41–50 of 487 posts
This feels like someone trying to do something they thought Steve Jobs would do.
spend a little bit of time in SF or the peninsula and you’ll see that’s a common thing there unless you’re running a company into the ground and getting a bailout from your rival who is trying to delay an antitrust suit, then you’re not doing Steve Jobs correctly
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are hundreds of people with similar voices. If any voice actor can pull the same accent than Ms. Johansson, it should be fair game, as long it was the original training material? Voices cannot be copyrighted or be exclusive, although I am sure Hollywood will try to copyright them in some point.
With generative AI training may not be needed, it can be part of prompt: imitate voice like in this file: her.mp3.
Altman would have us believe it's all just an innocent misunderstanding but without actually saying so: "We cast the voice actor behind Sky’s voice before any outreach to Ms. Johansson." Is he trying to suggest the company did not try to make the voice sound like her without her permission? The statement sounds like it's written by a lawyer to be technically true while implying something that is actually false. These…
If OpenAI loses, does this mean this voice actor cannot do their job any longer, because it happens some other actor has a similar voice?
Could Sky's voice actor sue a movie Johansson works in, because Johannson is copying her voice?
I don't like @sama just as much as the next person, but come on, in what world is ScarJo's voice unique? There are many people who sound like her. Does she imply that she "owns" this voice so no one else can use it? Excuse me, that's not how it works. Edit: IMO OpenAI should just make their voice engine open source. Then we'll see if ScarJo or anyone else can stop the open-source community. I expected more from her.
The fact that he pulled it down has me believing that he knew there was a real chance the company would get in trouble if he hadn't.
I don't like @sama just as much as the next person, but come on, in what world is ScarJo's voice unique? There are many people who sound like her. Does she imply that she "owns" this voice so no one else can use it? Excuse me, that's not how it works. Edit: IMO OpenAI should just make their voice engine open source. Then we'll see if ScarJo or anyone else can stop the open-source community. I expected more from her.
They should have just created a unique voice from the start. And they will likely do that moving forward.
I love how we went from questioning copyright & licensing to "GPT vs Google, which one is better". To every artist or engineer out there who contributed to the general knowledge: you lost, everything you've ever done to help other people is now part of the models and there's nothing you can do to take it back. What even happened to the copyright strikes artists were supposed to bring up against these AI companies? Th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
spend a little bit of time in SF or the peninsula and you’ll see that’s a common thing there unless you’re running a company into the ground and getting a bailout from your rival who is trying to delay an antitrust suit, then you’re not doing Steve Jobs correctly
It's usually people who never worked for Steve or ever got to meet him who seem to take this approach. Their company isn't just a business, it's a cult, and they're the Founder (notice the capital "F") and part of being in charge of this cult is asserting dominance over others. Steve knew to rarely pull this outside of tech executive circles; the new generation doesn't seem to keep it in SV. Musk is the go-to example…