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

OpenVoice: Versatile Instant Voice Cloning

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 207 posts

Re: OpenVoice: Versatile Instant Voice Cloning

#121

Post by seabass-labrax »

fieldcny wrote: post #112
IshKebab wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he's referring to your "defanging" which you implied was security related but doesn't actually achieve anything at all.

They are making you think about what you are doing before you click the link. that’s not theatre that’s keeping people from clicking arbitrary links to zip files which can auto-execute code once downloaded. I’d suggest that those who think it is theatre probably don’t understand the implications of that action.

On which operating systems can Zip files automatically self-execute? Android .APKs come to mind, although in this case, Android asks you whether you want to install the application and thus gives you a chance to prevent the execution.

Re: OpenVoice: Versatile Instant Voice Cloning

#122

Post by mattlondon »

stale2002 wrote: post #65
jamespattn wrote: post #46

Can someone give me a practical use case where this adds a net benefit to society?

Well we could just look at the obvious and existing use cases for text to speech stuff. Alexa, siri, and similar, are all common place. Another huge usecase would be anything to do with voice acting. Either in video games, cartoons, or the like. This would completely democratize voice acting material, and would empower anyone to be able to do this for cheap.

... and put 99% of voice actors out of business. We'll eventually end up with every TV show, movie, and, video game being voiced by Ryan Gosling and Beyonce because market research.

Re: OpenVoice: Versatile Instant Voice Cloning

#123

Post by airstrike »

RagnarD wrote: post #106

My first and ongoing thought is that immoral/criminal uses of voice cloning vastly exceed any legitimate ones.

Which just means we need to build protocols around this risk, rather than foolishly trying to shove the genie back in the bottle, lest we be left with only the criminal uses

Re: OpenVoice: Versatile Instant Voice Cloning

#124

Post by lbrunson »

grayhatter wrote: post #62
jamespattn wrote: post #46

Can someone give me a practical use case where this adds a net benefit to society?

No. The real answer is yes, I could probably come up with some contrived examples, like I lost my voice in a freak LLM accident and now want to clone my old voice. But this doesn't (you don't?) really need a net benefit reason to figure it out and publish it. Because why? I assume, because "this shouldn't exist!" which is just a more palatable wa to phrase "won't someone think of the children". Society doesn't benefi…

By this logic there shouldn’t be regulation on anything, because the bad guys will have it any way.

While you can’t make it go away, you can disincentivize propagation and use which can be the difference between thousands of cases of scams/extortions and millions. Until there’s a stronger argument for voice cloning models (talking to a dead loved one is creepy and not a positive argument) then we shouldn’t encourage tools with overwhelmingly nefarious utility.

Re: OpenVoice: Versatile Instant Voice Cloning

#126

Post by graphe »

RagnarD wrote: post #106

My first and ongoing thought is that immoral/criminal uses of voice cloning vastly exceed any legitimate ones.

What of commercial uses being greater than illegitimate ones? YouTube will give people the ability to hear it in their own localized language in the author's voice.

Re: OpenVoice: Versatile Instant Voice Cloning

#128

Post by anotherevan »

Is it possible to use this (or Eleven Labs) to generate a voice model to plug into an Android phone's TTS?

I have a friend with a paralysed larynx who is often using his phone or a small laptop to type in order to communicate. I know he would love it if it was possible to take old recordings of him speaking and use that to give him back "his" voice, at least in some small measure.

Re: OpenVoice: Versatile Instant Voice Cloning

#129

Post by dijksterhuis »

z991 wrote: post #75

I commend the authors on making this easy to try! However it doesn't work very well for me for general voice cloning. I read the first paragraph of the wikipedia page on books and had it generate the next sentence. It's obviously computer generated to my ear. Audio sample: https://storage.googleapis.com/dalle-party/sample.mp3 Cloned voice (converted to mp3): https://storage.googleapis.com/dalle-party/output_en_defaul…

> It's obviously computer generated to my ear.

From the README

    Disclaimer

    This is an open-source implementation that approximates the performance of the internal voice clone technology of myshell.ai. The online version in myshell.ai has better 1) audio quality, 2) voice cloning similarity, 3) speech naturalness and 4) computational efficiency.

Re: OpenVoice: Versatile Instant Voice Cloning

#130

Post by IshKebab »

fieldcny wrote: post #112
IshKebab wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he's referring to your "defanging" which you implied was security related but doesn't actually achieve anything at all.

They are making you think about what you are doing before you click the link. that’s not theatre that’s keeping people from clicking arbitrary links to zip files which can auto-execute code once downloaded. I’d suggest that those who think it is theatre probably don’t understand the implications of that action.

We understand exactly the implications of that action. There are no implications.

Simply downloading a zip from Amazon has zero risk. Even opening an arbitrary zip has essentially zero risk. RCE from opening a zip is obviously a really critical and valuable vulnerability and would not be wasted with a public link.

Combine that with the fact that this comes from a voice cloning GitHub repo and the chance of this having some 0-day are infinitesimal.

Finally just making the link non-clickable does not add security. Nobody can take any action to increase their security because they have to slightly edit a link (not that they would because it's sensible a clickable link in the GitHub readme).

So yes, I fully understand the implications and it is definitely security theatre.

I suggest that those who think that it isn't probably haven't really thought about the threat model.

Post reply on HN