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

They stole my voice with AI

jeffgeerling.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 461 posts

Re: They stole my voice with AI

#91

Post by Drakim »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #46
Dalewyn wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's going to be an interesting First Amendment question.

Might as well make photoshopping and manual audio tweaking / impersonation illegal, since its the same ballpark, just less effort.

Might as well make forging signatures and identity thief legal. Who is the government to say which squiggles I may and may not write?

Society is about compromises and balancing different needs against each other. Sometimes we go one way, other times we go the other way, there is no one principle that always solve any situation.

Re: They stole my voice with AI

#92

Post by wruza »

adityaathalye wrote: post #89

If LLMs are the ultimate remix machine, then is anyone with a RAG a digital DJ? One can't help but wonder what theft even means any more, when it comes to digital information. With the (lack of) legal precedent, it feels like the wild wild west of intellectual property and copyright law. Like, if even a superstar like Scarlett Johansson can only write a pained letter about OpenAI's hustle to mimic her "Her" persona,…

what theft even means any more

They dragged the term through different phases, but that’s just projection of will. Theft is undefined for objects with .copy() interface. It’s still there when you look at it.

People have to adjust expectations, not laws. Computers replaced computers, now voice acting replaces voice actors. Your popularity doesn’t mean anything really and wouldn’t it be unfair if only popular could spare their jobs.

Re: They stole my voice with AI

#93

Post by ConorSheehan1 »

oxygen_crisis wrote: post #82
ummonk wrote: post #3

I don't see why using AI would get around Midler vs. Ford. If anything, there is even less of an argument to be made in your defense when you use AI to replicate a voice, instead of using another voice actor to replicate the voice.

The court explicitly limited their decision to the voices of professional singers in that case: > ...these observations hold true of singing, especially singing by a singer of renown. The singer manifests herself in the song. To impersonate her voice is to pirate her identity... > We need not and do not go so far as to hold that every imitation of a voice to advertise merchandise is actionable. We hold only that when…

Doesn't this have an obvious edge case for every singer from now on though? If your voice is cloned before you become a singer of renown you have no protection.

Re: They stole my voice with AI

#94

Post by the_gorilla »

ERR_CERT_AUTH3 wrote: post #73
diffxx wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm long on humans and suspect that many people will begin to prefer imperfection in reaction to the overproliferation of ai generated content.

AI will be able to generate imperfection too.

That's convenient, right? AI will be more than perfect and also be able to be imperfect if you want it, it'll just do anything you want. Here's a better prediction: Almost no one wants to listen to whatever low effort trash gets pumped into an advanced TTS.

Re: They stole my voice with AI

#95

Post by parineum »

saaaaaam wrote: post #88
mbrumlow wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems silly. What if I train my model on somebody who sounds like a somebody?

I imagine it would then depend on the intent and how that voice was presented. If you got Bob who sounds awfully like Mr Very Famous Guy to record vocal that you then use to train your AI and use that vocal clone to sell your nutritional yeast extract as though it’s Mr Very Famous Guy selling it that would likely be a problem. If you used the vocal clone to sell it, but said something like “oh hey it’s Bob here lots…

This Ain't Very Famous Guy: An AI Parody

Re: They stole my voice with AI

#96

Post by 8n4vidtmkvmk »

surfingdino wrote: post #77

It's all fun and games until someone produces a recording of somebody else saying something incriminating and it will be used in court. This is the part of AI I hate.

It'll be bad for a few years, but surely at some point it'll become inadmissible in court because it's too easy to fake, right? But then what do we do, if video and audio footage is inadmissible?

Re: They stole my voice with AI

#97

Post by the_gorilla »

wruza wrote: post #92
adityaathalye wrote: post #89

If LLMs are the ultimate remix machine, then is anyone with a RAG a digital DJ? One can't help but wonder what theft even means any more, when it comes to digital information. With the (lack of) legal precedent, it feels like the wild wild west of intellectual property and copyright law. Like, if even a superstar like Scarlett Johansson can only write a pained letter about OpenAI's hustle to mimic her "Her" persona,…

what theft even means any more They dragged the term through different phases, but that’s just projection of will. Theft is undefined for objects with .copy() interface. It’s still there when you look at it. People have to adjust expectations, not laws. Computers replaced computers, now voice acting replaces voice actors. Your popularity doesn’t mean anything really and wouldn’t it be unfair if only popular could spa…

> Theft is undefined for objects with .copy() interface.

> Computers replaced computers, now voice acting replaces voice actors.

It's incredible what web development does to someone's ability to communicate ideas.

Re: They stole my voice with AI

#98

Post by btilly »

mbrumlow wrote: post #24
toomuchtodo wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California recently signed some legislation into effect. It’s a start. Congress is working on “No Artificial Intelligence Fake Replicas And Unauthorized Duplications Act.” Still in dev in the House, but has bipartisan support. Call your congressperson, ask them to co-sponsor and/or vote for it. https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/california-bills-pro... https://salazar.house.gov/media/press-releases/salazar-intro…

Seems silly. What if I train my model on somebody who sounds like a somebody?

And the flip side. What if somebody who sounds like the person you trained on accuses you of stealing their voice? Assuming malice from similarity is going to sometimes lead to wrong results.

Re: They stole my voice with AI

#99

Post by klabb3 »

golol wrote: post #86

>I remember when OpenAI practically cloned Scarlett Johanssen's voice... There is absolutely zero evidence for this. I find it infuriating that this keeps being stated as a fact. So they go and hire a voice actor and clearly use her voice to train, but then they also scrape Scarlett Johansson from youtube and splice it into the training data to make the voice a bit more like hers? Really does that sound realistic?

Yeah it does.

Motive: Altman had some weird boyish thing for her and they asked her first, she said no.

Means: Lots of available data to use from her movies. They probably trained a model first without releasing it just because it’s ridiculously easy. Especially for OpenAI.

Opportunity: AI is astonishingly good at laundering and remixing without exposing the training set, for previously-unseen levels of plausible deniability.

Re: They stole my voice with AI

#100

Post by parineum »

EGreg wrote: post #67
toomuchtodo wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California recently signed some legislation into effect. It’s a start. Congress is working on “No Artificial Intelligence Fake Replicas And Unauthorized Duplications Act.” Still in dev in the House, but has bipartisan support. Call your congressperson, ask them to co-sponsor and/or vote for it. https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/california-bills-pro... https://salazar.house.gov/media/press-releases/salazar-intro…

They’re stifling creativity with these anti-AI bills! “No AI unathorized duplications”… these regulations are going to hold this country back while others advance. Mark Andreessen is very much against this government overreach

You joke but couldn't I just pay a Chinese company to train model for me that sounds like a certain person and use it with impunity?

Sounding like someone certainly isn't illegal and a foreign company isn't going to respond to a lawsuit that aims to determine the source of their training data.

You'd just not have to pretend to be that person in a deceptive way (parody is legal).

Post reply on HN