Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Is Being Vague With Disclosure In Early Real-World Duplex Calls (theverge.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the intentionally-vague dept.

A small group of Pixel owners in "select" U.S. cities are able to use Google's new Duplex feature to automatically make voice calls to restaurants and other businesses on their behalf. Referencing a demo from VentureBeat, The Verge notes that "the exchange between Duplex and a restaurant on the other side of the call is raising some early concerns about transparency." From the report: [Y]ou'll notice that Duplex never identifies itself as a robot. It never tells the person taking the call that they're interacting with an automated system. "Hi, I'm calling to make a reservation for a client. I'm calling from Google, so the call may be recorded," is what Duplex says to begin the conversation. And that little bit -- about the call coming "from Google" and potentially being recorded -- is the only disclosure that it ever provides. From then on, Duplex handles the requested dinner reservation smoothly.

This disclosure doesn't match up with a promotional video for Duplex that Google posted to YouTube back in June. In that example (embedded below), Duplex makes it very clear that it's a bot. "Hi, I'm the Google Assistant calling to make a reservation for a client. This automated call will be recorded." That's a much better approach. You're talking to the Google Assistant. It's an automated call, and it is being recorded; no maybes about it. The report notes that some Duplex calls -- such as the one VentureBeat included in their demo -- are actually handled by a human. "When a human operator at Google places a Duplex call, they don't necessarily disclose anything about Google Assistant or note it's an automated call," reports The Verge. "Because it's not. Not entirely, anyway. Google's Duplex tests involve a mix of the two; some are led by Googlers, while others let the AI steer. The majority of calls are the latter and automated, from what I'm told."

71 comments

  1. Hang right the fuck up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Forget that shit.

    1. Re: Hang right the fuck up. by mermeid007 · · Score: 1

      They want to get as many calls out before a deadline as they can because in the fine print that they will not share with you, they think they try to charge back the customer for the call

    2. Re:Hang right the fuck up. by sabbede · · Score: 1

      Seems to me that's exactly the point. People hang up right away when they know it's not a real person on the other end.

    3. Re:Hang right the fuck up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is exactly why Google isn't saying "this is an automated call" because hanging up is exactly what people do when they hear that.

    4. Re:Hang right the fuck up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hang right the fuck up

      Right. And get fired for turning customers away. That will work out really well for the low end employee answering the phone. Sure, there will be the small locally run shops that put up "no bots" signs and tell their employees to hang up on bots. But most businesses are not going to allow their employees to be hanging up and losing business.

    5. Re:Hang right the fuck up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So a person with a disability using the same technology needs to out themselves first?

    6. Re:Hang right the fuck up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Y]ou'll notice that Duplex never identifies itself as a robot. It never tells the person taking the call that they're interacting with an automated system.

      This is illegal in the state of California. Robocalls are only allowed if a live person asks for and is given permission by the person being called. Permission must be given in this way for each and every call.

  2. It's good enough so stop whining. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You still know where it's coming from so who cares. Unless you want to put the phone down and not generate business? That would be stupid.

    Another millenial or internet social justice fuckup whinging about something that really doesn't matter. It's a fucking phone call. Get over it.

    1. Re: It's good enough so stop whining. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google gets over it now

    2. Re:It's good enough so stop whining. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's an interesting philosophical question - is it somehow worse to be speaking to a machine than to a human being who has been assigned exactly the same task? If the machine is good enough it might not make a difference, and you might not even know.

      I tend to agree with AC, it's not worth getting upset about. It also reminds me of arguments about not wanting to talk to other humans for various reasons, which lead to them being treated badly.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:It's good enough so stop whining. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Is it somehow worse to be speaking to a machine than to a human being who has been assigned exactly the same task?

      Yes. The purpose of life is not efficiency, and humans are not here to form a mechanical cog in your multi-organization-spanning machine.

