| ▲ | lurk2 6 hours ago |
| > Haiket doesn't even try to hide its connection to Meta. All you have to do is to go to their website, click on press, and see in the only press release they've ever posted that its CEO holds patents in use by Meta. […] Alex holds over 10 patents in voice and communication technologies, assigned to and used by Google and Facebook. How does this imply he has any connection to Meta? Companies license patents all the time. |
|
| ▲ | input_sh 6 hours ago | parent [-] |
| Okay, what about three sentences above that one? > Before Haiket, Alex founded a number of technology start-ups and helped develop innovative voice solutions for Facebook and Google. At the very least, I think it's safe to say he has some connections within Meta that he utilised for this purpose. He's definitely not a complete outsider whose startup (with no actual product) just happened to be picked by Meta. |
| |
| ▲ | lurk2 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > what about three sentences above that one? My bad. I searched for “Meta” instead of “Facebook.” Quite a few other red flags in that press release. > Haiket is launching the Beta trial from today, with a pipeline of future innovation for early adopters, including a pioneering silencing technology that will allow users to speak privately in public, with voice communication that only your device can hear. | | |
| ▲ | scns 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | >> including a pioneering silencing technology that will allow users to speak privately in public, with voice communication that only your device can hear. Does anyone else think this sounds beyond ridiculous? | |
| ▲ | londons_explore 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > voice communication that only your device can hear. This is fairly straightforward - you have the device spew out noise with similar characteristics to human speech (ie. random overlapping syllables in the speaker's voice). Take a recording then subtract the random syllables. Only your device can do the subtraction, because only your device knows the waveform it transmitted. Obviously in a room with lots of reverb this will be a bit harder, since you will also need to subtract the reflection of what was transmitted with a room profile and deal with the phone moving in the room, but it sounds far from impossible. | | |
| ▲ | zimpenfish 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > you have the device spew out noise with similar characteristics to human speech Surely this only works if you're using the phone as a speakerphone (and are therefore almost certainly being an arsehole in public[0])? [0] Because if it was an actual speakerphone situation, hiding your voice would be stupid. | |
| ▲ | wizzwizz4 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Countermeasure: set up four microphones some distance apart, use autocorrelation to pinpoint the sound sources, and then isolate them, recovering the "masked" speech. The countercountermeasure would be to fully surround your mouth and vocal tract with an active noise cancelling system and then produce noise (to push whatever little sound gets through far below the noise floor: the signal is unpredictable enough that you can't use averaging techniques to recover it). The countercountercountermeasure would be to use a camera in the radio band to look at the vocal tract directly, using the phone as a light source, and recover the phonemes that way. The countercountercountercountermeasure would be to construct an isolated box… at which point you're no longer having a voice call in public: you have a portable privacy booth. |
|
| |
| ▲ | huflungdung 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
|
