181–190 of 191 posts
Depending on where you live, that might violate wiretapping laws. Most of North America requires at least one party consent.
It could also not count as wiretapping, since it's about transcription, not about audio recordings. If the transcription service's presence in the call isn't hidden from other participants, is it still wiretapping?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He specifically _didn't_ configure it in that way.
How many times has a user said they didn't configure something that way and when you checked they did and they were thinking about a different setting for something else? Realisitically, it's actually the most likely thing that happened. And he did have it configured to send out emails. So that part is true.
This isn't true at all. This feature was and is disabled on my account.
> How many times has a user said they didn't configure something that way and when you checked they did and they were thinking about a different setting for something else? Realisitically, it's actually the most likely thing that happened.
Normally I would agree with you - the same thing happened to my boss earlier in the day, the Otter bot joined a call before she did and she was baffled how it was there. I thought she must have accidentally enabled a new feature.
So when I looked at my otter.ai account after that I was exceptionally careful to not just click through the big blue "Enable Otter Assistant" button and find the light grey "Skip" button in the upper right. To no avail, as the Otter bot started to invade my meetings after that.
I only stopped it by disabling the Google Calendar integration they had had prior, which was only to suggest which meeting to link recordings to, and not the new "Otter Assistant" feature that automatically joins meetings.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How many times has a user said they didn't configure something that way and when you checked they did and they were thinking about a different setting for something else? Realisitically, it's actually the most likely thing that happened. And he did have it configured to send out emails. So that part is true.
If they're lying or mistaken, let us discuss the lie or mistake, and even the possibility that there could have been a lie or mistake (based on something .) Just dismissing it based on a obvious counterfactual that you're declaring based on no evidence other than that you think users lie and developers don't make mistakes is a waste of time. If you have some kind of insight into the specific configuration of otter.ai…
Like I explained in the other comment, while mistaken configurations are frequently a user mistake, I was exceptionally careful in this instance because the same thing had just happened to my boss and I was wondering what the mistake she made was.
Also, I was hoping for a quality investigation and response from otter.ai but I think anyone can compare the credibility of my account to their response in this thread to figure out who they believe.
I stopped using them when I saw they share with everyone by default. I wanted the notes only for myself so I could be more present in meetings but not at the expense of making everyone feel like they have to watch what they're saying because it's being transcribed.
That's really only just hiding the fact that they should be watching what they're saying, though. If someone is sending a copy of our private conversation to a random third party, I'd certainly like to know about it. If anything, this "warning" only makes me trust this service more because I don't have to wonder if this service is listening in.
I rely on Otter pretty heavily these days. 100% agree that recording and sending the transcript to meeting attendees without their knowledge is a really bad move from several angles. I work sales calls set up with Calendly and Otter joins them all. These are very technical so normally it's fantastic - EXCEPT if we start talking early or the prospect doesn't follow the invite and never joins the call, then they would…
I now refuse to join sales meetings setup by vendors. Any meeting has to be on Google Meet using our domain because of dumb shit like Gong, Otter, and other stuff that records our employees without permission.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also deleted account. If anyone from Otter.ai is here - don't do this, reverse this change, email anyone affected since the change and apologise and also, i'd advise you to lawyer up.
Odds are they know their market better than you do, and are fully aware of just how serious the consequences from shit like this can be. but this is capitalism afterall, kind of the point
Earlier quoted context omitted.
change doesn't require breaking established laws , however, and that's what we're talking about
Doesn’t require it but it is ok if that happens.
Tangential, but I often wish I had screenshots to prove I'd opted in, or out, or otherwise done the right thing. It shouldn't be too expensive to record and index the screen whenever I'm doing something important online and keep it for a week.
Take more screenshots https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32215277 20220724 > record my screen with OBS ( https://obsproject.com/ ) >> 1080p in 10fps might be enough and it won't take ridiculous amount of space (ffmpeg de-dupe afterward: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32215277#32223240 ) -- > The space requirements can be very low capturing something like writing code (ffmpeg low fps: https://news.ycombinator.…
> Are there other, more privacy oriented transcription services anyone can recommend? Yes. Try https://aliceapp.ai , the iOS app's in the AppStore: https://aliceapp.ai/app . I created this specifically to be as privacy conscious as possible. There's a small, but strong team of engineers behind this and I'm the primary investor. It's not perfect, but works pretty well, with many relying on it everyday. From the FAQs:…
Can you say anything about the technology? It appears that this app DOES NOT work fully offline? That would imply that it sends all audio recordings to someone's data center... Who are you sending the audio to? Which legal jurisdiction are they in?