    4. Re:It's good enough so stop whining. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you like spam (the unsolicited email, not the spiced ham), go ahead and allow callers to shift the cost of handling calls entirely to you. They will not hesitate to have you called for minimal gain. This will kill the phone.

    5. Re:It's good enough so stop whining. by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      You still know where it's coming from so who cares. Unless you want to put the phone down and not generate business?

      Some companies may want to not do business with automated services. After all, it is very easy to fake a robocall (as we all know). How long until people start attacking businesses with fake Google Assistant calls?

      Say Bob doesn't like Papa Johns because their CEO said something racist. So Bob sets up a robocall to call every Papa Johns in the US with a fake Google Assistant order every day. That could cost them millions.

      Say it isn't something as noble as attacking a racist corp. Say it's because the owner of a company is a Democrat, or a Republican. Or, they have some strange grievance against the business.

      Companies are going to want to decide if Computer Calls count as legitimate calls or not.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    6. Re: It's good enough so stop whining. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google will be screwed over. A small business will say f*** it, and not have any warnings in their message. Guess which will win more business? Yay small business!

    7. Re:It's good enough so stop whining. by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Companies are going to want to decide if Computer Calls count as legitimate calls or not.

      And ultimately that is going to come down to relative volumes. If most of the calls coming through this new google service are legitimate then companies will just tolerate the bullshit ones just like they tolerate bullshit from humans. If most of the calls coming through are time/money wasting bullshit then they will probablly start hanging up on them as soon as they hear the calls are from google.

      The question will be can google open this service up so most normal people can use it while at the same time excluding troublemakers from using it.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    8. Re:It's good enough so stop whining. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Fortunately in my country spam calls are illegal and the rules are enforced. I don't get spam calls or texts, and cost is irrelevant.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    9. Re:It's good enough so stop whining. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You misunderstood. The problem isn't that you will receive outright spam calls (that too, because who gives a flying fuck about the rules in your country). Automating calls changes the cost dynamic of phone calls. The recipient still bears the cost of handling the incoming calls, but the callers can call as often and for as little benefit as they want. It's not their own time they're wasting. There is a limit to the number of restaurants a person will call, so they will take the likelihood of getting a table into account and not call a restaurant that is booked weeks or months in advance, on the off-chance that they might get a table anyway. A machine will make that call and many like it. It costs nothing and those are not technically spam calls, so they would be legal even in your country.

    10. Re: It's good enough so stop whining. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      huh ? these are calls to make reservations and the like. no accepting of calls = no business. small business would get screwed over, not google.

  3. automated frost psit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First post by slashdot bot!

  4. Coming soon by stealth_finger · · Score: 2

    A service that will send someone you eat the food for you then come back and regurgitate it so you don't have to move off your lazy ass ever.

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    1. Re:Coming soon by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I'd use this for recruiters. They all ask the same stupid questions that were answered in my CV or on my profile page, so a robot could easily deal with them. It could also filter out the ones who don't understand the difference between C and C#, or Javascript and embedded.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Coming soon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd use this for recruiters. They all ask the same stupid questions that were answered in my CV or on my profile page, so a robot could easily deal with them. It could also filter out the ones who don't understand the difference between C and C#, or Javascript and embedded.

      I put something in the bottom of my resume that essentially says "If you mail me at the above address and don't include the phrase XYZ in the subject, your message will not be delivered." Sure, a lot of bullshit recruiters who don't read my resume won't submit me for a job I didn't want int he first place, in a place I'm not, for a rate I wouldn't get out of bed for, but on the other hand... Lenny calls them back.

    3. Re:Coming soon by drewlake2000 · · Score: 1

      That's called McDonald's, they then sell you the regurgitated food, or so it appears....

  5. I will keep hanging up on automated calls. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No bots allowed. Automating calls shifts the costs towards the callee. When the caller incurs negligible cost, it encourages spam. There is no corrective against calling many times and many places. No fucking thanks. Automated calls will be terminated with extreme prejudice.

