[HN Gopher] Zoom Escaper: self-sabotage audio, making your prese...
___________________________________________________________________
Zoom Escaper: self-sabotage audio, making your presence unbearable
to others
Author : DyslexicAtheist
Score : 99 points
Date : 2021-03-15 21:36 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (zoomescaper.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (zoomescaper.com)
| hobs wrote:
| the most powerful version of this I see in a contractor I talk
| to; its just an incredibly high frequency whine - you know they
| are not doing it on purpose but at the same time you are
| desperate to end the discussion as fast as possible.
| leephillips wrote:
| How do you know it's not on purpose? Seems to have what might
| be a desired effect.
| cbanek wrote:
| This is great. I have someone in my meetings to has the bad
| connection problem all the time. When trying that one out though,
| if I disabled it, it would only sometimes disable itself (and re-
| enable audio)?
| danaliv wrote:
| _" Sorry, this browser isn't compatible with Zoom Escaper. Please
| try Chrome on desktop."_
|
| How many times will we have to learn the lessons of the late
| '90s/'00s?
| gfodor wrote:
| The lesson of those times was to not rely upon proprietary APIs
| in browsers. (Like ActiveX or other IE-only extensions which
| were often used.)
|
| When you see this warning nowadays, it's not usually about
| that, but about Firefox or Safari being behind in supporting
| already-specced APIs.
| [deleted]
| _Microft wrote:
| I agree. Every webdev should know by now that you also need to
| tell visitors the screen resolution that a webpage is best
| viewed with.
| codetrotter wrote:
| 420x6969. Ultra portrait aspect ratio.
| motoboi wrote:
| Yeah, safari is the new internet explorer.
| saaaam wrote:
| Creator of the Zoom Escaper here... Sadly it relies on a web
| audio feature that's chrome only. Also too bad because I use
| firefox as my primary browser.
| permalac wrote:
| Well done.
|
| If someone wants to use this they should have no problem
| running in chrome.
| fireattack wrote:
| Could you elaborate a little bit? Just curious about the
| technical side of creating this cool application.
| chrisma0 wrote:
| "Man Weeping" or "Urination" are clearly the effects you want to
| get out of that meeting! "James, we'll have to drop you out of
| the call unfortunately, your crying is way too loud! Goodbye."
| nickthemagicman wrote:
| I can create the urination effect without an app.
| LilBytes wrote:
| Awww, I get the down votes. But I laughed. I laughed a lot.
| slt2021 wrote:
| good ole low tech analog solution
| boredpandas777 wrote:
| The most annoying and least suspicious thing for me personally
| would be the person on the other end playing back my own audio
| with a delay, just like the echo of your own voice that you get
| sometimes on a bad phone connection.
|
| This way I would blame it on my connection, not the other person,
| who is actually causing it. In a team setting, it goes like "Oh,
| so we're all hearing our own echoes. We should quit and try
| again" If there is one person acting as reflector with the right
| delay (echo generator) for everyone else, that could work, in
| theory.
| brokencode wrote:
| I'd attribute that to the other person playing the audio out of
| their computer speakers while using a mic that is not
| directional enough to filter it out.
| ghayes wrote:
| I generally consider it rude to not use headphones in a
| meeting. The primary issue is you can't have simultaneous
| talking when someone isn't using headphones, since most
| applications auto-cancel audio input when they detect
| feedback. You then have to switch to turn-taking which isn't
| always suited for certain conversations.
| tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
| Most meeting software I've seen shows talkers, making it very
| obvious who's causing the echo.
|
| I've _never_ seen local echo on a video conference nor do I
| really see a realistic path that could reasonably cause this.
| Regular echo, on the other hand, is common.
| Minor49er wrote:
| Most modern voice applications give a pretty clear visual
| indicator about who is making noise. I think in your scenario,
| the person echoing the audio would be quickly identified and
| told to mute themselves. If they were the only ones playing
| your audio back after a delay, people would suspect that they
| are the ones with the connection issue.
|
| However, this _was_ pretty common for a prank, especially 10-15
| years ago on services like Ventrilo which resulted in the then-
| popular Ventrilo Harassment series. Most of the people who got
| pranked in those didn 't get a visual indicator of who was
| playing sound. The situation you describe can be seen in this
| video titled "Ventertainment - Nerd Confusion 3: The Ring":
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5AkIfgioA4
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-03-15 23:00 UTC)