5 ms·
I suspect certain types of recording, i.e lossless wouldn't be able to be distinguished. But your typical mp3, voice recording wont make the cut. It's quite ea
by neximo4 11y ago
I suspect certain types of recording, i.e lossless wouldn't be able to be distinguished.
But your typical mp3, voice recording wont make the cut. It's quite easy to tell a recording apart from a spectrogram.
There are also ways around this the bank can employ, such as the use of spontaneity, which a recording cannot account for, i.e ask the user to say something random if there is a doubt.
- sjtgraham 11y agoRemember that telephone calls are sampled at 8khz. A lot of information will automatically be lost before the signal reaches the other party.
- martinald 11y agoAgreed, this is the reason I don't really trust the claims here. It's actually much worse if you are using a mobile phone, since the GSM codec will add even more artefacts before being passed via PSTN to them. Add that to serious background noise and you are giving people to fake way more room than a crystal clear PCM WAV.
- trtmrt 11y agoYour voice is already distorted by transfer medium, mobile phones are terrible, something like 4-8khz ...
- tamana 11y agoWe have software that can make a synthetic video of any person mimic another person's movements, in real time. I am sure audio is even easier.
- AnimalMuppet 11y agoWe can put one person's skin and face on another person's motion capture, yes. We can't (as far as I know) make one person appear to have another person's gestures, unless the first person can mimic those movements quite well. There's a lot of nuance in the spoken voice. Don't be sure audio is easier than motion. (Faking it well enough to fool a computer is easier than fooling a human, though...)