist of what was discussed. It's kinda hard to read while you're washing dishes.





Member since:
2009-10-12
In spirit of Audio for Everyone, would you pretty please provide plaintext as alternative format for me?
I'm an OS News regular. Your podcasts may be spectacular but I wouldn't know because I won't waste my time listening instead of reading. Reading is faster and enables skimming which you can't do with audio.
Ergo I don't get why anyone would prefer audio to text (except as an alternative) so popularity of podcasts is beyond my understanding.