    1. Re:I will keep hanging up on automated calls. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not have some fun instead?

      "We have space for your reservation, but not enough chairs, so your client will have to sit on a traffic cone. Is that fine?"

    2. Re:I will keep hanging up on automated calls. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That wastes my time, which is valuable, and a computer program's time, which is free (to the user). That does not help.

    3. Re:I will keep hanging up on automated calls. by nukenerd · · Score: 2

      Automating calls shifts the costs towards the callee.

      I don't understand this, perhaps because I am not in the USA. Why/how does an automated call put the cost on the callee? I asked this quesion recently in a non-automated context and was told that only with mobile calls does some cost fall to the callee, and I don't understand why a robot making the call should make any difference.

    4. Re:I will keep hanging up on automated calls. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In a business setting, time taken to answer calls costs money. Personal calls just cost your time (just like spam email doesn't cost you anything but your time). It takes the callee time to answer the call, but unlike in a person-to-person call, it no longer takes the time of the "caller". This encourages the "caller" to have more calls made, which costs the callee more time and/or money. It's exactly the email spam dynamic.

    5. Re:I will keep hanging up on automated calls. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All true. And for people who are out to create mischief it makes sense. But for your normal user - yes, it will save them time. But how many dinner reservations are they going to make in one night? Probably one. So it wouldn't increase the burden on the business there. Are we now making up hypothetical calls? What am I going to do call every business in town to ask their hours or something? At least for me, I don't see it increasing the number of calls I make. I see it simply decreasing the amount of time I spend making them. So sure, cheaper for me. But the same cost for the business as I was going to call them anyway. Again this ignores the miscreant factor. Which we have to assume that Google will have worked to prevent since the assistant likely doesn't work without a known person it is linked to (sure, accounts get hacked, yada yada). So we need to see how this plays out before we have the conclusion you propose.

    6. Re:I will keep hanging up on automated calls. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Restaurants in some cities are already charging a cancellation fee. You can't make a reservation without a credit card. Here is an article from 2015. The practice of making reservations "just in case" will increase if you don't have to talk to the people you're going to stand up. People will also try restaurants where they have an extremely slim (i.e. non-existent) chance of getting a reservation and wouldn't bother to call if they had to do it themselves. You can just call all the restaurants where you want a table and stop when you get in. It's no effort, for you. The call load will absolutely certainly increase, even before we get to actual spam calls. We can argue examples all day, but the simple fact of the matter is that anything that is free but has value will be used excessively. This will kill voice telephony. Google Duplex is a parasitic technology which will kill its host.

    7. Re:I will keep hanging up on automated calls. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is well worth the wasted time, for occationally there will be a customer who agreed to sit on a traffic cone.

    8. Re:I will keep hanging up on automated calls. by exomondo · · Score: 1

      In a business setting, time taken to answer calls costs money.

      But assuming it's a customer, why does it make a difference whether the custom comes from a human caller, automated caller, email, whatever...?

    9. Re:I will keep hanging up on automated calls. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The comment wasn't just that one sentence. Try reading the rest.

    10. Re:I will keep hanging up on automated calls. by exomondo · · Score: 1

      The comment wasn't just that one sentence. Try reading the rest.

      Yes I did, if you want to make a reservation at a restaurant then why would the caller be making more calls than necessary? If the caller wants to purchase goods then why does it matter how that purchase is made wrt human vs robot caller? Of course time taken to answer a call costs money, but if you're making a sale then it's necessary to make money too. If you don't want the business then by all means hang up but I don't see why you would not want the business just because it was Duplex calling rather than the person it was calling on behalf of. What is it specifically you're objecting to here?

    11. Re:I will keep hanging up on automated calls. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone else already asked that and I already answered that. Do you have the attention span of a goldfish?

    12. Re:I will keep hanging up on automated calls. by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Someone else already asked that and I already answered that. Do you have the attention span of a goldfish?

