zlacker

>>helsin+(OP)
It is incredibly disheartening to see what was born a non-profit dedicated to guiding AI towards beneficial (or at the very least neutral) ends, to predictably fall into the well-worn SV groove of progressively shittier behavior in the pursuit of additional billions. What is victory for Open AI even supposed to look like by now?

>>projec+DZ1
What's shitty about this?

They approached Johansson and she said no. They found another voice actor who sounds slightly similar and paid her instead.

The movie industry does this all the time.

Johansson is probably suing them so they're forced to remove the Sky voice while the lawsuit is happening.

Nothing here is shitty.

>>LewisV+s92
What I'm wondering is why are they doing that in the first place. Why is the best AI company in the world trying to stick a flirty voice into their product?

>>zarmin+Uc2
It pains me to say it, but I really think it pays dividends to consider the very obvious possibility that the people who are doing this are in general just not socially well-adjusted.

Everything about OpenAI speaks of people who do not put great value on shared human connections, no?

Hey, I like that artist. I am going to train a computer to produce nearly identical work as if by them so I can have as many as I like, to meet my own wishes.

Why is it surprising that it didn't really cross their mind that a virtual girlfriend is not a good look?

This is not an organisation that has the feelings of people central to its mission. It's almost definitionally the opposite.

>>ecjhdn+6f2
Yes, it seEms a LOt of big Names in tech have this same problem. Curious that, isn't it?

I also think it is tipping their hand a bit. I know companies can do multiple things at once, but what might this flirty assistant focus suggest about how AGI is coming along?