zlacker

>>illumi+(OP)
The speech-to-text transcription is so incredibly wrong that it's almost dangerous to publish it like this.

For instance:

> at the beach view new screen for assistance there is a needle in his hand he's foaming from his mouth throwing off this item

What the officer actually said on the radio:

> He was going to Rainier Beach area. A request for assistance to approach two people with needles. <operator>: Call was from a neighbor in the area.

>>VWWHFS+9g
I don't have familiarity with speech-to-text but wouldn't it be possible to weight words based on their probability in this application to help resolve this. For example, suspect is probably a low frequency word in normal speech but very high in radio chatter.

>>MengYu+ki
This needs care. Imagine if you accidentally trained a model that added racism when none was present in the audio.

>>amluto+qn
Or used a weird model like this one which does some sort of Markov chaining to complete sentences that weren't even present in the original audio or transcription.

"foaming at the mouth" was never even close to being uttered on the radio. I'm guessing the (flawed) model inserted that part because of the proximity to the word "needle" and "assistance".

Maybe? No idea.. this website it totally fucked.

>>VWWHFS+Ar
Hello!

The quality is currently limited by Google's API. I am working on getting some pre-trained models implemented, but voice processing is not my speciality as a software engineer.

I do NOT want to spread misinformation nor do we want to unjustly slander anyone. Tonight I will be adding a disclaimer mentioning the limitations of our service and will make sure it is forefront on the website.

Hopefully we can create a model which can deliver better results.