The why question is easily answered if you see how many negative reactions their choice of voice caused. A gender-neutral voice would have just avoided annoying a certain percentage of the population, including me.
I'm happy if advertising stops hitting the sexy/cliched stereotypes.
Sometimes the Guardian goes a bit far but OpenAI could have avoided this kind of article: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/may/1...
(Edit: I guess I was being slightly inflammatory with my first sentence. I think the default voice should be gender-neutral and then let the user choose what makes them happy. I don't think it was clever of OpenAI to use a sexy female as the default voice in their demos as evidenced by us having this discussion)
To be honest, this HN thread was the first time I saw someone complaining about male and female voices in ChatGPT.
>A gender-neutral voice would have just avoided annoying a certain percentage of the population, including me.
The voice actors and actresses hired by OpenAI use their natural voices for training, I don't understand how that could be annoying to anyone, is the problem that they didn't hire a trans person (I imagine they have a more neutral voice)?
It's the fifth place I've seen it since yesterday. And I haven't been looking. Even my mum sent me a Guardian article about it on Whatsapp.
Daily show: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/51ucQ4s7Crc
In my opinion, they should have hired a trans person, created a gender-neutral voice, and used that as the default. It would not have caused a backlash to the voices.
I'm assuming you're trans and you follow or know people who seem to really care about these issues. I think you might be deeply biased, I search for the ChatGPT voice on Google and no one really seems to care about it in a negative way, if there was an actual backlash I would be able to find it easily.
>In my opinion, they should have hired a trans person, created a gender-neutral voice, and used that as the default.
I think the vast majority of the population would find it more natural to have a female or male voice. I also believe that people should be hired for their skills, not their gender.
Couldn't the fact that most ChatGPT developers are white, cis-male, and affluent introduce bias that one needs to actively work against to ensure a more inclusive and representative technology? Given historical discrimination, we need to elevate underrepresented voices to even the playing field.
I think the problem lies with a small group of people online who always see malice first, if the AI has a female voice then it's because people think women are submissive, if the AI has a male voice then it would be the patriarchy, the AI can tell you where to go for example. Some people who want to complain will always find a way to complain, there is nothing wrong with having a female or male voice as the default one.
>most ChatGPT developers are white, cis-male
White and cis doesn't really surprise me, since most of the US is white and cis; Sam Altmam is gay, if this sort of thing actually matters. The smaller presence of women in STEM disciplines is noticeable; for some reason, all of my female friends seem to care far less about computers, probably some bias at portraiting hackers as men in the media or something (even though the vast majority of hackers are indeed men), it's like the chicken or egg dilemma.