24 Comments on Why do people learn how to type when stenography exists?
For some reason that reminds me of Morse code.
3
“Are these eggs fresh?”
Translates to, “Shumbagaensh, est, al ubbagu, estrogenehbleg, et chickenest, el unennegeneg.”
It’s kinda confusing.
4
why do people bother w/ stenography when you could just digitally record what people say?
if you have the conversation verbatim, why use someone’s interpretation?
6
my aunt ran one of those steno schools and constantly searched for males to train to accompany male judges on camp/hunting/etc working trips so wives wouldnt worry.
I coulda been a steno!!!
2
I have backwards K’s on my shit, and upside down S’s.
In Russian it’s always translated to, “It is Forbidden…”, or, “Are these eggs fresh?”
2
Outside of stenography, my father had a Russian print enlarger.
The print enlarger had Russian instructions translated to English… I ain’t seen so much FORBIDDEN shit in my life.
I mean fucking FORBIDDEN!
147 things were FORBIDDEN, but they never once told you how to operate the fucking thing.
2
That looks so easy to do.
(Puts gun in mouth, pulls trigger…)
3
Not anymore difficult than playing a piano. With your hands AND feet at the same time.
3
Good gig. Probably highest paid in the courtroom.
2
“Zed”? She didn’t sound British. Canuck?
2
So bored with these relatively attractive but conceited people looking for a gimmick or bait just to display themselves.
Let your typing skills speak for themselves, the only reason you show your faces because that’s what you really want people to see and don’t pretend it isn’t.
3
If the Germans had used Sterno machines instead of Enigma, they would have won the war.
3
Some expect technology to replace court reporters. However, audio recordings cannot be trusted to capture every piece of conversation – background noise, shuffling papers, inaudible mumbles, failed or turned off microphones are just some of the problem. A court report stops proceedings and asks for clarification. A recording device just keeps on rolling. Ultimately, a written transcript of the proceedings must be provided and real time steno continues to be the most reliable method. After a trial, if it is not in the record, it did not happen. In an important case, do you want to trust an audio recording transcription with potential gaps or errors? Or do you want an accurate record of proceedings and testimony should you file an appeal?
Many California courts have stopped using court reporters because of budget cuts. Lawyers, sometimes with both sides sharing the costs, are privately hiring court reports to provide an accurate, certified transcript of the proceedings.
Like playing a musical instrument, it takes years of practice to become a “real time” reporter and they are well paid. I believe stenographers are still the source of real-time closed captioning for television.
3
Had a girlfriend who used to do sign language for the courts. Didn’t do it on a daily basis but made damn good money when she did.
How does this translate Ebonics? Must be a challenge for court reporters…I finna tryna unnerstan into finna product.
“Shawanda” testified in Chauvin case and for the life of me I can’t imagine the court reporter captured eye rolls, grunts, mumbles and Ebonics all into a legible transcript.
I was a court reporter for many years and worked in the Atlanta area. It is a very difficult job and becomes harder to do as you get older. Sometimes you have to sit for hours writing, not getting bathroom breaks and getting dehydrated. I eventually couldn’t take the stupidity of the jurors and the senseless murders, as well as being physically worn out. But still, I was proud to be able to do it and produce a good transcript. I also realized the transcripts weren’t really being used to bring about any sort of justice, but were used by the attorneys to get criminals off on technicalities. Also, to answer the above question, we just translate Ebonics into English. I became very good at that. (And my friends and family enjoyed my renditions of the proceedings.)
4
Worked in a steno pool for NYS division of the budget. Rockefeller always wanted his letters typed up in blue ink. Who would have guessed a politician would be that picky. A long time ago, in a state fading out.
1
Modern annoyances:
1) Videos shot vertically! Horizontal, people!!!!
2) Adding “wings” to a vertically-shot video so the actual content is small even if you’re watching on a mobile device and rotate
2
why do we have qwerty when dvorak exists?
What would David Copperfield have done?
@ecp:
Despite claims to the contrary, Dvorak has not been proven to be more efficient than qwerty.
…I’m not really sure if the point of the transcript. When I was still new to jury duty and actually still believed it was about, you know, justice and rule of law, I wasn’t clear on the definition of the terms used in the law the case turned on, and being a visual person and a reader with bad hearing from way back, I wanted to be sure about what the defendant said in relationship to it and wanted to read it for myself. To that end, I asked for the foreman of the jury to see the bailiff for a legal definition that could have come out of Black’s Law Dictionary and a transcript of that testimony.
…oh, no, no, NO, silly young one! It ain’t THAT easy!
…the question had to be submitted, in writing, to the bailiff, who then gave it to the judge, who then called EVERYFRIGGINGBODY back into the courtroom, then We The Jury were filed back in, then the judge TOLD us orally what the law was…not what it SAID, what HE said it was…and had the reporter read back the testimony orally, in a nice, high, female voice that I had a 0.0% chance of actually being able to understand because of my high frequency hearing loss.
