zlacker

[return to "Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice"]
1. anon37+t5[view] [source] 2024-05-20 22:58:41
>>mjcl+(OP)
Well, that statement lays out a damning timeline:

- OpenAI approached Scarlett last fall, and she refused.

- Two days before the GPT-4o launch, they contacted her agent and asked that she reconsider. (Two days! This means they already had everything they needed to ship the product with Scarlett’s cloned voice.)

- Not receiving a response, OpenAI demos the product anyway, with Sam tweeting “her” in reference to Scarlett’s film.

- When Scarlett’s counsel asked for an explanation of how the “Sky” voice was created, OpenAI yanked the voice from their product line.

Perhaps Sam’s next tweet should read “red-handed”.

◧◩
2. nickth+R7[view] [source] 2024-05-20 23:10:38
>>anon37+t5
This statement from scarlet really changed my perspective. I use and loved the Sky voice and I did feel it sounded a little like her, but moreover it was the best of their voice offerings. I was mad when they removed it. But now I’m mad it was ever there to begin with. This timeline makes it clear that this wasn’t a coincidence and maybe not even a hiring of an impressionist (which is where things get a little more wishy washy for me).
◧◩◪
3. crimso+y9[view] [source] 2024-05-20 23:19:08
>>nickth+R7
But it's clearly not her voice right? The version that's been on the app for a year just isn't. Like, it clearly intending to be slightly reminiscent of her, but it's also very clearly not. Are we seriously saying we can't make voices that are similar to celebrities, when not using their actual voice?
◧◩◪◨
4. ncalla+jc[view] [source] 2024-05-20 23:38:23
>>crimso+y9
> Are we seriously saying we can't make voices that are similar to celebrities, when not using their actual voice?

They clearly thought it was close enough that they asked for permission, twice. And got two no’s. Going forward with it at that point was super fucked up.

It’s very bad to not ask permission when you should. It’s far worse to ask for permission and then ignore the response.

Totally ethically bankrupt.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. nicce+Cd[view] [source] 2024-05-20 23:45:43
>>ncalla+jc
And they could have totally get away with it by never mentioning the name of Scarlett. But of course, that is not what they wanted.

Edit: to clarify, since it is not exactly identical voice, or even not that close, they can plausibly deny it, and we never new what their intention was.

But in this case, they have clearly created the voice to represent Scarlett's voice to demonstrate the capabilities of their product in order to get marketing power.

[go to top]