4 ms·

> You only need a half-decent voice actor to pretend you are someone else on the phone. You can even digitalize this part already. All you need are 5 seconds o

> You only need a half-decent voice actor to pretend you are someone else on the phone. You can even digitalize this part already. All you need are 5 seconds of recording and a pre-trained model in the desired language/accent. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sR1rU3gLzQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sR1rU3gLzQ

saurik 7y ago
Right... but the point is that you _don't_ need fancy neural networks, you _only_ really need someone with an actually not that uncommon skill.
- numlock86 7y ago
  Yes. But I think there is another way to look at this: You _don't_ need fancy people with a not so uncommon skill, you _only_ need a bit of computing power. Point is: I totally agree! The entry level to fake something is really low. No matter the technical value or skills you bring to the table.
  - saurik 7y ago
    But the point of the comment being responded to--which I also think is a very important point that it feels like you missed--is this isn't some new issue, caused by computers. Zeitgeist: panic, "the concept of truth is being destroyed by advancements in computers!!!" OP: sigh, "no... you have always been able to trick people, such as with audio, using a trained voice actor" You: "but, even with audio, you can also trick people with fancy new computers!" Me: ?!?
    - feanaro 7y ago
      The OP seems as if he understood that, but his argument is that this new technology makes the costs significantly lower. The lowering of cost has a strong impact in itself. In other words, almost no one would have bothered seeking out and then paying a talented individual with a somewhat uncommon skill in the vast majority of cases. Once this kind of software is available for free and packaged in such a package that almost zero effort is needed in order to achieve the same effect, a significantly higher number of people will do it. So something important has changed. I agree that the alarmist stance is still unwarranted, though.
- _Microft 7y ago
  Using voice actors and doppelgängers does not scale. It is similar to the argument that automated surveillance is not bad because you could as well observe someone yourself. Sure that is possible but in reality it is limited to the niche of police and private detectors because it does not scale well.
scarejunba 7y ago
Very cool. Thanks for sharing. I wonder why the warbling is easier to detect in the male voices. They sound like a computer. But very cool advancement.

saurik 7y ago

Right... but the point is that you _don't_ need fancy neural networks, you _only_ really need someone with an actually not that uncommon skill.

numlock86 7y ago
Yes. But I think there is another way to look at this: You _don't_ need fancy people with a not so uncommon skill, you _only_ need a bit of computing power. Point is: I totally agree! The entry level to fake something is really low. No matter the technical value or skills you bring to the table.
- saurik 7y ago
  But the point of the comment being responded to--which I also think is a very important point that it feels like you missed--is this isn't some new issue, caused by computers. Zeitgeist: panic, "the concept of truth is being destroyed by advancements in computers!!!" OP: sigh, "no... you have always been able to trick people, such as with audio, using a trained voice actor" You: "but, even with audio, you can also trick people with fancy new computers!" Me: ?!?
  - feanaro 7y ago
    The OP seems as if he understood that, but his argument is that this new technology makes the costs significantly lower. The lowering of cost has a strong impact in itself. In other words, almost no one would have bothered seeking out and then paying a talented individual with a somewhat uncommon skill in the vast majority of cases. Once this kind of software is available for free and packaged in such a package that almost zero effort is needed in order to achieve the same effect, a significantly higher number of people will do it. So something important has changed. I agree that the alarmist stance is still unwarranted, though.
_Microft 7y ago
Using voice actors and doppelgängers does not scale. It is similar to the argument that automated surveillance is not bad because you could as well observe someone yourself. Sure that is possible but in reality it is limited to the niche of police and private detectors because it does not scale well.

scarejunba 7y ago

Very cool. Thanks for sharing. I wonder why the warbling is easier to detect in the male voices. They sound like a computer. But very cool advancement.