91–100 of 168 posts
The headline is drawing all sorts of misleading conclusions. There's a PM posting for an ML team with a $300-900k market range. Nothing to do with actors striking.
One of the specific things that they're striking against is that the movie companies wanted to be able to get the right to use background actors' likenesses in perpetuity to be recast as AI characters.
> As Actors Strike for AI Protections, Netflix Lists $900,000 AI Job
How are those even related?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Kylian Mbappe was recently offered $776 MILLION in salary for a 1-year deal as the highest paid soccer (football) player [1]. Jaylen Brown will be making $304 MILLION over 5 years for the Boston Celtics as the highest paid NBA player. Wealth inequality from predominantly ads-based (tv-deals) business models is a cancer to our society. [1]: https://frontofficesports.com/saudi-arabia-reportedly-offers...
> Wealth inequality from predominantly ads-based (tv-deals) business models is a cancer to our society. How do you solve this? People want to pay attention, advertisers want a piece. They have $enough_profit_to_pay_for_ads, so they do.
Advertisers want to swap what they care about with their ads. In fact, last time I watched television, programming was more ad than TV.
To hell with advertisers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine that your likeness as an extra is sold for $250, used in future films via AI deep fake, and you never get paid again. That's my understanding of why they're striking.
I don’t think they need your likeness for an extra. They can just create an army of AI extras and use them without paying for anyone’s likeness. That’s my understanding of the strike anyway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Kylian Mbappe was recently offered $776 MILLION in salary for a 1-year deal as the highest paid soccer (football) player [1]. Jaylen Brown will be making $304 MILLION over 5 years for the Boston Celtics as the highest paid NBA player. Wealth inequality from predominantly ads-based (tv-deals) business models is a cancer to our society. [1]: https://frontofficesports.com/saudi-arabia-reportedly-offers...
The economy is not zero sum, other people making large sums of money shouldn't make you upset. Those athletes are paid that much because the fans (customers) value them that much.
Apparently it upsets author of the article that AI PM makes 900k.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Kylian Mbappe was recently offered $776 MILLION in salary for a 1-year deal as the highest paid soccer (football) player [1]. Jaylen Brown will be making $304 MILLION over 5 years for the Boston Celtics as the highest paid NBA player. Wealth inequality from predominantly ads-based (tv-deals) business models is a cancer to our society. [1]: https://frontofficesports.com/saudi-arabia-reportedly-offers...
The economy is not zero sum, other people making large sums of money shouldn't make you upset. Those athletes are paid that much because the fans (customers) value them that much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine that your likeness as an extra is sold for $250, used in future films via AI deep fake, and you never get paid again. That's my understanding of why they're striking.
But who has the budget for particularly recognisable extras anyway? It's not like famous enough to be mass-recognisable actors are getting paid to be extras anyway, and why would you bother to copy someone unknown's likeness when you can just have your AI generate something new anyway? And I'm not convinced you'd want recognisable extras, it'd be distracting wouldn't it? And detract from who your actual stars are whe…
If I'm a background actor, of course I want to get paid to be in multiple movies instead of just getting paid once to serve as AI training data.
Plus, many famous actors started out in bit background parts, and there is a valid fear this is "pulling up the ladder". Brad Pitt's first movie role was as an uncredited waiter in the 1987 film No Man's Land, for which he was almost fired trying to ad lib a line (i.e. to "upgrade" his part to a speaking role).
from the article: https://jobs.netflix.com/jobs/278437235 "... The overall market range for roles in this area of Netflix is typically $300,000 - $900,000. This market range is based on total compensation (vs. only base salary), which is in line with our compensation philosophy..."
Odd that no one is highlighting that the 900k salary quoted is almost certainly bogus. Now companies are forced to disclose salary ranges in California. Some tech companies combat this by publishing unhelpfully broad salary ranges. Some people MIGHT make that much, but the vast majority still won't (not that it detracts from tech workers making a pretty penny).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The economy is not zero sum, other people making large sums of money shouldn't make you upset. Those athletes are paid that much because the fans (customers) value them that much.
> other people making large sums of money shouldn't make you upset. Why not? It clearly shows that there is a screw loose. Or put differently: it reminds us of the fundamental truth that in society, people without power get as little as is available to keep them alive and sometimes less, and people with power (in this case, the power of a good negotiating position) get as much as is available to pay them. The world d…
Because it's not productive.
Yell and shake your fist at cloud all you want, it's not going to change.