Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I think for most people the answer is “worse”.
[flagged]
Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
241–250 of 1001 posts
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#242I watched the keynote and many of the demo videos and never once thought, "That sounds just like ScarJo."
That said, the timeline she lays out is damning indeed.
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#243Earlier quoted context omitted.
This quote actually makes me disgusted. I don't think this is a quality to encourage on, especially since despite the tone it reads more as abuse.
It's actually the most rational thing I've heard quoted from him. You have to be willing to open the box to see what's inside to know if you can do it better/cheaper/faster/smaller. There's ways of doing that without breaking laws, or doing something unethical with the what you learn. There's also ways of doing it without destroying something or violating anyone/anything. It also allows you to hear their response to…
Makes me glad there aren't people betting on how far I'm willing to go to bend the law. When you lay it all out like that you make PG sound like a cockfighter paying to get his champion bloodied.
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#244Most of the reactions here are in unison, so there's little left to contribute in agreement. I'll ask the devil's advocate / contrarian question: How big a slice of the human voice space does Scarlett lay a claim to? The evidence would be in her favor in a civil court case. OTOH, a less famous woman's claim that any given synthesized voice sounds like hers would probably fail. Contrast this with copyrighted fiction.…
(Not a lawyer) I think the issue is not just that they sound similar, but that OpenAI sought to profit from that perceived similarity. It’s pretty clear from Sam Altman’s “her” tweet that OpenAI, at least, considers it a fairly narrow slice of the human voice space.
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#245Earlier quoted context omitted.
Normally I'd agree if this were some vague "artist style", but this was clearly an attempt to duplicate a living person, a media celebrity no less.
Is this different from the various videos of the Harry Potter actors doing comedic high fashion ads? Because those were very well received. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipuqLy87-3A
There’s a big difference between a one off replica and person-as-a-service.
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#246Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 w…
I thought it sounded like Jodie Foster.
Scar Jo thought it sounded like herself, and so did people who knew her personally.
That is what matters. OWNERSHIP over her contributions to the world.
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#247This is interesting to hear and if she decides to sue there's extremely clear precedent on her side.
The fact that they reached out to her multiple times and insinuated it was supposed to sound like her with Sam's "her" tweet makes a pretty clear connection to her. Without that they'd probably be fine.
Bette Midler sued Ford under very similar circumstances and won.
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#248What if the model asks the user to input an audio sample of the person they'd like to hear, and use that? Would that be legal?
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#249So they wanted Johansson's voice, she declined, they chose another voice actress who sounds somewhat similar. Can someone explain why that is bad? I don't really get it.
Did they really hire another voice actress? Who?
As for why it's bad, it's because they set down the precedent of wanting specifically Scarlett Johansen's voice, got declined, doubled down, got declined again, and then went ahead and did it anyway. They can say in their own defense that it's some other voice actress that sounds similar, ok, so produce that name, tell us who she is.
Absent that, it's Johansen's voice, clipped from movies and interviews and shows and whatever.
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#250Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 w…
[flagged]
> has a history of not treating people fairly and ethically
Grandpa used to say, fallacy often exhibited by powerful people is when they transitively believe their wealth also signifies that the rules don't apply to them.