AI voice scams: 77% of victims lose money | Hacker News Reader

AI voice scams: 77% of victims lose money

9to5mac.com

47 pointselorant25 comments

The percentage (77% of victims lose money) is totally unfounded.

The original report by McAfee states that a market research company has asked people in a survey whether they would give money if a loved one asked for it. Even if you value this kind of research, it does not at all imply that people are falling for current AI voice scams.

> The global average showed 25% of people surveyed either experienced an AI scam or someone they know did.

And the article lost all credibility.

Must be a phone survey—anyone who still answers phone calls from strangers is probably pre-disposed to being victimized like this.

This is no doubt the weirdest thing I've read all week. Why wouldn't I answer a call from an unknown number?

There has to be some context here because the way you worded this implies what I consider "normal" is completely inconceivable to you.

I only answer an unknown number if very particular circumstances (from the area code I live in which is far from the area code of my phone) - otherwise, it goes to voicemail and if important I will call back.

Otherwise it’s all about my extended warranties and other scams.

Many people receive calls from legit, unfamiliar numbers maybe once a month.

Meanwhile, I receive half a dozen spam calls on some days.

So logically for me, it makes little sense to respond to unknown numbers. I presume the OP is in the same boat.

For a lot of people (like me and everyone in my friend group), close to 100% of calls from unknown numbers are scam calls.

I think many people also don’t think someone they don’t know has the right to speak to them just because they have their phone number.

I have not answered unknown call numbers by using my voice for about ten years now. I start muted or I whistle to see if a spammer is on the other end, but mostly I simply let them go to voicemail, then block and report the caller. It was clear for many years now that voice prints would be a useful thing to spammers or other adversaries and I certainly don’t want to pair my phone number with a voice print on a random machine. I have probably lost a couple reminders from dr offices, especially in recent years when people started using automated call systems, but things feel simpler than a decade ago when the spam load was unbearable.

I don't wanna make assumptions, but this sounds like you're probably not American. Americans are completely inundated with spam calls every day. It is hard for me as a European to imagine this kind of life, but that's what it is like for them.

As a result, I as a European cannot fathom how one can even live a life with a phone in America, while for Americans it's unfathomable that we would actually use our phones as phones by answering calls.

A recent phone survey found that 100% of respondents would respond to a phone survey!

Actually I bet if they asked the question it would only be around 97%...

One of the things that good surveys do is explain their methodology for factoring out bullshitters, because some relatively noticeable percentage of people who will respond to a survey do it maliciously/humorously.

Don't forget "accidentally" particularly with the "push 1 for X" "push 2 for Y" polls. Good pollsters have ways of polling for things that are well under 10%, but it's a non-trivial problem to solve.

> anyone who still answers phone calls from strangers

Isolation leads to paranoia.

These "9to5$PLATFORM" sites are not really noted for their strict adherence to the truth.

I received a voicemail customized to me, referring to my company name and state, that sounded like a friendly, informal older gentlemen with a bit of a southern accent. It seemed to probably be selling something so I didn't take it too seriously. But only when he said the callback number - "Plus one, two oh two, ..." did I realize it was a computer-generated message. Not a scam, just marketing, but it was scary how real the voice sounded.

Questionable statistics aside, it's unbelievable to me that the US hasn't been able to greatly reduce phone and SMS scams. In my opinion, platforms like Twilio should have some liability for scams made using their platform, and we should put some serious economic pressure on countries that aren't cracking down on scam organizations within their borders.

The FCC is trying. https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-issues-robocall-cease-and-d...

> Failure to comply with the steps outlined in this letter may result in downstream voice service providers blocking all of Twilio’s traffic, permanently.

Doesn't this require a huge amount of voice data before it would even sound remotely believable to maybe an elderly person with hearing/processing issues? I thought this was only possible for YouTubers,news presenters, etc as they have many hours of voice data to use.

elevenlabs only requires a few seconds of voice audio.

Yeah and it doesn't sound anything like the imitated person for anything outside extremely simple sentences.

i dunno, it replicated me just fine. maybe i have a basic voice. maybe a lot of people do.

I've tried it with mine and it wasn't anything like it. But then English isn't my first language so I have a bit of an accent.

Obstacle overcome since a few years. Already a few years ago you could fool close acquaintances with voice processing in real time.

Voice has to be the low hanging fruit. Even if the article is not credible, I am sure we will ramp up towards this sooner than we expect

Reply on news.ycombinator.com