Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft's Acoustic Caller ID Patent

Posted by samzenpus on from the who-do-you-sound-like-today dept.

theodp writes "A new patent granted to Microsoft Tuesday for automatic identification of telephone callers based on voice characteristics covers constructing acoustic models for telephone callers by identifying words or subject matter commonly used by callers and capturing the acoustic properties of any utterance. Not only that, it's done 'without alerting the caller during the call that the caller is being identified,' boasts Microsoft in the patent claims."

12 of 185 comments (clear)

  1. Only Innovation: Real Time versus Offline? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The only difference here (aside from what agencies have been doing since the 1960's) is that this analysis seems to be done in real time, rather than offline? I mean, haven't monitoring people been able to tell who is speaking based on sound synthesis since forever?

    1. Re:Only Innovation: Real Time versus Offline? by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It might not be useful in a home environment, but how about in an office where after the initial greeting the customer details are popped on-screen without you typing anything?

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    2. Re:Only Innovation: Real Time versus Offline? by omeomi · · Score: 3, Funny

      Isn't that why they ask for my account number?

      Good Lord, no. They ask for your account number just to irritate you because both you and the person you're talking to know damn well you had to key in your account number just 2 minutes ago.

      --
      ZuluPad, the wiki notepad on crack
    3. Re:Only Innovation: Real Time versus Offline? by Yoozer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Me: "Thank you for calling, may I have your store's telephone number, area code first please?"

      You're the kind of rude, arrogant bastard that loses companies customers.
      Yeah, but only if he adds the insulting part to the call or changes tone with "your phone number?" (but that could indeed benefit from a "please").

      Part of the problem is that when you call any company, you generally get a barrage of useless information such as "This is Quux speaking, Foo and Bar suppliers, we now have a wonderful FooBar for only $39.95, how can I help you?" - which is swiftly (and rightfully) ignored because it's just noise; it does not solve the customer's problem. Make enough calls like that and they become a protocol.

      By trying to cut short and asking the phone number and area code, the call is made longer; for the customer it belongs to the last part of the first sentence and is therefore ignored, hence people will ask for it again. People generally want to identify themselves first after hearing contact has succeeded. To put it in computer terms; the AC is trying to cram the payload in the header of the packet and is then pissed off that the protocol doesn't support it.

      More effective would probably be "Thank you for calling, I'm Anonymous Coward, how can I help you?" - the latter part of this sentence ("I'm Anonymous Coward, how can I help you") will be ignored, but at least that information is completely irrelevant to the rest of the call. Then ask for important information, since that's actual payload.

  2. Why? by Aoreias · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What's the purpose of caller ID after I've picked up the phone? I'm not going to talk to some challenge response bot if I'm someone who needs to be IDd and screened anyway.

    --
    We've upped our standards. Up yours.
  3. NOW I get it... by Penguinisto · · Score: 4, Funny
    ...they're looking to patent-troll the CIA!

    Brilliant!

    /P

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  4. Verification of identity by Nymz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What's the purpose of caller ID after I've picked up the phone?

    If someone had acquired some of your personal information, and then tried to impersonate you, an automated voice recognition system could be useful by raising an alarm, or at least giving a percentage of how much their voice is like yours.
  5. Re:Can they detect how pissed off i am? by qbwiz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It could be true, too.

    --
    Ewige Blumenkraft.
  6. Err by OverlordQ · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wont this most likely violate wiretapping laws in two-party states?

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
  7. Wiretapping law by w9ofa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It is my understanding that recording a telephone conversation is against the law in most states, without notifying the other parties on the line.

    Thus, a practical device for this patent would most likely be illegal.

  8. Thus proving the rule by killmenow · · Score: 4, Funny

    To patent anything, follow these steps:

    1. Choose something already being done in the real world, anything really
    2. describe it with maximum verbosity
    3. add "on the Internet" at the end

    Tada! PATENT!

  9. Sneakers by Loconut1389 · · Score: 3, Funny

    My name is Werner Brandes, my voice is my passport. Verify me.