Sam Altman is showing us who he really is

Post by CRConrad » Thu, May 23, 2024, 1:12 PM UTC

frankacter wrote: post #330

wk_end wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should tell that to OpenAI, who are the ones selling it as "her".

Drawing a parallel to a calming persona of an always on life assistant from pop culture in a few throwaway social media posts from personal accounts such as "Hope Everyone's Ready" isn't "selling it as Her" any more than Anthropic is selling their offerings as a Star Trek communicator despite a few comments they've made on social media.

Post by CRConrad » Thu, May 23, 2024, 1:18 PM UTC

czl wrote: post #265

WheatMillington wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking like a celebrity is obviously not an issue. A lookalike being passed off as a celebrity is an issue.

Was OpenAI was passing off their AI model as Johansson? Obviously not. If anything OpenAI tried to mimic the AI from the film Her and owners of that film may try to seek compensation. I hope that fails but they can try.

Post by CRConrad » Thu, May 23, 2024, 1:32 PM UTC

caeril wrote: post #420

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…

I agree that he should have been honest, but from the opposite perspective. Altman should have said, "Yes, we made the voice similar to this washed-up actress, but her voice is not much different from anyone else with similar regional upbringing, year of birth, habits, and ethnic background, so we invite anyone else born in the mid-eighties, raised in Greenwich, and with Danish heritage, to sue us too. We'll see how…

Post by CRConrad » Thu, May 23, 2024, 1:41 PM UTC

nomel wrote: post #250

campbel wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IANAL, but I think the mistake they made was constantly referencing the movie 'Her' when talking about Sky.

Regardless of the exactly voice spectrum, the plot would apply with any flirty female voice. It was not a movie about Scarlett Johansson. It was a movie about AI eliciting a relationship. For the “her” reference(s?), was there anything beyond the single tweet?

Post by CRConrad » Thu, May 23, 2024, 1:46 PM UTC

sillysaurusx wrote: post #405

lelandfe wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"This is perfectly legal!" Actually, there's a similar court case from 1988 that creates legal precedent for her to sue. "That's just one case! And it's from 1988! That's 36 years ago: rounded up, that's 4 decades!" Actually, there's a court case from 1992 that built on that judgement and expanded it to define a specific kind of tort. "That's bad law! Forget the law! I demand a moral justification." Anyway, asking a…

If you approach a debate from a bad faith standpoint, don’t be surprised when the other person doesn’t change their mind. "I think you’re a liar" is a great way to make them nope out. Which is a shame, since you had a decent argument. Except it isn’t. Again, you’re acting like OpenAI tried to profit off of Scarlett. They tried to profit off of the portrayal she did in the movie Her. These are not the same thing, and…