[miss_classified]

It's also slightly wrong, and needs some proofreading.

Example:

  > Get at.

That's not what he says at the 24 second mark. If you can't get the first 30 seconds of an hour-long transcript right, why should I read on?

(btw, I get that it was an automated transcript [http://temi.com], and has some OCR-like errors, which is apropos, considering the context of the speech)

[HarryHirsch]

Yes, the transcription errors convey a vaguely machine-generated feel, and together with the weird typography (contrast insufficient, background too bright, line spacing too tight, timing marks every 30 seconds) you ask yourself if the whole speech wasn't a machine-generated prank. Considering the subject of that speech, that's ironic.

[flohofwoe]

The best part is that this "Audio to Text" transcription service says on its web page:

Proprietary algorithm

Built by our machine learning and speech recognition experts.

[starbeast]

Who are experts in learning new machines and can nearly always recognise speech, but generally prefer email.