4 ms·
On the one hand, that's so smart I can't believe it's not widely used by everyone. On the other hand, if it was that common, there would be a market for system
by mabbo 7y ago
On the one hand, that's so smart I can't believe it's not widely used by everyone.
On the other hand, if it was that common, there would be a market for systems that defeat it for the spammers.
- r00fus 7y agoIf bypasses were common (mostly just sending "1"), then a configurable number you could cycle would work fine. Everyone would have a different number and you only get 3 tries. Anything more complicated like actually following the voice prompt isn't going to happen soon.
- bluGill 7y agovoice recognition is already to the point where it can recognize numbers. That we are limited to one of 12 numbers (including * and #) before it gets too hard for humans limits the problem scope to the point where it is a relatively easy problem. Of course this assumes enough people follow the pattern of press some number to continue. Every time the pattern changes the cost of understanding it and fitting it into their system goes up. In the end though it isn't a scheme we can win: AI can successfully follow more complex processes than humans can in this limited space - including random failure to follow the instructed process if it is too complex.
- gaius_baltar 7y agoIt can be done by asking some obvious question for humans: "This is a anti-robocall system, please answer the question to complete the call. A mother cat and her three kittens are sleeping in a box. Dial the number of animals in that box." The number of kittens change randomly and maybe the system can put some pillows, blankets and other non-animals in the box too, making automated processing harder. AI will get there, sure, but this will make things expensive for the attackers.