Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sam Altman is showing us who he really is

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 487 posts

Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is

#251

Post by a_wild_dandan »

dragonwriter wrote: post #91
redox99 wrote: post #44

They hired a voice actor for Sky's voice. 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?

> 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? No. Just as if they hired a writer to do something that made them liable for copyright violation, or an engineer for something that made them liable for patent violation, those workers would not be banned from work. The violation of right of personality isn't mere similarity of v…

The Sky voice actress could legitimately lose clients who fear "likeness" litigation, for all Her potential contracts, regardless of context. Your analogy needs work.

Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is

#252

Post by z7 »

Uehreka wrote: post #204
rowanG077 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't see at all where OpenAI claimed that sky is associated with Scarlett Johansson. If true I agree that is bad.

The day of the demo, Sam posted a one word tweet “her” (the title of the movie, starring Scarlett Johansson as an AI Assistant, that people bring up when talking about the idea of AI companions). Minutes later his company debuted an AI assistant that sounded a lot like Scarlett Johansson, performing an assistant/companion role similar to hers in the movie. The association was noticed, widely discussed and definitely…

Or he could have tweeted 'her' to compare his product with the movie AI's conversational abilities and human-like interactions. It just depends on how one subjectively interprets a single syllable.

Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is

#253

Post by a_wild_dandan »

icpmacdo wrote: post #236
Decabytes wrote: post #140

Ilya was right

Ilya: "I’m confident that OpenAI will build AGI that is both safe and beneficial under the leadership of @sama, @gdb, @miramurati and now, under the excellent research leadership of @merettm" https://x.com/ilyasut/status/1790517455628198322

Blink twice to low-key acknowledge the non-disparagement contract.

Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is

#254

Post by actuallyalys »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #170
kneel wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you believe her when she claimed that she was shadow banned from all social media because of her brother? Or that she had to become a sex worker to pay the bills because of his 'technological abuse'?

It's not that different to (substantiated) things I've heard from other people, so… personally, I believe it. The alleged sexual / medical / financial abuse is pretty typical, as is the account hacking. If it helps, New York Magazine has substantiated some of the minor details: https://archive.ph/j4lVw#60% . Sam Altman is fairly influential, and worse abuses from social media companies are well-documented, so as cons…

It’s definitely plausible to me she would experience some form of shadow banning or algorithmic deprioritization due to posting advertiser unfriendly content and (incorrectly) blame it on her brother. These systems are frequently opaque so I don’t think it’s reasonable to count that as a strike against her credibility.

And of course it’s not really that implausible that Altman could pull some strings. It wouldn’t require a huge conspiracy to shadow ban a few accounts. I don’t think it’s the most likely explanation, though.

Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is

#255

Post by czl »

hluska wrote: post #177
frankacter wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While not defending OpenAI or Altman, the caveat here is that this was a voice actor using their natural voice, not an actor impersonating scarlett johansson. Setting a precedent that if your natural voice sounds similar to a more famous actor precludes you from work would be a terrible precedent to set.

If we assume that Scarlett Johansson is telling the truth, why would they try to resume negotiations with her two days before they launched the model? If they found a good actor whose voice sounds like Scarlett Johansson, that’s a great argument. But if they found a good actor whose voice sounds like Scarlett Johansson because the real Scarlett Johansson said no, that gets more questionable. When they did all that an…

> why would they try to resume negotiations

Could they be trying to avert possible negative public perception even if they believe all they did was 100% legal? If you have ample funds and are willing to pay someone to make X easier for you does your offer to pay them imply that X is against the law? If your voice sounds like someone famous now you are prevented from getting any voice acting work? Because that famous person owns the rights to your voice? Tell me which law says this?

Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is

#256

Post by nomel »

Texasian wrote: post #79
redox99 wrote: post #44

They hired a voice actor for Sky's voice. 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?

That’s a blatant misunderstanding of how voice acting works. A good voice actor is a vocal chameleon, and can really change their voice for each role.

This is simply not true. A voice actor doesn’t have to be skilled at changing their voice, especially in this context. Many are hired for their natural voice, like narration. When most film actors do voice acting, they’re just using their voice. They’re not hired for being chameleons.

Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is

#257

Post by qzw »

WalterBright wrote: post #43
panarky wrote: post #6

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…

Jim Carrey made his career by impersonating celebrity voices. So did Rich Little.

Are you referring to doing impressions where the act lasts for a few minutes, or are you saying that Jim Carrey actually impersonated other celebrity voice for like a whole movie or interview? There is a difference, I think. One feels like “fair use” while the other would seem more like “plagiarism”.

Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is

#258

Post by minimaxir »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #216
game_the0ry wrote: post #28

I wonder how long this thread will last on HN... How much influence does @sama have around here nowadays? For the record, I was never impressed with him - I am not aware of single consequential thing he has done or built other than take the credit for the fine work of the AI scientist + engineers at OpenAI. It feels like the company is just a vehicle for how own ambition and legacy, not much else.

The thread is rightly being knocked off by the mods because there’s zero substance here. It’s a follow-on thread (knock one) to a public uproar (knock two) about something that isn’t representative of a new phenomenon (knock three). This isn’t what HN is for.

It's likely getting flagged organically (and due to the ratio of comments to upvotes, getting penalized by the flame war detector), but not due to a vast YC conspiracy.

Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is

#259

Post by [deleted] »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #227
danielmarkbruce wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100%. This whole thing is more stupidity than anything else. There is nothing wrong with using a voice that sounds like her. There is everything wrong with referencing the movie and sort of implying it is the voice from the movie. They could have easily let others make the connection. So dumb.

Why is it wrong to explicitly mimic a part played in a movie? Are we saying that the actor owns their portrayal of the role? OpenAI should’ve owned their actions. "Yes, we wanted to get a voice that sounded like the one from Her." There’s nothing wrong with that.

[deleted]

Re: Sam Altman is showing us who he really is

#260

Post by NautilusWave »

panarky wrote: post #6

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…

Non-sequitur statements like this drive me nuts. Somehow, politicians and executive types learn how to use just enough of them to make the audience forget what they're not saying.
Post reply on HN