I just … I … I have to take a nap.
Watching the second episode of Ash vs. Evil Dead and Highway Star cranks up before a fight and the CC says “Upbeat Music Starts”…
The “call an elderly person with news their grandchild needs to be bailed out of jail” scam isn’t new, but The Register has a new twist on it: get ahold of a long enough recording of someone’s voice and software will play back in that voice anything you type.
The scam has depended in the past on older people not having clear memories, and the calls often come in the middle of the night when anyone might not be thinking clearly. Now we add in synthesis of a voice they might actually recognize as legitimate. You’ve got the “you have to take care of this now” urgency that scams usually employ coupled with “that really does sound like my grandson/granddaughter”.
The Register pointed out security and legal issues this technology raises over a year ago. The article said people might have to start speaking differently to voice assistants like Alexa and Siri so that if the recordings of what they’ve said are accessed and fed into the software, there would be a difference in the output as compared to everyday conversations.
I got to listen to a presentation recently on the history of microprocessors and one of the points was that problems like Meltdown and Spectre involve technologies and systems that are so widespread that fixing them may be impossible. Google, Amazon, Apple and Comcast (for their TV remotes) are all pushing their voice assistants. “See how easy it is when you can just say things and search or execute things by voice?” We’re at the Star Trek level of interaction with computers.
Now comes the fact that we shortly may not be able to trust that an audio recording is actually from a person. We’ve already got that with video and pictures. Adobe’s initial reaction was “we’ll watermark it for security purposes”, but that earlier article on the Register pointed out that will raise the question of what about all the other recordings that don’t have a watermark?
I’ll point out this: Will phone systems and VOIP systems have to add in watermark-detection processes so they can alert you that the person you’re speaking with is actually a human and not a simulation of their voice? What about all the existing systems that don’t have that function? How many years did the U.S. have to prepare for the transition from analog to digital TV? That wasn’t a change in response to a security issue. Would it even be possible to completely replace all components of the voice infrastructure?
But that’s not the only voice system that is affected. Cockpit voice recorders become evidence when an accident occurs. Will those also have to be watermarked?
In reading about this issue and while typing this post, I’ve already figured out three other ways voice manipulation could be exploited. I’m not going to say what they are because I don’t want to give anyone ideas about how to commit crimes. And that’s coming from someone who only learned about this a half hour ago.
It’s been said in a few different ways, but I’ll use the quote from Jurassic Park. “[Y]our scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn’t stop to think if they should.”
Wow. Scary stuff.
Chicken and goat farming in a remote location far and away from technology sure do sound tempting.
@RRabbit42 - another one from The Reg which seems to be harmless, is this one :
What with deepfake and the above voice faking, one can but wonder where things will be going next.
I want to get off this planet.
An actual conversation I kinda-sorta just had:
So, this massive amount of car repair work you just sent me a quote for…
It looks like your estimate is for $50 of parts and tons of labor. Seems a bit high.
Well, no, our parts cost is much higher than that.
Wow, $Manufacturer must really be ripping you off. Online you can get OEM from the manufacturer for a lot less.
They’re at least trying to work something out.
I swear, if this was a storyline on Law & Order: SVU every critic would pan it for being too unbelievable.
The Weinstein Company is still alive. An investor group was working on buying it and TWC sold the rights to two movies to raise funds. Then the New York Attorney General filed a law suit to get a couple of points of that negotiation strengthened: better compensation for victims, give up the non-disclosure agreements, and better protection for employees who would still be working with the same managers as before.
TWC fires David Glasser “for cause” and the negotiation is in doubt. Glasser files counter-suit to say he’s being made a scapegoat. TWC suddenly announced they’re filing for bankruptcy, but the next day, everything’s hunky-dory and the sale is going to go through.
Meanwhile, a sculpture called “Casting Couch” has been placed not far from where the Oscars will be held this weekend. Life-size golden sculpture of Harvey Weinstein sitting on a casting couch wearing a half-open bathrobe. Sit down, take a selfie with it.
On the Garrison Keillor front, the "more information" MPR said they had is email sent between the two people, but again, they've let Garrison provide the details and it opens up a new hole in what they've been saying. He says the messages were "romatic writing" that never went beyond that to anything physical between the two people. He does acknowledge the messages were more than romantic and a bit sexual, and was stupid for him to participate in, even if the exchange of messages was mutual.
That’s the hole. MPR says part of the problem was Garrison wasn’t giving them access to his email. But they had those same messages from the woman that received them. It doesn’t sound like they were looking to corroborate her side of the story since they went ahead and took action based on her statements.
It’s still coming across as a weak attempt to justify their actions and they’re continuing to let Garrison shape public opinion about what happened. If you’ve got a strong case against someone, you don’t do that. You provide the facts up front, ahead of time, which makes any explanations by the other side appear weaker when they get around to saying them later.
“Person A did B, C, D and E, which led us to take steps F, G and H”, which is usually followed by person A making a statment like, “I acknowledge I made some missteps and I am sorry for it” or “I categorically deny those allegations”.
In contrast, MPR’s statements have been “Garrison did something bad but we won’t say what it is because we want to protect the other person’s privacy, but he has to go nonetheless” and a few months later, “There’s more to it, but we’re still not really going to says what it is”. Meanwhile, Garrison has been saying, “This is specifically what I did”, providing a stronger defence for himself.
I’m starting to prep to sell some things locally. Giant Jenga, maybe cutting boards, recycled pallet serving trays, up to possibly farm house tables and similar.
I don’t necessarily need a name for it yet. Especially since I’m already Woodman, but I need to start thinking of something. My Etsy store was SoTSoT "Some of this, Some of that, but that was for my daughter’s crochet stuff and is a bit twee.
Edit: Derp, this was a request for ideas.
Well, nuts. I’m on call right now and it’s been busy the past few days, so I was thinking that it would give me some extra money when I go to Emerald City Comic Con next Sunday. Then I find out it ended today. I suppose there’s worse things to waste $40 on, but how in the world did I get the date completely wrong and buy a ticket for a time that I knew I couldn’t go?
Sorry. ReallyHorrible is already taken. Good luck, though.
Maybe PsychoticCrafts? How about ManWood?
ManWood == Taserface ?
How about Wood’s Stuff? First thought off the top of my head, but I’ll ruminate on it.
I was thinking in the shower this morning that our body is like a mech suit for our brains.
I’ll vote against “ManWood” as the results when searching for that are not likely to be what you want.
Recycle a Tree
Wood ‘R’ Us (Wood ‘S’ Me?)
Treecycled. I hope I just made that up and nobody else is using it.
That’s a million dollar name right there.
EDIT: No. Of course not.