I think the main idea is to codify the act as illegal, so if it’s discovered that someone used voice cloning (for like a telephone scam or something), then they can be charged for that too
riskable@programming.dev 2 days ago
How do you implement voice cloning prevention? Human voices aren’t that unique. Also, AI voice cloning isn’t perfect. So… At what threshold is a voice considered, “cloned” from a legal perspective?
I mean, people couldn’t tell the difference between Scarlet Johansson and OpenAI’s “Sky” voice which was not cloned.
kayzeekayzee@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 days ago
lowspeedchase@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
Human voices aren’t that unique.
Duuuuuuuddeeeeee lol… come on now.
Powderhorn@beehaw.org 2 days ago
My ex had an uncle with exactly my voice. Cadence, accent, inflection … it was uncanny.
riskable@programming.dev 2 days ago
From the perspective of human perception, people’s voices are only unique enough to about one in a few thousand. There’s a few outliers with much more unique voices but believe it or not, there’s a lot of people walking around on this earth that sound just like Morgan Freeman, James Earl Jones, and other voices people think are super unique.
I view an anti-cloning law as too risky: It sounds exactly like the type of thing that would prevent Grandma from cloning her own voice before going down for surgery because it just so happens to sound a lot like a famous person.
BCsven@lemmy.ca 2 days ago
One country was already setting up copyright on your voice so AI can be served takedown notices. Voice are quite unique, its how my bank verifies who I am. If somebody clones my voice via AI it could fool that login system
riskable@programming.dev 2 days ago
I work for a huge bank and we tested voice recognition technology: Even under the best circumstances (high quality microphone with no ambient noise in a sound booth), it was far, far too easy to copy someone else’s voice by simply playing back a sliced up recording a la Sneakers (the movie). We ruled it out as an option over a decade ago.
The problem was fundamental and had nothing to do with the quality of the technology. If your bank is using your voice as a unique identifier they had better be using something else in addition to it! Because it’s super insecure.
BCsven@lemmy.ca 2 days ago
There are other criteria like account number, etc. But the voice they ask you specific question live. But I get it. Thats why I have a hardware key for platforms that support it.
krooklochurm@lemmy.ca 2 days ago
Your bank is run by fucking morons if they’ve allowed voice verification at any after ~2 years ago.
It’s a kind of profound, logarithmic stupidity that increases exponentially every day as voice cloning technology gets better and better.
They are fucking stupid and don’t give one minuscule fuck about the security of your account.
BCsven@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
Well yes they are a bank. Lol. I moved regular accounts to a credit union because I was sick of the bank’s problems. But still have a disability retirement fund with the bank because its a special government account for my child.
Kissaki@beehaw.org 6 hours ago
If you’re selling or publishing a voice in a way that I personates another person without their consent that may be identifiable and prosecutable. “Generate with x voice.” 'Talk to x." Etc. Exact lettering is no necessary if intent is evident from pictures or evasive descriptions making an obvious implication.
If prosecution can find evidence of cloning/training that can also serve as basis.
In these ways it doesn’t have to be about similarity of the produced voice, of quality or alternative people, at all.