4 ms·

A bit sad that this interesting content is not available for audio/video impaired readers.

slver 5y ago
Or patience impaired. It's a whole hour.
jasode 5y ago
Fyi if you weren't aware ... most podcasts don't have text of the audio because high-quality (accurate) transcription of podcasts costs money. Example rates: https://www.google.com/search?q=podcast+transcription+service+prices https://www.google.com/search?q=podcast+transcription+servic... So this thread's podcast of 52 minutes of a complex technical topic with multiple speakers could cost ~$200. A programming-related podcast is already a niche topic with a tiny audience and an Array Languages podcast is an even tinier subset of that so the cost might not be justified. I suppose podcasts could be uploaded to Youtube and let their speech-to-text algorithm do an auto-transcribe. However, the A.I. algorithm is not good at tech topics with industry jargon/acronyms and the resultant transcription will be inaccurate.
- kwhitefoot 5y ago
  Presumably there was a script or at least a summary. Why not publish that as well as any slides used?
  - bidirectional 5y ago
    Why would there be? It's a recorded conversation between a group of people. Some of them may have some rough notes but maybe not even that.
  - abrudz 5y ago
    There was no script or summary, nor any slides. It was a completely organic conversation.
- anchpop 5y ago
  I make transcripts of all my work using Descript. It uses Google's speech-to-text algo (same as the one in youtube presumably) and gives you a transcript you can then edit. It costs $15/month I believe, and you have to spend some time editing the transcript that realistically won't be read by many, but it works pretty well ime (no affiliation besides being a happy customer)
  - dave84 5y ago
    Thanks for bringing Descript to my attention. Do you use any of the production aspects of it?
    - anchpop 5y ago
      Yeah, it works really well, it's basically completely replaced what I used to use Audacity and Premiere for.
  - abnercoimbre 5y ago
    Right. A high-quality podcast is already lots of pre- and post-production work on just the audio. I use Rev which hires captioners on my behalf [0] but it's also expensive. I use it sparingly. [0] https://www.rev.com/ https://www.rev.com/
tfsh 5y ago
Chrome now provides on-device powered live captions (which hooks into any chrome originating audio) - chrome://settings/accessibility -> toggle "Live Captions"[1] which could help alleviate some of the limitations for audio impaired viewers 1: https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/10538231?hl=en https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/10538231?hl=en
- enriquto 5y ago
  > on-device powered live captions I hate this. What were they thinking about? Why not a damn text file that people can grep?
  - uryga 5y ago
    probably because that's a very niche usecase and most people just want some video captions :) (don't get me wrong, what you describe would be cool and useful! but i can't imagine a lot of people would use it)
- jasode 5y ago
  >Chrome now provides on-device powered live captions [...] which could help alleviate some of the limitations for audio impaired viewers That's a great feature! But it also highlights the limited accuracy of the AI machine learning algorithm for technical topics with jargon. E.g., at 27m00s, the caption algorithm incorrectly transcribes it as as "APL is joked about as a right only language" -- but we know the speaker actually said, "APL is joked about as a write-only language". And the algorithm incorrectly transcribes "oversonian languages" when it's actually "Iversonian languages". The algorithm also doesn't differentiate multiple speakers and the generated text is just continuously concatenated even as the voices change. Therefore, an audio-impaired wouldn't know which person said a particular string of words. This is why podcasters still have to pay humans (sometimes with domain knowledge) to carefully listen to the audio and accurately transcribe it.
  - geocar 5y ago
    I know the joke is that APL is a write-only language, but it somehow seems more true to say it is a right-only language. I am nonplussed about AI/ML in general but this accidental wisdom is worth meditating on even if it didn't come from a human.
rak1507 5y ago
I have just finished transcribing it (quite roughly) https://gist.github.com/rak1507/3aec8c0b720e6d8a9ef121fc14e44e84#file-arraycast-transcript-txt https://gist.github.com/rak1507/3aec8c0b720e6d8a9ef121fc14e4...
- enriquto 5y ago
  wow! much appreciated, many thanks!
  - rak1507 5y ago
    No problem

Or patience impaired. It's a whole hour.

