zlacker

[return to "OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show"]
1. skille+CM[view] [source] 2024-05-23 06:13:55
>>richar+(OP)
The thing that worried me initially was that:

- the original report by Scarlett said she was approached months ago, and then two days prior to launch of GPT-4o she was approached again

Because of the above, my immediate assumption was that OpenAI definitely did her dirty. But this report from WaPo debunks at least some of it, because the records they have seen show that the voice actor was contacted months in advance prior to OpenAI contacting Scarlett for the first time. (also goes to show just how many months in advance OpenAI is working on projects)

However, this does not dispel the fact that OpenAI did contact Scarlett, and Sam Altman did post the tweet saying "her", and the voice has at least "some" resemblance of Scarlett's voice, at least enough to have two different groups saying that it does, and the other saying that it does not.

◧◩
2. serial+KN[view] [source] 2024-05-23 06:21:44
>>skille+CM
I don't know, to me, it's just sounds like they know how to cover all their bases.

To me, it sounds like they had the idea to make their AI sound like "her". For the initial version, they had a voice actor that sounds like the movie, as a proof of concept.

They still liked it, so it was time to contact the real star. In the end, it's not just the voice, it would have been the brand, just imagine the buzz they would have got if Scarlett J was the official voice of the company. She said no, and they were like, "too bad, we already decided how she will sound like, the only difference is whether it will be labelled as SJ or not".

In the end, someone probably felt like it's a bit too dodgy as it resemblance was uncanny, they gave it another go, probably ready to offer more money, she still refused, but in the end, it didn't change a thing.

◧◩◪
3. gnicho+cO[view] [source] 2024-05-23 06:26:42
>>serial+KN
Agreed — seems like they had a plan, and probably talked extensively with Legal about how to develop and execute the plan to give themselves plausible deniability. The tweet was inadvisable, and undoubtedly not part of the actual plan (unless it was to get PR).
◧◩◪◨
4. visarg+yX[view] [source] 2024-05-23 07:45:02
>>gnicho+cO
I am sure it was for free PR. Streisand effect trap for ScarJo.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. z7+952[view] [source] 2024-05-23 15:37:54
>>visarg+yX
They removed ChatGPT's most popular voice in response, causing anger among many of their customers... for PR?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. visarg+ae2[view] [source] 2024-05-23 16:19:06
>>z7+952
I can't say much about that particular voice because I almost never used chatGPT's voices. They are too slow.

I need 1.5x speeds even if I have to use a worse voice. I am a TTS power user, listening to all online text since 2010s. Maybe GPT-4o has a more flexible voice, perhaps you can just ask it to speak faster.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. gnicho+Qc3[view] [source] 2024-05-23 21:55:19
>>visarg+ae2
They also need to have a terse mode, to avoid all the throat-clearing that I've seen in videos.
[go to top]