zlacker

I think it’s interesting that Johansson chose to forgo substantial royalties and collaboration potential

But it must feel pretty fucking weird and violatory when you spend your entire life thinking about how you are going to deliver certain lines and that’s your creative Body of work, and then for someone to just take that Voice and apply it to any random text that can be generated?

I get why she wouldn’t want to let it go.

In a way it is similar to how a developer might feel about their code being absorbed, generalized, and then regurgitated almost verbatim as part of some AI responses

But in the case of voice it’s even worse as the personality impression is contained in the slightest utterance… whereas a style of coding Or a piece of code might be less Recognizable, and generally applicable to such a wide range of productions

Voice is the original human technology, To try to take that from someone without their consent is a pretty all encompassing grab

>>keepam+(OP)
She choose to forego being a billion lonely guys AI girlfriend

Not a bad call for someone already rich

>>steveB+11
> She choose to forego being a billion lonely guys AI girlfriend

To suggest that Johansson’s only appeal is to the opposite gender (and ‘lonely’ ones at that!) I think is myopic and reductive of her impact

>>keepam+12
That is not her only appeal, she is a renowned actress.

However Sam tweeted "her" which is literally the movie where she voices the AI girlfriend. And then made a synthetic replica of her voice the star of their new demo against her wishes.

It's pretty direct what he is pitching at.

>>steveB+z2
Fair enough. But I think your comment was reductive…

but it doesn’t matter, because how he may have marketed it in a 140 character tweet does not encompass the entirety of how it could be used, of course

>>keepam+(OP)
ScarJo probably has enough money for ten lifetimes already. The potential downside of signing your identity away to a SV plutocrat with questionable morality and world-changing technology is enormous. And it seems like she was instantly vindicated in not trusting him.

>>keepam+(OP)
Were royalties in the picture? Don't think it's crazy to think that a company obsessed with replacing artists wouldn't value one enough to pay royalties.

And in terms of collaboration potential... OpenAI is a big draw for businesses and a subset of tech enthusiasts, but I don't think artists in any industry are dying to collaborate with them.

>>keepam+(OP)
SJ is a major character in like 5 of the top grossing movies of all time. The royalties from her voice being used by ChatGPT would be meaningless to her

>>steveB+11
More like delaying the inevitable. We have ai voice generation so good now, they use it to stage ransom calls and parents cannot tell the difference.

>>keepam+12
That was not an exclusive statement. It can be a billion lonely guys, AND lonely women, AND gregarious enbies, AND everyone else.

>>skywho+uc
Indeed, they can find the male voice equivalent. Though to be fair I think men are MUCH more susceptible to this than women.

That said, Krazam covered this topic well already https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiPQdVC5RHU

>>keepam+(OP)
> chose to forgo substantial royalties and collaboration potential

We know nothing about their offer to her. Could have just been a bad deal

>>sudden+N3
According to Open AI's post about the Sky voice controversy:

"Each actor receives compensation above top-of-market rates, and this will continue for as long as their voices are used in our products."

https://openai.com/index/how-the-voices-for-chatgpt-were-cho...

Not sure if this is royalties, but it seems like there's some form of long term compensation. But it's a little vague so not sure.

>>steveB+11
I would have to imagine that having your voice being spit out of millions of machines, all day long, might dilute one's brand, no?

Also, suddenly your voice is being used to say things that you would never say. What could go wrong?

Suddenly, instead of ScarJo, the famous movie star, you are that crazy voice from OpenAI.

>>keepam+43
> But I think your comment was reductive…

So what? Reducing a situation to its essentials is an entirely valid argument / debating technique.

>>CRConr+f2w
Your mistake is thinking that's the essentials hahaha! :)

>>steveB+11
> She choose to forego being a billion lonely guys AI girlfriend

To suggest that Johansson’s only appeal is to the opposite gender (and ‘lonely’ ones at that!) I think is myopic and reductive of her impact

hahaha! :)

>>keepam+PZx
Oh ferfuxxake, please stop it with the Valley Girl talk.

lol hahaha!