Fyi if you weren't aware ... most podcasts don't have text of the audio because high-quality (accurate) transcription of podcasts costs money. Example rates: https://www.google.com/search?q=podcast+transcription+service+prices https://www.google.com/search?q=podcast+transcription+servic... So this thread's podcast of 52 minutes of a complex technical topic with multiple speakers could cost ~$200. A programming-related podcast is already a niche topic with a tiny audience and an Array Languages podcast is an even tinier subset of that so the cost might not be justified. I suppose podcasts could be uploaded to Youtube and let their speech-to-text algorithm do an auto-transcribe. However, the A.I. algorithm is not good at tech topics with industry jargon/acronyms and the resultant transcription will be inaccurate.

kwhitefoot 5y ago
Presumably there was a script or at least a summary. Why not publish that as well as any slides used?
- bidirectional 5y ago
  Why would there be? It's a recorded conversation between a group of people. Some of them may have some rough notes but maybe not even that.
- abrudz 5y ago
  There was no script or summary, nor any slides. It was a completely organic conversation.
anchpop 5y ago
I make transcripts of all my work using Descript. It uses Google's speech-to-text algo (same as the one in youtube presumably) and gives you a transcript you can then edit. It costs $15/month I believe, and you have to spend some time editing the transcript that realistically won't be read by many, but it works pretty well ime (no affiliation besides being a happy customer)
- dave84 5y ago
  Thanks for bringing Descript to my attention. Do you use any of the production aspects of it?
  - anchpop 5y ago
    Yeah, it works really well, it's basically completely replaced what I used to use Audacity and Premiere for.
- abnercoimbre 5y ago
  Right. A high-quality podcast is already lots of pre- and post-production work on just the audio. I use Rev which hires captioners on my behalf [0] but it's also expensive. I use it sparingly. [0] https://www.rev.com/ https://www.rev.com/

tfsh 5y ago

Chrome now provides on-device powered live captions (which hooks into any chrome originating audio) - chrome://settings/accessibility -> toggle "Live Captions"[1] which could help alleviate some of the limitations for audio impaired viewers 1: https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/10538231?hl=en https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/10538231?hl=en

enriquto 5y ago
> on-device powered live captions I hate this. What were they thinking about? Why not a damn text file that people can grep?
- uryga 5y ago
  probably because that's a very niche usecase and most people just want some video captions :) (don't get me wrong, what you describe would be cool and useful! but i can't imagine a lot of people would use it)
jasode 5y ago
>Chrome now provides on-device powered live captions [...] which could help alleviate some of the limitations for audio impaired viewers That's a great feature! But it also highlights the limited accuracy of the AI machine learning algorithm for technical topics with jargon. E.g., at 27m00s, the caption algorithm incorrectly transcribes it as as "APL is joked about as a right only language" -- but we know the speaker actually said, "APL is joked about as a write-only language". And the algorithm incorrectly transcribes "oversonian languages" when it's actually "Iversonian languages". The algorithm also doesn't differentiate multiple speakers and the generated text is just continuously concatenated even as the voices change. Therefore, an audio-impaired wouldn't know which person said a particular string of words. This is why podcasters still have to pay humans (sometimes with domain knowledge) to carefully listen to the audio and accurately transcribe it.
- geocar 5y ago
  I know the joke is that APL is a write-only language, but it somehow seems more true to say it is a right-only language. I am nonplussed about AI/ML in general but this accidental wisdom is worth meditating on even if it didn't come from a human.

rak1507 5y ago

I have just finished transcribing it (quite roughly) https://gist.github.com/rak1507/3aec8c0b720e6d8a9ef121fc14e44e84#file-arraycast-transcript-txt https://gist.github.com/rak1507/3aec8c0b720e6d8a9ef121fc14e4...

enriquto 5y ago
wow! much appreciated, many thanks!
- rak1507 5y ago
  No problem