Google is Working on 'Clear Calling' For Android Phone Calls (theverge.com) 28
The first beta for the Android 13 quarterly release includes a new "clear calling" feature that "reduces background noises during calls." From a report: It was first spotted by Mishaal Rahman on Twitter who also tweeted directions to enable it for yourself without root, if you're feeling bold. The images shared by Rahman note that Clear Calling works "on most mobile networks," is "not available for Wi-Fi calling," and "content from your call is not sent to Google."
Why the limitations? (Score:3)
This would seem to be a processing on the audio from microphone, why does it care about the carrier and whether it's carried by Wifi or cellular?
Re: Why the limitations? (Score:3)
I think it would be easier to do that over WiFi
Re: (Score:1)
content from your call is not sent to Google
Funny how they outright say this. So call content is not sent but they probably obfuscate the data somehow to get around that statement.
Right (Score:2)
If Google can extract the background from your speech, if not Google, there are others who would love to have it, so Ima call Bullshit.
Re:Right (Score:4, Informative)
Background removal from audio is a well known field. E.g:
https://jmvalin.ca/demo/rnnois... [jmvalin.ca]
At the bottom is a thing to play with adding noise and seeing how well it can filter out background. You can still hear certain noise when coincident with foreground speech, but overall it's pretty compelling.
Re: (Score:3)
For more examples:
https://www.amazon.science/int... [www.amazon.science]
Re: Right (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So no one would be interested in the background? Give me a break.
If Google can extract the background from your speech, if not Google, there are others who would love to have it, so Ima call Bullshit.
It doesn't say no one would be interested, it says content won't be sent to Google. But of course, you're probably right. "Uses phone near busy intersections" and "Occasionally talks on the phone outside when the wind is really blowing" and "Sometimes uses phone when nearby people are conversing, but whether it's an office, a restaurant, or a busy sidewalk is hard to say" would be invaluable for targeted advertising.
Re: Right (Score:2)
When location data is near someone we're trying to listen to's location data.
Re: (Score:2)
Committing millions of wiretapping felonies just to target ads a little better doesn't seem wise. When you use their assistant to screen calls it always announces itself so there can be no legal issues, and all processing is done on the phone (verified).
Re: (Score:2)
Committing millions of wiretapping felonies just to target ads a little better doesn't seem wise. When you use their assistant to screen calls it always announces itself so there can be no legal issues, and all processing is done on the phone (verified).
I wonder - since we can now pull other conversations out - does that mean that if a person uses the serfvice, everyone in the room must give permission?
Sorry ma'am we couldn't hear the background (Score:2)
If only we could have heard what was in the background we could have solved the murder. :p
Qualcomm did this in the mid 90s (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I once worked with a professor who had worked on that!
Much later, as I was prepping courses during Covid, I had lectures from previous years (with guest speakers, etc.) that I wanted to re-use. But the Course Management System that recorded the sessions had really aggressive noise suppression so that if the signal dropped below a relatively high threshold, it would cut to 0. It was very distracting. I was able to make it a lot easier to listen to by adding a quiet bit of random noise to the audio.
Wait. (Score:2)
Meanwhile, what we really need is... (Score:3)
...a service which recognises people with incomprehensible accents and auto corrects it.
Re: (Score:2)
Completely cutting audio when no one talks is dumb (Score:2)
Some of the cheaper microphones make it really obvious though when all sound just cuts out before the speaker has even finished their previous word. Though usually is y
Isn't this old tech ? (Score:1)
Wasn't this available since ages via secundary microphones? I remember my old devices having then in the back/top for this purpose.
Like this:
http://www.gsmdome.com/wp-cont... [gsmdome.com]
I'd rather have... (Score:2)
...POTS quality audio instead of shitty GSM codecs that make everyone sound like a cross between a walrus and a turkey. For fuck's sake it's 2022 and we've all got more than enough bandwidth... would it really kill anybody to demand a straight 64kbps uncompressed audio stream instead of this crap?
Re: (Score:2)
Don't know what type of phone you have but even the office phones at my old job sounded better when someone called from a cell phone. Like comparing a POTS line to facetime audio.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you demand uncompressed? That's going to make for worse quality. By all means increase the bandwidth.
Re: (Score:2)
Because the compression quality on GSM codecs is absolute garbage. It's not just the bandwidth. Just give me a 64 kbps POTS stream. Problem fucking solved.
Re: (Score:2)
"content from your call is not sent to Google." (Score:4, Insightful)