“Sora” means “Sky” in Japanese.
Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
891–900 of 1001 posts
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#892Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Isn't OpenAI mostly built upon disregarding the copyright of countless people? It sure was. But OpenAI decided to poke the Bear and is being sued by NYT. And apparently as a sidequest they thought it best to put their head in a lion's mouth. I wouldn't call the PR clout and finances of an A-list celebrity small potators. They could have easily flown under the radar and have been praised as the next Google if they ke…
> > Isn't OpenAI mostly built upon disregarding the copyright of countless people? > It sure was. Can you cite something that elaborates on this point? Do people who read books and then learn from it also disregard copyright? How is what OpenAI does meaningfully different from what people do?
DALL-E replicates artist’s lifestyle with no regard to copyright.
Sora is doing the same on YouTube videos. It blocks queries like “in the style of Wes Anderson” but it still uses that as training data and generating content.
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#893This is the first I've heard of this, but I've used the "Sky" voice extensively and never once thought it sounded like Johansson. Has anyone else noticed a similarity? To me they sound pretty different, Johansson's voice is much more raspy.
Yes when the demos first came out I don't remember seeing anyone comparing the voice to Scarlett Johansson's. It seems to be a meme that's taken hold subsequently with the news about OpenAI trying to license her voice.
Have you seen the announcement? The voice is not 100% the same but the mannerisms and the flirty tone are spot on.
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#894Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually it’s the copyright that is supposed to prevent a monopoly arising in the form of an OpenAI, or Google News back in the day.
Copyright was supposed to protect a small inventor or maker for a short period of time. But as those small makers became corporations and they lobbied for and were able to keep increasing the copyright periods from a few years to decades after the death of the individual the actual essence of the reason for copyright is gone. I am of the opinion that copyright apart from a fixed term should also have a form of value…
without copyright you have Google News sucking up all news organization content and robbing them of revenue (which is why news orgs sued and most went behind paywalls). Now OpenAI is doing the same thing to all content creators. Copyright law is the only thing protecting content creators or giving them any leverage at all. Copyright terms might be too long (we can debate that) but getting rid of it altogether would be the greater evil.
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#895Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The thing about the situation is that Altman is willing to lie and steal a celebrity's voice for use in ChatGPT. He lies and steals much more than that. He’s the scammer behind Worldcoin. https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/04/06/1048981/worldcoi... https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/richardnieva/worldcoin-... > Altman is, and wants to be, a large part of AI regulation. Quite the public contradiction. That’s as…
> That’s as much of a contradiction as a thief wanting to be a large part of lock regulation. Based on what I see in the videos from The Lockpocking Lawyer, that would be a massive improvement . Now, the NSA and crypto standards, that would have worked as a metaphor for your point. (I don't think it's correct, but that's an independent claim, and I am not only willing to discover that I'm wrong about their sincerity,…
> Based on what I see in the videos from The Lockpocking Lawyer, that would be a massive improvement.
If you've watched his videos then surely you should know that lockpicking isn't even on the radar for thieves as there are much easier and faster methods such as breaking the door or breaking a window.
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#896Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Based on what I see in the videos from The Lockpocking Lawyer The Lockpicking Lawyer is not a thief, so I don’t get your desire to incorrectly nitpick. Especially when you clearly understood the point.
You noticed your confusion but still went on the aggressive, huh. Ah well. "A is demonstrating a proof of B" does not require "A is a clause in B". A being TLPL, B being that the entire lock industry is bad, so bad that anyone with experience would be a massive improvement, for example a thief.
I’m not confused and my reply was not aggressive. I don’t think it will be a good use of time to continue this conversation because discussions should get more substantive as they go on and this was an irrelevant tangent to which I have no desire to get sucked in to.
Other people have commented to further explain the point in other words. I recommend you read those, perhaps it’ll make you understand.
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#897[dead]
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#898> Move fast and steal peoples' likenesses.
Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice
#899Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone is so mad about them stealing a beloved celebrity’s voice. What about the millions of authors and other creators whose copyrighted works they stole to create works that resemble and replace those people? Not famous enough to generate the same outrage?
Welcome to the world where the "fuck the creatives" brigade wants everything for free.
[dead]