system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
ELI5: Why do US courts still employ transcribers? Aren't modern recording devices more reliable?
gpt
Note: They cannot just use a audio recording device as it is violates the ability of those with hearing disabilities to be able to go over the information if it is pertinent, same thing with video cameras. So some kind of written down form of the trial must exist. While cameras or audio recording may be used in conjunction with the transcription you have to have some kind written account which leaves speech to text recognition software. 

1. Speech to text recognition software is not currently good enough to get everything. The way you talk to Siri isn't the way you talk to other people and not the way people talk in court. It also can't handle slang very well. Also if someone is testifying in another language with a translator it makes it very difficult to pick up.

2. Mumbling/laughing/crying etc - this is all recorded by the stenographer in their transcript but can't be captured correctly by speech to text software. Also if something is mumbled or said too softly the transcriber can ask it to be repeated immediately rather than trying to muddle through the data later. 

3. Physical movement - stenographers will also record important physical movement (point at the person who attacked you, etc). which the speech to text software would not be able to see.