- 7/14/2014 1:12:20 PM
Always nice to get someone on my side, @magneticnorth! :D
@Beth Truthfully, I don't think it's an evil plot but a problem in the assumptions of the system. All these phone systems appear to be designed to get you NOT to speak to a live person. The info you enter can bring up some results that don't require human internention, like a record of payment or balance due, etc. But for those of us who call only when want to speak to a person, all that data entry is so much wasted time because the system doesn't carry it over to the human rep.
- 7/14/2014 8:48:37 AM
Yes, Beth, there must be a certain value to it. Perhaps my calls automatically get associated to my personal record in the database? It'll be easy to pre-populate the call's log with the data the customer enters, and it'll probably be more accurate than dictating the number to the rep. What's amiss here, really, is the bridge between pre-live and live. If they only need to authenticate my identity, heck, they already ask so many other questions... why ask me the same loooong number that I haven't memorized, and which I've just painstakingly punched? I guess this shows, all the more, how valuable voice biometrics is in this context.
- by BethSchultz, Blogger
- 7/14/2014 8:36:35 AM
Well, @magneticnorth, that's true. But why not eliminate the whole pre-live rep processi n the first place... since the repetitive request for info comes anyways? I wonder how much time, money, effort that piece of the process saves companies? There must be value to it, since it's common practice.
- 7/13/2014 9:14:42 PM
If we're wary about the call hijacking scenario, then why should the machine require the account number in the first place?
That's why I agree with Ariella's hypothesis ;)
- 7/11/2014 11:11:57 AM
<Also ... seems like it would be useful for the inhabitants of matchmaking sites like Match.com. Just use your app to detect if that person pretending to be a wealthy 25-year-old is really a 45-year-old gold-digger who has fooled other lonelyhearts ...>
@Lyndon_Henry I suppose that would work with the established imposters -- leaving a voice print. However, you would still have the problem the first time around when there is no record on file. Interesting thing about voice and age: some of us (meaning me) sound much younger on the phone than we are in real life. Some callers can't tell the difference between my 18 year-old and myself when they call. I think even my sister thought she was talking to me when she conveyed some information to my daughter.
- by SethBreedlove, Data Doctor
- 7/10/2014 11:45:09 PM
@ Lyndon - Funny you should mention that. Before I worked in credit,in my early 20's, I did work for a private detective and pretended to be an adopted child looking for his biological parents in order to locate someone.
If this could be installed on everyone's phone, that might put an end to that, and a spouses excuse for working late, a child's excuse of what happened to their homework, surprise birthday parties........
- by Lyndon_Henry, Blogger
- 7/10/2014 10:50:02 PM
When I used to work as a credit investigator, I learned very quickly that was very easy to impersonate a person to find out their credit info. I did it often for legit reason.
I can envision the day when this fraud detection technology becomes widespread. Seems like it would create problems for a lotta private investigators that depend on impersonation to glean private information...
Also ... seems like it would be useful for the inhabitants of matchmaking sites like Match.com. Just use your app to detect if that person pretending to be a wealthy 25-year-old is really a 45-year-old gold-digger who has fooled other lonelyhearts ...