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

Weird A.I. Yankovic: a cursed deep dive into the world of voice cloning

waxy.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 207 posts

Re: Weird A.I. Yankovic: a cursed deep dive into the world of voice cloning

#101

Post by deepsun »

minimaxir wrote: post #98
deepsun wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> voice actors are fearing that the ability for generative AI to replicate their voices may cost them work I'm not sure how to feel about that. I'm against the idea that some people "deserve" being paid for being lucky born with an interesting voice. On the other hand, the world always worked like that. And, say, hard-working farmer or doctor were also lucky being born with necessary traits to make for their living,…

Voice acting is more than just talking into a microphone. It's a skill not limited to the quality of voice.

A lot of skills are not simple, but computers have taken over them anyways. For example, financial bookkeeping is not just writing and storing the books, it's a professional skill with many tricks to learn. However, databases and spreadsheets have taken the major part from those jobs. Same could be said about programmers who learned the skill of programming Assembly language. Or performing -- vinyl records and CDs has largely taken over orchestras and traveling musicians.

I would vote for it only if it somehow encouraged voice actors to experiment and create new interesting styles. Kinda like patents were designed to do -- encourage inventors (although recently it became controversial in IT world).

Re: Weird A.I. Yankovic: a cursed deep dive into the world of voice cloning

#102

Post by nsbk »

mckirk wrote: post #4

My absolute favorite application of this tech so far is The Beach Boys singing 'Hurt'. It's the first time I seriously didn't notice any artifacts, and it just works so well even though it really shouldn't. Enjoy: https://youtu.be/gmNSFqyg_Z8

That hurt

Re: Weird A.I. Yankovic: a cursed deep dive into the world of voice cloning

#103

Post by NavinF »

tomrod wrote: post #96
colechristensen wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. If you're not using a cloud provider bandwidth is extremely cheap. In fact locally I can get a 10 gbps home internet unmetered connection for $300/mo. I'm not sure how they'd react if I transferred 1 PB/mo though :)

Is my math wrong here? 10 gbps -> 8s per 10 GB -> 800s per 1TB -> 80,000s per 1PB -> 22.3 hrs at full speed for 1 PB?

If you search "1pib/(10 gbps)" on google, you'll get 10.4 days.

An unmetered 10G port at a US data center is ~$1500/mo. Not particularly expensive

Re: Weird A.I. Yankovic: a cursed deep dive into the world of voice cloning

#104

Post by satvikpendem »

dylan604 wrote: post #64
satvikpendem wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's mostly audiobooks, I have some ePubs that don't have audiobooks anywhere, such as many Japanese light novel fan (or official) translations into English for example. I can get through them as I can understand audio faster than I can read text, as I play back at 3 to 5x speed.

what's your retention/comprehension of the content at those speeds? i find that those speeds allows me to understand the concept as it's whizzing by, but the retention of it is not good. everything i've ever been taught and personal experience about long term retention all say speed is not the most conducive.

Retention is pretty good but that's because I've been training myself for the past 5 to 10 years to get to that speed. It's similar to how blind people's TTS are incomprehensible to most hearing-able people.

Re: Weird A.I. Yankovic: a cursed deep dive into the world of voice cloning

#105

Post by autoexec »

b112 wrote: post #63
Jeff_Brown wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Porperty is a bundle of rights, and often hard to pin down. In the case of voices, if a company owns enough of your data to train a good simulacrum, and they have the right to do it, then they kind of do own your voice -- or more precisely, a damn good substitute.

Copyright is complex. And artist's rights are outside of copyright, in some respects. An example.. in the past, painters have had their works bought, and then hung in unfavourable conditions. Or in places/locations, which reflect poorly upon the work of art. Artists have sued, and won, to have artwork moved, shown differently, or force-sold back to the artist. Now, everything you say is copyright... you. At least in…

> Artists have sued, and won, to have artwork moved, shown differently, or force-sold back to the artist.

That seems insane to me. Do you have specific examples?

Re: Weird A.I. Yankovic: a cursed deep dive into the world of voice cloning

#106

Post by HappyDaoDude »

sumtechguy wrote: post #29
minimaxir wrote: post #10

This article only covers the musical aspects of AI voice cloning, but there's another dynamic to AI voice cloning that's more complicated: replacing general voice actors in movies/video games/anime (example: https://www.axios.com/2023/07/24/ai-voice-actors-victoria-at... ) Unlike musicians who can't be replaced without significant postprocessing, have enough money to not be impacted by competition, and have legal mus…

What I find interesting is this aspect that eventually, these companies will hire some college kids who needs a couple thousand bucks and a free pizza. Have them read the right scripts. Sign the right 'give everything away' contract and just forever use their voice. Or do it sneaky. Have a voice assistant and in your ToS 'we can use a copy of your voice for anything'. The existing voice actors will be just out of wor…

I have said this will initially be sold as a feature on things like Audiobooks.

Pick your book, pick your reader and away it goes. The Diary of Anne Frank read by Gilbert Gottfried.

Re: Weird A.I. Yankovic: a cursed deep dive into the world of voice cloning

#107

Post by jimmaswell »

RajT88 wrote: post #83
callalex wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven’t used windows in a while but I thought it supported some form of cross-volume symlink? Or at least mounting an image stored on another volume to an arbitrary path.

Links in windows are a thing, but not well known. I must have been using Windows for close to 20 years before I realized they were in there. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/fileio/hard-... https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/administrat...

mklink /d on windows has saved me many times.

Re: Weird A.I. Yankovic: a cursed deep dive into the world of voice cloning

#108

Post by lazide »

sofixa wrote: post #99
ImprobableTruth wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Voices are uncopyrightable, but impersonation isn't legal (see Midler v. Ford, for a notable case), so I don't think the situation is totally clear.

It's always funny to me when people cite old American case law and try to wrangle their heads around how that can apply to a situation which the case's participants couldn't have possibly imagined. Shouldn't the correct way to do this be new legislation being created after consulting interest groups to answer the modern problems which exist due to modern realities, like what the EU is doing? It seems much more sensib…

Interest groups == lobbyists in this case. Which might explain some of the American hesitation.

Re: Weird A.I. Yankovic: a cursed deep dive into the world of voice cloning

#109

Post by lazide »

ImprobableTruth wrote: post #32
minimaxir wrote: post #10

This article only covers the musical aspects of AI voice cloning, but there's another dynamic to AI voice cloning that's more complicated: replacing general voice actors in movies/video games/anime (example: https://www.axios.com/2023/07/24/ai-voice-actors-victoria-at... ) Unlike musicians who can't be replaced without significant postprocessing, have enough money to not be impacted by competition, and have legal mus…

Voices are uncopyrightable, but impersonation isn't legal (see Midler v. Ford, for a notable case), so I don't think the situation is totally clear.

As long as they don’t claim the voice is the original actor (misspell the name perhaps, or the Hollywood classic ‘based on’), they won’t be impersonating no?
Post reply on HN