In the US banks are capturing the voices of their customers who contact their call centers for any reason. So if a USian vocally says something controversial they probably have no hope of anonymity if they called their bank in recent years.

Is the same thing not happening in Russia and Israel? An IDF soldier came on broadcast radio and criticized Israel, and a Russian citizen criticized Putin. Shouldn’t they be concerned about doxxing risks?

It would be reckless if the radio station did not disguise their voices, but I don’t get the impression their voices are being disguised. So I just wonder if voice disguising tech is so good at making the voice sound natural that it’s not detectable.

  • freedomPusherOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    That’s a good point. Word choice would be quite low quality evidence prone to a high error rate, thus unsuitable as direct evidence, but it’s perhaps sufficient to get someone (if not the wrong person) on the radar for targeted surveillance. While voice prints are a sufficiently high quality biometric that banks are trusting them for identification purposes.

    In any case, voice disguising should be an obligatory minimum whenever someone speaks to journalists on the condition of anonymity.