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

OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 1001 posts

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#121

Post by chipweinberger »

People see what they want to see.

If it wasn't for us being biased by the surrounding circumstances I don't think people would have confused their voices. Their voices are not that similar. I probably personally know people with a voice as similar to SJ as Sky's. You probably do too.

The voice actress says the same: "I’ve never been compared to her by the people who do know me closely."

But then suddenly a story emerges and their voices are indistinguishable. All of these extra details shouldn't have even mattered.

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#122

Post by visarga »

gnicholas wrote: post #40
serial_dev wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, to me, it's just sounds like they know how to cover all their bases. To me, it sounds like they had the idea to make their AI sound like "her". For the initial version, they had a voice actor that sounds like the movie, as a proof of concept. They still liked it, so it was time to contact the real star. In the end, it's not just the voice, it would have been the brand, just imagine the buzz they would h…

Agreed — seems like they had a plan, and probably talked extensively with Legal about how to develop and execute the plan to give themselves plausible deniability. The tweet was inadvisable, and undoubtedly not part of the actual plan (unless it was to get PR).

I am sure it was for free PR. Streisand effect trap for ScarJo.

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#123

Post by numpad0 »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #110
numpad0 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on similarities between existing data and generative outputs, so minimum is zero. Humans are caught plagiarizing all the time.

Plagiarism is not illegal, it's merely frowned upon, and only in specific fields. Everywhere else, it's called learning from masters and/or practicing your art.

wtf.

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#124

Post by [deleted] »

skilled wrote: post #18

The thing that worried me initially was that: - the original report by Scarlett said she was approached months ago, and then two days prior to launch of GPT-4o she was approached again Because of the above, my immediate assumption was that OpenAI definitely did her dirty. But this report from WaPo debunks at least some of it, because the records they have seen show that the voice actor was contacted months in advance…

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#125

Post by tmalsburg2 »

DeathArrow wrote: post #94

In today's climate you are considered guilty until you prove you are innocent. People who accused you don't have to show any proof.

Today's climate, where Silicon Valley billionaires occasionally have to endure some mild pushback.

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#126

Post by lynx23 »

skilled wrote: post #18

The thing that worried me initially was that: - the original report by Scarlett said she was approached months ago, and then two days prior to launch of GPT-4o she was approached again Because of the above, my immediate assumption was that OpenAI definitely did her dirty. But this report from WaPo debunks at least some of it, because the records they have seen show that the voice actor was contacted months in advance…

[flagged]

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#127

Post by dingclancy »

gnicholas wrote: post #108
abrookewood wrote: post #69

If they are so confident that they didn't copy her voice, then why did they pull that character/version?

I wondered about this also. Maybe they pulled it temporarily so that their side of the story could get out in circulation. Then they'll reinstate the voice after a while on the grounds that "as we all know, this was developed separately and in advance of any conversations with Scarlett". If they had kept the voice then it might seem like they were reacting and possibly caught off-guard. Instead, it looks like they're…

Sam Altman statement said they pulled the voice out of respect to Scarlett Johansson.

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#128

Post by Dylan16807 »

gitgud wrote: post #97
Seattle3503 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a human? Whatever they can consume within their natural life.

Does natural life still count if a person is using an artificial heart? What about if they have augmentation that allows them to read and interpret books really fast? It’s not an easy question to answer…

Your first question doesn't change the answer, and your second question depends on a premise that isn't real.

Natural life is plenty simple in this context.

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#129

Post by JumpCrisscross »

contrarian1234 wrote: post #120

I think it's really problematic that the government is protecting voice actor's careers. It's like if they disallowed cars on the roads to protect horse carriages. Clearly with the new technology a whole economic sector is gone and irrelevant over night. Now amateurs and small projects can afford to add good sounding voices to their creations. This is good news in the end The same goes for actors and their likenesses…

> like if they disallowed cars on the roads to protect horse carriages

What? Nobody is banning OpenAI from licensing voices. The censure is on, at the very least, using an unlicensed likeness to promote their new products without compensation. (Assuming Sky truly is a clean-room product.)

Likeness just became a tradeable product. That wasn't true before. The better analogy is in recognising mineral rights, including crude oil, after the utility of it was recognised and traded on [1].

> ultra wealthy celebrities

We have a hundred millionaire atop a multi-billion dollar industry fighting a billionaire atop a multi-billion dollar company. Nobody gets to cry poverty.

> can imagine in a decade some place like China which doesn't care about protecting celebrities

Would positively love to see Altman try to pull this stunt with Xi Jinping's voice.

[1] https://info.courthousedirect.com/blog/history-of-mineral-ri...

Re: OpenAI didn’t copy Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, records show

#130

Post by zirgs »

contrarian1234 wrote: post #120

I think it's really problematic that the government is protecting voice actor's careers. It's like if they disallowed cars on the roads to protect horse carriages. Clearly with the new technology a whole economic sector is gone and irrelevant over night. Now amateurs and small projects can afford to add good sounding voices to their creations. This is good news in the end The same goes for actors and their likenesses…

Imagine if switchboard operator careers were protected. We still would not have the Internet today.
Post reply on HN