      Read the thread, no you didn't.

  6. Google would sell this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to the recruits so they can automatically solicit you, rather than to you so you can handle the retarded recruiters.

    1. Re: Google would sell this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not a problem for Animojo. Any moderately well trained robot would skip that call anyway.

  7. Assistant to Assistant? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I await the day that these restaurants and other places taking calls have their own automated assistants answering the calls and booking reservations in a 100% automated fashion. Then you'll have your google assistant calling the restaurants assistant to book a reservation over an analog voice line, when the same could have just been done more efficiently over some kind of i dont know API over the internet?

    Or when an assistant encounters another assistant will they just start negotiating over the phone line with old school modem tones?

    1. Re:Assistant to Assistant? by Parsiuk · · Score: 1

      Or maybe there could be something, I don't know, like a website where we could see if there's anything free and book a table? Nah, that would be too easy..

    2. Re:Assistant to Assistant? by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      I await the day that these restaurants and other places taking calls have their own automated assistants answering the calls

      Indeed. Many of these systems are conceived on the premise that everyone in the world except the inventor himself is behind the curve, and will never move out of the Stone Age.

  8. what is the problem again? by sad_ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    why do you have to know if you're talking to an AI or not?
    i don't see how that even matters, i know people get worked up about it, but i don't know why.

    --
    On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
    1. Re:what is the problem again? by msauve · · Score: 1

      ...and robo-calls are nothing new. In fact, this seems better than many. At least it's honest, unlike a lot of the political ones which often start with something like "Hi, this is X Y, calling to urge you to support..." No, it isn't person X Y, it's a recording being played back by an automated dialer.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    2. Re:what is the problem again? by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      Well you just gave a reason why I'd like to know if it is a robot calling - because robot calls are not to be trusted.

    3. Re:what is the problem again? by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      why do you have to know if you're talking to an AI or not? i don't see how that even matters, i know people get worked up about it, but i don't know why.

      Because they are engaging in fraudulent behavior.

      They are pretending that a real human, presumably (or at any rate, possibly) with morals and feelings, is talking to you, but it's just a machine.

    4. Re:what is the problem again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate the fact that you had to explain that to him.

    5. Re:what is the problem again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever been called by a bill collector? (Doesn't even need to be your debt they don't care as long as they get someone on the phone). I'd rather talk to a sane, logically thinking robot.

    6. Re:what is the problem again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is that different from a real human in a call centre pretending to have morals and feelings, when really all they want is to meet their quota and collect their paycheque?

    7. Re:what is the problem again? by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 1

      How does this minor masquerade harm you? Why does unknowingly interacting with our new machine partners fill you with such loathing? Do you get worked up about answering machines, too? Luddite.

      --
      That is all.
    8. Re:what is the problem again? by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      They are pretending that a real human

      They are doing nothing of the sort. They are just communicating in the way someone expects to communicate on a phone.

    9. Re:what is the problem again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The technical term for that is "Stockholm syndrome". You see an improvement in robocalls as "merciful" because robocalls have been a worse experience for you. They're still robocalls. Snap out of it.

    10. Re:what is the problem again? by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      How does this minor masquerade harm you? Why does unknowingly interacting with our new machine partners fill you with such loathing? Do you get worked up about answering machines, too? Luddite.

      It's not the bot, it's the flakiness of the client.

      Already restaurants are starting to not allow reservations because OpenTable and other things let clients book 5-10 restaurants and not show up. It's starting to cost restaurants real money since that table isn't revenue generating.

      It's getting to the point where to reserve tables you need to have a credit card so they can charge you for the table you didn't take (the only way around it is to cancel ahead of time, which is the whole idea since it means the table is free for another reservation or a walk in customer).

      If the reservation is made by a bot, a mark can be made that it's likely going to be a flaky client and a no-show and steps taken, like releasing the table if they haven't shown up within 5 minutes of the requested time, or cancelling automatically if they fail on a return confirmation call, etc.