Nothing was provided, or WOULD be provided, in writing.
And I couldn’t ask for a re-read. I couldn’t speak at all. Da Rules forbade it.
…so back to the jury room we went, and one of the other jurors who took notes showed me what HE wrote, and it, along with my recall of the actual testimony which I COULD hear, was sufficient to reach a conclusion.
Not that it mattered what I thought anyway, since the jury foreman was a Black man and said he couldn’t understand why a White man wouldn’t be as totally comfortable as he was to get out of the car his driver was buying drugs in and go for a nice long walk out of this unfamiliar and obviously Black neighborhood.
So even then, everything was rayciiss from there.
I made a few more passes at trying to be a good citizen and all, but the whole thing was just stupid and officious and, as The-Mamomma says above, not even REMOTELY interested in the TRUTH. It was EXTRA stupid when they called me for a civil case, and I was just checked out by then, so I gave lackluster (but still truthful) answers at the Voir Dires to make the liars apprehensive about me being a juror when I seemed like I couldn’t even stay awake in the box, and prominently holding Les Miserables (I was reading Hugo at the time anyway, pre-Internet jury duty gave you LOTS of time to read while waiting to be called) to make the lawyers question my stance on crime and punishment. I even, very honestly, maybe TOO honestly, gave my opinion during the Voir Dire in a bus case that maybe I thought that SOME patients in my Squad were only there to set up a payday, so I pretty reliably got myself tossed from every case after that, and scolded by the Judge who was percepive about what I was doing on the last one, but let me go anyway.
And I’ve managed to not get called since. Always SOME medical thing going on in my family, darn it…
But the biggest takeaway I got from it is NEVER go in front of a jury. They will discuss your tone of voice, how you dressed, what your aura was, if you seemed like you were “too defensive” AS A DEFENDANT, your hair color, whether you seemed like you were mean or hateful or – of course- racist…everything and anything BUT the case, the facts, and the law.
And the whole process seems designed to not help the jurors AT ALL.
And this was DECADES ago, it’s gotten WAYYYY stupider since then, so I’m not really surprised at Seatlleoid jury outcomes.
I don’t know what the answer is, but I DO know what we have NOW doesn’t work.
It’s probably best we fall apart at this point, start over in smaller pieces with something new.
…that way, there’s at least a CHANCE that SOME of those pieces may be able to at least TRY to be just…
…because from what I’m seeing NOW…
…NO one is.
1
…might be interesting though if more of the stenographer were like THIS (at 0,25)…
For some reason that reminds me of Morse code.
“Are these eggs fresh?”
Translates to, “Shumbagaensh, est, al ubbagu, estrogenehbleg, et chickenest, el unennegeneg.”
It’s kinda confusing.
why do people bother w/ stenography when you could just digitally record what people say?
if you have the conversation verbatim, why use someone’s interpretation?
my aunt ran one of those steno schools and constantly searched for males to train to accompany male judges on camp/hunting/etc working trips so wives wouldnt worry.
I coulda been a steno!!!
I have backwards K’s on my shit, and upside down S’s.
In Russian it’s always translated to, “It is Forbidden…”, or, “Are these eggs fresh?”
Outside of stenography, my father had a Russian print enlarger.
The print enlarger had Russian instructions translated to English… I ain’t seen so much FORBIDDEN shit in my life.
I mean fucking FORBIDDEN!
147 things were FORBIDDEN, but they never once told you how to operate the fucking thing.
That looks so easy to do.
(Puts gun in mouth, pulls trigger…)
Not anymore difficult than playing a piano. With your hands AND feet at the same time.
Good gig. Probably highest paid in the courtroom.
“Zed”? She didn’t sound British. Canuck?
So bored with these relatively attractive but conceited people looking for a gimmick or bait just to display themselves.
Let your typing skills speak for themselves, the only reason you show your faces because that’s what you really want people to see and don’t pretend it isn’t.
If the Germans had used Sterno machines instead of Enigma, they would have won the war.
Some expect technology to replace court reporters. However, audio recordings cannot be trusted to capture every piece of conversation – background noise, shuffling papers, inaudible mumbles, failed or turned off microphones are just some of the problem. A court report stops proceedings and asks for clarification. A recording device just keeps on rolling. Ultimately, a written transcript of the proceedings must be provided and real time steno continues to be the most reliable method. After a trial, if it is not in the record, it did not happen. In an important case, do you want to trust an audio recording transcription with potential gaps or errors? Or do you want an accurate record of proceedings and testimony should you file an appeal?
Many California courts have stopped using court reporters because of budget cuts. Lawyers, sometimes with both sides sharing the costs, are privately hiring court reports to provide an accurate, certified transcript of the proceedings.
Like playing a musical instrument, it takes years of practice to become a “real time” reporter and they are well paid. I believe stenographers are still the source of real-time closed captioning for television.
Had a girlfriend who used to do sign language for the courts. Didn’t do it on a daily basis but made damn good money when she did.
