wentw0rth

5 ms·

1.
by wentw0rth 3mo ago
You are correct with inferring it's a scale, completely. Politely disagree with "You aren't going to be able to find a set of signatures that keeps out a useful number..." That's AGEWARDEN's job and the last ye
2.
by wentw0rth 3mo ago
Love it. We've been playing around with other ideas that are not web related. As the tech improves, less data will be needed to infer age. Strange now, but setting up a microphone at a kiosk or providing a widget-less API for broader u
3.
by wentw0rth 3mo ago
Good question: regardless of the recording instrument (our lab has many microphones of varying degrees from low > high fidelity), a live person vs. recordings that are played back carry a unique signature.
4.
by wentw0rth 3mo ago
That would be considered a "replay attack" and recorded audio carries a unique signature: BLOCKED
5.
by wentw0rth 3mo ago
The AGEWARDEN system is ^^ agnostic and answers a simple question only: Is this human over or under 18? From my research, each person is incredibly unique :)
6.
by wentw0rth 3mo ago
> There should exist frequencies impossible to reach for anyone but post-pubescent men.... Of course that would make it teen-age verification at best. Yes and no. Like geology, the more you dig into audio, the more is uncovered and avail
7.
by wentw0rth 3mo ago
> Your comment brought my mind to voice actors. They easily change their voices. Deep fakes also come to mind. Voice actors, deep fakes, replay attacks (recordings from a TV/computer/phone) - mitigated. As in my earlier comment
8.
by wentw0rth 3mo ago
Post edit/updated, let me track: > How would we trust your platform to not store voice fingerprints, then? This is a good question. Other than having it be more expensive to keep this data, and if it were true, destroy the company w
9.
by wentw0rth 3mo ago
> the difference between "deep-state surveillance digital ID verification" and privacy-preserving ZKPs to verify age Agreed. > Also, nothing comes to mind regarding browsers, android devices, or non-mobile devices. As far as
10.
by wentw0rth 3mo ago
All good! Posting here to get the opinions and feedback from engineering peers. > I... told it in a higher then normal voice that I was a kid, and it said I was under 18... Good. If you're pretending to be a kid, you should be block
11.
by wentw0rth 3mo ago
Lawyers HIGHLY suggested the line; AGEWARDEN is > 95% accurate and on par with others in this space. If someone told me they had 100% accuracy with inference, I'd call them out. Thank YOU for calling it out :)
12.
by wentw0rth 3mo ago
That's the nice thing about audio temporal vs. video, much cheaper.
13.
by wentw0rth 3mo ago
> You allow someone to perform a more thorough check verifying your age and identity (such as the government or your smartphone vendor)... Some people may be okay with that, others may want to browse the web in privacy. > What doesn&#
14.
by wentw0rth 3mo ago
LOL, it was BEFORE the sketchy times :')
15.
by wentw0rth 3mo ago
Thanks for the comment/question: > wouldn't it be far easier to bypass this than even face (live video) verification... or am I missing something? Missing the experience of learning just how much information is in a clip of aud
16.
Show HN: Voice Age Verification(agewarden.ai)
8 points by wentw0rth 3mo ago|33 comments