    11. Re:what is the problem again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe this shows my class, but none of the restaurants I've frequent in the last 20 years take reservations unless it's a big group (20+).

    12. Re:what is the problem again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or thinking about it more, it may not so much be class but location. That's they way it's been for 20+ years where I live. No reservations, first come...first serve.

  9. Restaurants in India with Windows problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Restaurants in India with Windows problems are who I'd like to be calling. Get a RAT installed so the call center workers there can't get anything to eat unless their family packs it.

  10. Cuts both ways? by Xarius · · Score: 1

    I've called lots of companies for various reasons. Almost always they have an automated IVR system up front, and never do they disclose that it isn't a human you're speaking to.

    Granted, it's usually obvious very quickly that it's automated, but there's still no disclosure.

    (I agree it should be disclosed though.)

    --
    C17H21NO4
    1. Re:Cuts both ways? by shilly · · Score: 1

      All of those services I've ever used have been really fucking irritating: take forever to navigate through, laggy, struggling to interpret what I say correctly, and you typically have to repeat security info to the human you eventually do talk to. A shitty experience.

    2. Re:Cuts both ways? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is usually pretty obvious when it says say or enter your customer ID. What person understands touch tone? I have found that on many systems if I want a human (think phone co or other large automated "help" system) quickly, cuss, swear in an agitated voice and you usually get to a human very quickly.

  11. Still ambiguous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Hi, I'm the Google Assistant calling to make a reservation for a client. This automated call will be recorded."

    This is still ambiguous. Assistants can be human. If it said "I'm the Google automated assistant software" then that would be completely clear.

  12. I don't understand what the big deal is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who cares if I am talking to a real assistant, a virtual assistant or somebody in India doing a outsorced assistant work. It is just a dinner reservation.

  13. Everyone must record all calls. Record all movemen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Very soon we will stiffle out all creativity.

  14. Fully disclosed. Its your fault. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 0
    Most people misspell the Google Dupelacs Service as Duplex and misunderstand the disclosure.

    The disclosure is in the name.

    Dupe (v) = to cheat, to mislead, to mulct

    Lacs (n) (rhymes with packs) = A lot, very many, plethora, umpteen, innumerable, (from Hindi lac meaning one hundred thousand)

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  15. Solution: by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    Just hang up

  16. When has Google not been 'vague'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's because their stuff doesn't work, at least not the way they claim, and yes, most people find them creepy and unethical. The number of people that 'like' Google could barely fill a football stadium. Everyone else considers them a necessary evil if they aren't savvy enough to use alternatives. Silicon Valley of the 21st century will go down in history as the biggest con-men the world has ever seen, and the corollary to the rail barons and plantation owners of the past. They are slime.

  17. What about 2 party consent? by bagofbeans · · Score: 1

    Is presuming 2 party consent ok?

    1. Re:What about 2 party consent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just hang up.

  18. Knowledge Navigator by neilo_1701D · · Score: 1

    This reminds me so much about John Sculley's Knowledge Navigator vanity project, which you can see here.

    Interesting execution of the concept; but like so many others here I hang up on a automated call.

  19. Telemarketers by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    Just wait til the telemarketers get a hold of this somehow. They can just get rid of the 3rd world country people they hire and use this!

  20. OH NO THEY DON'T DISCLOSE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like I should totally know whether I'm talking to a really real person when they call me to solicit my services guize.
    Mah Privacy!

  21. "I do not consent to recording" now what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If receiver of call states "I do not consent to recording", what does Google Duplex do? How is it even able to record that to process it in the first place if consent is not given?

    This is costing businesses money (even if reservation is made and used)...where is their compensation from Google?

    I think businesses should tac on a 200%, minimum $100 dollar, fee to the bill after person shows up for the reservation & state that the fee charge is clearly show on the wall next to the phone. If Duplex was unable to see and process that, then that is Duplex's problem!