How does this translate Ebonics? Must be a challenge for court reporters…I finna tryna unnerstan into finna product.
“Shawanda” testified in Chauvin case and for the life of me I can’t imagine the court reporter captured eye rolls, grunts, mumbles and Ebonics all into a legible transcript.
“Why I quit being a court reporter.”
https://youtu.be/ueNkmzyQniw?t=19
izlamo delenda est …
I was a court reporter for many years and worked in the Atlanta area. It is a very difficult job and becomes harder to do as you get older. Sometimes you have to sit for hours writing, not getting bathroom breaks and getting dehydrated. I eventually couldn’t take the stupidity of the jurors and the senseless murders, as well as being physically worn out. But still, I was proud to be able to do it and produce a good transcript. I also realized the transcripts weren’t really being used to bring about any sort of justice, but were used by the attorneys to get criminals off on technicalities. Also, to answer the above question, we just translate Ebonics into English. I became very good at that. (And my friends and family enjoyed my renditions of the proceedings.)
Worked in a steno pool for NYS division of the budget. Rockefeller always wanted his letters typed up in blue ink. Who would have guessed a politician would be that picky. A long time ago, in a state fading out.
Modern annoyances:
1) Videos shot vertically! Horizontal, people!!!!
2) Adding “wings” to a vertically-shot video so the actual content is small even if you’re watching on a mobile device and rotate
why do we have qwerty when dvorak exists?
What would David Copperfield have done?
@ecp:
Despite claims to the contrary, Dvorak has not been proven to be more efficient than qwerty.
…I’m not really sure if the point of the transcript. When I was still new to jury duty and actually still believed it was about, you know, justice and rule of law, I wasn’t clear on the definition of the terms used in the law the case turned on, and being a visual person and a reader with bad hearing from way back, I wanted to be sure about what the defendant said in relationship to it and wanted to read it for myself. To that end, I asked for the foreman of the jury to see the bailiff for a legal definition that could have come out of Black’s Law Dictionary and a transcript of that testimony.
…oh, no, no, NO, silly young one! It ain’t THAT easy!
…the question had to be submitted, in writing, to the bailiff, who then gave it to the judge, who then called EVERYFRIGGINGBODY back into the courtroom, then We The Jury were filed back in, then the judge TOLD us orally what the law was…not what it SAID, what HE said it was…and had the reporter read back the testimony orally, in a nice, high, female voice that I had a 0.0% chance of actually being able to understand because of my high frequency hearing loss.
Nothing was provided, or WOULD be provided, in writing.
And I couldn’t ask for a re-read. I couldn’t speak at all. Da Rules forbade it.
…so back to the jury room we went, and one of the other jurors who took notes showed me what HE wrote, and it, along with my recall of the actual testimony which I COULD hear, was sufficient to reach a conclusion.
Not that it mattered what I thought anyway, since the jury foreman was a Black man and said he couldn’t understand why a White man wouldn’t be as totally comfortable as he was to get out of the car his driver was buying drugs in and go for a nice long walk out of this unfamiliar and obviously Black neighborhood.
So even then, everything was rayciiss from there.
I made a few more passes at trying to be a good citizen and all, but the whole thing was just stupid and officious and, as The-Mamomma says above, not even REMOTELY interested in the TRUTH. It was EXTRA stupid when they called me for a civil case, and I was just checked out by then, so I gave lackluster (but still truthful) answers at the Voir Dires to make the liars apprehensive about me being a juror when I seemed like I couldn’t even stay awake in the box, and prominently holding Les Miserables (I was reading Hugo at the time anyway, pre-Internet jury duty gave you LOTS of time to read while waiting to be called) to make the lawyers question my stance on crime and punishment. I even, very honestly, maybe TOO honestly, gave my opinion during the Voir Dire in a bus case that maybe I thought that SOME patients in my Squad were only there to set up a payday, so I pretty reliably got myself tossed from every case after that, and scolded by the Judge who was percepive about what I was doing on the last one, but let me go anyway.
And I’ve managed to not get called since. Always SOME medical thing going on in my family, darn it…
But the biggest takeaway I got from it is NEVER go in front of a jury. They will discuss your tone of voice, how you dressed, what your aura was, if you seemed like you were “too defensive” AS A DEFENDANT, your hair color, whether you seemed like you were mean or hateful or – of course- racist…everything and anything BUT the case, the facts, and the law.
And the whole process seems designed to not help the jurors AT ALL.
And this was DECADES ago, it’s gotten WAYYYY stupider since then, so I’m not really surprised at Seatlleoid jury outcomes.
I don’t know what the answer is, but I DO know what we have NOW doesn’t work.
It’s probably best we fall apart at this point, start over in smaller pieces with something new.
…that way, there’s at least a CHANCE that SOME of those pieces may be able to at least TRY to be just…
…because from what I’m seeing NOW…
…NO one is.
…might be interesting though if more of the stenographer were like THIS (at 0,25)…
https://youtu.be/T6a3F6fPSP0