[piptastic]

Just having software that can record and transcribe only relevant conversations, record action items, and email summaries would vastly improve the state of the meetings I attend.

Nothing worse than wasting 3 hours in a meeting and coming out where participants remember things incorrectly and go off in different directions.

[joe_the_user]

Indeed but so far, software has shown itself much more capable of solving logical puzzle than determining relevance. It seems fairly clear that the Jeopardy win came from the program having a lot of data and logical statements from which it could make relevant guesses and deductions.

If the software could make a coherent summary of and answer questions about what took place in a single, informal meeting, that would be an incredible advance. I haven't seen evidence of this.

[cyorir]

Right, at the company I currently intern at this is all done manually by the software librarian. It seems like there is a lot of room for automation in meetings; bonus points if such a system could tie into the issue tracker/SCM (whatever that may be, we use Accurev). Although Watson sounds like it would be helpful in cutting down on the number of pointless arguments in meetings where not everyone is on the same page.

[walshemj]

Sounds like you have some poor chair's of meetings. Minutes should be done by a secretary/note taker or a PA.

And if you think that's old school you have never had the luxury of meeting where you had a professional PA it makes an order of magnitude difference.