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

161–170 of 1001 posts

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

#161

Post by bayindirh »

resolutebat wrote: post #153
throwaway115 wrote: post #133

This whole thing is starting to feel like another Sam Altman spotlight production. There's enough evidence to show no wrongdoing, but it was handled in a way to make people think there was a scandal. Maximum spotlight for relatively low risk. I wonder if people will get tired of being jerked around like this.

I'm genuinely not sure what you're trying to say here. Are you claiming that this was somehow engineered by Altman on purpose to draw attention, because all publicity is good publicity? Or engineered by his enemies to throw mud at Altman, because if you throw enough some of it will stick? Occam's Razor argues that Sam simply wanted ScarJo's voice, but couldn't get it, so they came up with a legally probably technical…

> they came up with a legally probably technically OK but ethically murky clone.

Isn't what OpenAI does all the time? Do ethically murky things, and when people react, move the goal posts by saying "Well, it's not illegal now, is it?".

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

#162

Post by tallytarik »

lynx23 wrote: post #126
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]

Who slandered who?

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

#163

Post by justeoghan »

I never comment on HN I’ve just always been a long time lurker but I feel like I’m going crazy here reading comments.

SJ is not the “AI” portrayed in the movie her. And AFAIK she does not in fact have all the same idiosyncrasies and tones in real life as the voice does in the movie because she was in fact directed to act like that.

Not only that but the voices are not the same because there was another actress for sky as we have seen.

To me It seems as if the case for SJ is DOA unless it comes out somehow that they in fact trained on her voice specifically. But since that doesn’t seem like the case I have no idea how SJ can legally own all voices that sound like hers.

It would obviously be a different story if OpenAI were saying that sky was SJ but that’s not the case. To me the question should be is “can the studio own the character in her that openAI was copying and any similar things”. Which given that systems like SIRI were already out there in the world when the movie came out and we knew this tech was on the way. The answer should be no but IANAL.

I’m not a huge fan of OpenAI anymore and I think they deserve criticism for many things. But this situation isn’t one of them.

Clarification: Of course if it turns out that they in fact trained on SJ or altered the voice to be more like hers then I’d think differently. I still think the studio has more of a claim though look from the outside and not being a lawyer.

Edit: clarification

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

#164

Post by dorkwood »

mike_hearn wrote: post #116
dorkwood wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bit like someone saying they don't want cars traveling down the sidewalk because they're too big and heavy, and then having someone ask how big and heavy a person needs to get before it becomes illegal for them to travel down the sidewalk. It misses the point, which is that cars aren't people. Arguments like "well a car uses friction to travel along the ground and fuel to create kinetic energy, just like hu…

Is that a good example? People have been arguing in court about that exact thing for years, first due to Segway and then due to e-scooters and bikes. There's plenty of people who make arguments of the form "it's not a car or a bike so I'm allowed on the sidewalk", or make arguments about limited top speeds etc.

> first due to Segway and then due to e-scooters and bikes

Those aren't cars.

But you've identified that the closer something comes to a human in terms of speed and scale, the blurrier the lines become. In these terms I would argue that GPT-4 is far, far removed from a human.

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

#165

Post by omayomay »

yeah but, "kind of" copied, and samalt reinforced that with refering to "her" in this tweet.

samalt is walking in the shadows of ethical/non-ethical line and he seems obviously is proficient in that.

however, even in such cases he does not hesitate to walk in the border of non-ethical is worrisome for the future of the ethics in ai.

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

#166

Post by contrarian1234 »

TrackerFF wrote: post #156
contrarian1234 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this context they aren't "creators" because they don't create anything. These actors are not being compensated, b/c they're not actually performed any additional work or doing any acting If you record my voice at a conference and then create a synthetic replica.. why would I care? You didn't make me do any additional work or anything

So if someone created a deep fake porn video of you, that wouldn't bother you either? Because, after all, you didn't do any work or anything.

It's not really an analogous situation at all

In the case of a pornographic video there is no issue if it's clear from the context or content that it isn't actually me doing what's in the video

When you talk to ChatGPT, I don't actually think Scarlett Johansson is speaking to me

If I make a fake phone call recording with her synethetic voice and claim it's real and it somehow hurts her then that's an issue - but that's a different legal matter entirely

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

#167

Post by numpad0 »

gambiting wrote: post #131
numpad0 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try loading random voice file done by real (voice)actors into Audacity, switch view to spectrogram mode, drag down to expand, and compare it to yours. Professionally done voice should look like neatly arranged salmon slices, yours will look like PCIe eye diagrams. You can also obviously compare multiple voice files recorded with similar sounding but different individuals, they rarely look similar on spectrograms.

Sure, except literally no one actually does this. You listen to a voice and it sounds similar in your head? That's who you picture when you hear it. Unless you're a robot I guess.

The point is that human voices are technically and verifiably unique, tangential or perhaps antithetical to your/average person's perception.

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

#169

Post by [deleted] »

tivert wrote: post #52
MattGaiser wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They used a different person, so it is not her voice.

> They used a different person, so it is not her voice. That doesn't matter because it's an impersonation. Ford lost, even though they didn't use Bette Midler's voice either: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co .

[deleted]

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

#170

Post by DeathArrow »

Some people die due to hunger, some people die due to wars, some people die due to curable diseases, but somehow, what matters most for some folks is whether OpenAI copied the voice of Scarlett Johansson.

Human mind is a curious place.

Post reply on HN