Comment by bluGill
1 day ago
What is the problem?
Notes are valuable for several reasons.
I sometimes take notes myself just to keep myself from falling asleep in an otherwise boring meeting where I might need to know something shared (but probably not). It doesn't matter if nobody reads these as the purpose wasn't to be read.
I have often wished for notes from some past meeting because I know we had good reasons for our decisions but now when questioned I cannot remember them. Most meetings this doesn't happen, but if there were automatic notes that were easy to search years latter that would be good.
Of course at this point I must remind you that the above may be bad. If there is a record of meeting notes then courts can subpoena them. This means meetings with notes have to be at a higher level were people are not comfortably sharing what every it is they are thinking of - even if a bad idea is rejected the courts still see you as a jerk for coming up with the bad idea.
Accurate notes are valuable for several reasons.
Show me an LLM that can reliably produce 100% accurate notes. Alternatively, accept working in a company where some nonsense becomes future reference and subpoenable documentation.
Counterpoint: show me a human who can reliably produce 100% accurate notes.
Seriously, I wish to hire this person.
Seriously, do people around you not normally double check, proofread, review what they turn in as done work?
Maybe I am just very fortunate, but people who are not capable of producing documents that are factually correct do not get to keep producing documents in the organizations I have worked with.
I am not talking about typos, misspelling words, bad formatting. I am talking about factual content. Because LLMs can actually produce 100% correct text but they routinely mangle factual content in a way that I have never had the misfortune of finding in the work of my colleagues and teams around us.
7 replies →
You are mixing up notes and full blown transcript of the meeting. The latter is impossible to produce by the untrained humans. The former is relatively easy for a person paying attention, because it is usually 5 to 10 short lines per an hour long meeting, with action items or links. Also in a usual work meeting, a person taking notes has possibility to simply say "wait a minute, I will write this down" and this does happens in practice. Short notes made like that usually are accurate in the meaning, with maybe some minor typos not affecting accuracy.
If it is just for people in the meeting we don't need 100%, just close enough that we remember what was discussed.
I really don't see the value of records that may be inaccurate as long as I can rely on my memory. Human memory is quite unreliable, the point of the record is the accuracy.
2 replies →
Meh, show me a human that can reliably produce 100% accurate notes. It seems that the baseline for AI should be human performance rather than perfection. There are very few perfect systems in existence, and humans definitely aren't one of them.
You show me human meeting minutes written by a PM that accurately reflect the engineer discussions first.
Has it been your experience? That's unacceptable to me. From people or language models.