871–880 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They did produce the actual voice artist!
Where? Right now you have "An anonymous person says that an anonymous person said this to him in an email". That's a pretty low bar for "produced the actual voice artist".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if the voice actor was sourced before they originally contacted SJ, it was clearly the intent to sound like her. There are so many other distinctive voices they could have chosen, but instead they decided to go as close as possible to "her" as they could. Many people thought it was SJ until she stated it wasn't. I appreciate the voice actor may sound like that naturally, but its hardly coincidental that the voic…
This is not a thing. They hired a voice actor, who spoke in her normal speaking voice. That voice is not SJ's intellectual property, no matter what it sounds like. Further, I don't know how you can say any intention here is "clear", especially given the track record on this particular story, which has been abysmal even after this story was published . They could have taken auditions from 50 voice actors, come across…
Except that is simply not true. If their intent was to sound like Her, and then they chose someone who sounds like Her, then they're in trouble.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A random person's normal speaking voice is nobody's intellectual property. The burden would have been on SJ to prove that the voice actor they hired was "impersonating" SJ. She was not: the Washington Post got her to record a voice sample to illustrate that she wasn't doing an impersonation. Unless & until some 3rd other shoe drops, what we know now strongly --- overwhelmingly, really --- suggests that there was simp…
If "Her" weren't Sam's favorite movie, and if Sam hadn't tweeted "her" the day it launched, and if they hadn't asked SJ to do the voice, and if they hadn't tried to reach her again two days before the launch, and if half the people who first heard the voice said "Hey, isn't that SJ?" - Then I'd say you have a point. But given all the other info, I'd have to say you're in denial.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not a thing. They hired a voice actor, who spoke in her normal speaking voice. That voice is not SJ's intellectual property, no matter what it sounds like. Further, I don't know how you can say any intention here is "clear", especially given the track record on this particular story, which has been abysmal even after this story was published . They could have taken auditions from 50 voice actors, come across…
> They could have taken auditions from 50 voice actors, come across this one, thought to themselves "Hey, this sounds just like the actress in 'Her', great, let's use them" and that would be fine. Except that is simply not true. If their intent was to sound like Her, and then they chose someone who sounds like Her, then they're in trouble.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well as the article states, there’s legal precedent protecting actors from having their voices “impersonated” by other actors. The fact that Altman tweeted “her” and contacted Johansson can make the case for the intent to impersonate.
> Well as the article states, there’s legal precedent protecting actors from having their voices “impersonated” by other actors. The article doesn't state that. It says that about singers. Very different.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please don't take this as me defending OpenAI's clearly sketchy process. I'm writing this to help myself think through it. If it weren't for their attempt to link the voice to SJ (i.e. with the "her" tweet), would that be OK? - It's fine to hire a voice actor. - It's fine to train a system to sound like that voice actor. - It's fine to hire a voice actor who sounds like someone else. - It's probably fine to go out of…
There’s a special branch of law called “right of publicity” or “manners and likeness.” It protect celebrities who rely on endorsements and “who they are” for income. It very clearly prohibits copycats with near-likeness as a workaround to getting permission from a celebrity. OpenAI asked SJ to use her voice. That right there helps her case immensely. She said no. They went ahead anyway, presumably with someone or som…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s human nature: people see others achieve what they cannot, and try to pull them down. You see this wrt Musk on this site a lot, too.
That was what Elizabeth Holmes claimed as well, however, we know that some people who try to achieve greatness are grifters. A pithy saying doesn’t change that reality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was not claimed that they cloned ScarJo's voice. They hired a soundalike when they couldn't get the person they wanted. Use or lack of use of AI is irrelevant. As I said before, both Bette Midler and Tom Waits won similar cases. Since they withdrew the voice this will end, but if OpenAI hadn't backed off and ScarJo sued, there would be discovery, and we'd find out what her instructions were. If those instructions…
> It was not claimed that they cloned ScarJo’s voice. There were some claims by some people when the issue first arose that they had specifically done a deepfake clone of SJ’s voice; probably because of the combination of apparent trading on the similarity and the nature of OpenAI’s business. That’s not the case as far as the mechanism by which the voice was produced.
Clearly a lot of people (including her "closest friends") find the ChatGPT demo to have been very similar to SJ/"her", which isn't to deny that the reporter was fed some (performance-wise) flat snippets from the voice actor's audition tape that sounded like flat sections of the ChatGPT demo. It'd be interesting to hear an in-depth comparison from a vocal expert, but it seems we're unlikey to get that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
no, that's definitely not illegal. Voices are not trademarkable, only jingles (melody, words + tone), and of course specific recordings of voices are copyrighted. The ONLY way they get in trouble is if they claim to be Morgan Freeman.
A reasonable person would assume that the voice in the commercial is Morgan Freeman, which could be very problematic for the commercial maker.
You can hear both voices for yourself and tell they are different, but y'all such NPCs you just believe the bullcrap the media spoon-feeds you not the literal sounds in your ears. New theory, HN is a honey pot for dumb people that Y Combinator studies how to make money from. Previous theory it was a Alzheimer's style "Fake bus stop" used to round up imposter hackers and keep them contained while the real Hackers did…
I'm losing faith in Hacker News commenters too. Such an incredible display of lack of critical thinking ("oh, he tweeted Her? Must be because he's trolling ScarJo, not because the movie is literally like the real life product") and bandwagoning over this piece of news, all because HN wants to hate OpenAI. Not to mention, on the AI Paint thread, there was this heavily upvoted guy saying its servers are paid for by the…
But I have had to cut myself off from a given community because my relationship became unhealthy with it many times. I get that.