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

Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

941–950 of 1001 posts

Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

#941

Post by ecjhdnc2025 »

dclowd9901 wrote: post #719
ecjhdnc2025 wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also gave you cab drivers who don't earn enough to be able to replace their vehicles. You can cheer on "forces" like Uber all you like but I would prefer it if progress happened without criminal deception: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/jul/10/uber-files-leak... I don't see how anyone can read this and think the uber app is a net positive.

There’s gotta be a middle ground. The registration system was shit and encouraged a ridiculous secondary market that kept a lot of people under someone else’s thumb too. Why does everything keep getting worse? Why do people keep making less? We need to figure out the answers to these questions. And no, nobody here knows them.

Black cab regulation in London is not shit. It's simultaneously archaic and valuable; a cabbie can solve problems an Uber driver will never manage.

If there is a middle ground I'd like to think it involves not smashing through regulations that protect individual businesspeople (like cabbies) who have learned a difficult job.

Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

#942

Post by dewbrite »

wasteduniverse wrote: post #867
nox101 wrote: post #854

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not confirmation. That's called prudence.

Ask to use Alice's likeness in my product, get declined. Ask again. Debut product, users say "this sounds a lot like Alice". The day my product releases, I make a public statement referencing a movie Alice starred in. When Alice asks how I made my product, I delete all access to the product. How else am I supposed to interpret this?

"better safe than sorry"

- any legal team, ever, in the history of the universe

Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

#943

Post by Intralexical »

wraptile wrote: post #752
kristiandupont wrote: post #678

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have exactly the same feeling as I think you do. When you reach the levels of success he has, there will always be people screaming that you are incompetent, evil and every other negative adjective under the sun. But he genuinely seemed to care about doing the right thing. But this is just so lacking of basic morals that I have to conclude that I was wrong, at least to an extent.

I feel that this is a classic tale of success getting to you. It almost feels like it's impossible to be successful at this level and remain true. At least, I hadn't seen it yet.

Or "success" itself acts as a filter selecting for those who are ruthless enough to do amoral and immoral things.

Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

#944

Post by maxbond »

z7 wrote: post #827
maxbond wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I propose the following razor: Never attribute to jealousy that which can be explained by a difference of perspective. Jealousy can explain any criticism of anybody. That makes it an epistemic hazard; you can always fall back to it, and you can develop a habit of doing so. And then you have deafened yourself. Any substantive criticisms will be lost on you. As will any opportunity to learn from those you disagree with…

That would be tautological, as 'difference of perspective' is a restatement of the phenomenon at a higher level of abstraction. Someone who is resentful will likely have a different perspective than they would otherwise have. Psychological motives are real and don't disappear by simply assuming a variant of a problem-solving heuristic. Notice also I didn't use the word 'jealousy.' I do think that speculations about p…

You can use whatever high minded references to philosophy and psychology you please, but from what I've read from you in this thread - you're missing the point. You aren't understanding the criticism, and you're addressing the weakest form of the argument. I'm suggesting you aspire to address the strongest form, whether the weakest is present or not.

If you choose to do nothing with that information, that's up to you.

Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

#945

Post by Intralexical »

ncallaway wrote: post #450
mensetmanusman wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Effective altruism would posit that it is worth one voice theft to help speed the rate of life saving ai technology in the hands of everyone.

Effective Altruists are just shitty utilitarians that never take into account all the myriad ways that unmoderated utilitarianism has horrific failure modes. Their hubris will walk them right into federal prison for fraud if they’re not careful. If Effective Altruists want to speed the adoption of AI with the general public, they’d do well to avoid talking about it, lest the general public make a connection between E…

Plus, describing this as "speed the rate of life saving ai technology in the hands of everyone" is… A Reach.

Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

#946

Post by titanomachy »

theyinwhy wrote: post #814
titanomachy wrote: post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be helpful if you linked to something more specific (even a timestamp). I’m not going to watch this nearly 3-hour video to decide whether it supports your statement or not.

If you want to discover truths, 3 hours research seems like a good deal. Anyways, I got you covered. Altman has had a plan for this from the get go: https://www.techemails.com/p/sam-altman-emails-elon-musk

What's the quote from this that indicates he is trying to "obtain an artificial monopoly on AI"?

Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

#947

Post by Intralexical »

ncallaway wrote: post #450
mensetmanusman wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Effective altruism would posit that it is worth one voice theft to help speed the rate of life saving ai technology in the hands of everyone.

Effective Altruists are just shitty utilitarians that never take into account all the myriad ways that unmoderated utilitarianism has horrific failure modes. Their hubris will walk them right into federal prison for fraud if they’re not careful. If Effective Altruists want to speed the adoption of AI with the general public, they’d do well to avoid talking about it, lest the general public make a connection between E…

The central contention of Effective Altruism, at least in practice if not in principle, seems to be that the value of thinking, feeling persons can be and should be reduced to numbers and objects that you can do calculations on.

Maybe there's a way to do that right. I suppose like any other philosophy, it ends up reflecting the personalities and intentions of the individuals which are attracted to and end up adopting it. Are they actually motivated by identifying with and wanting to help other people most effectively? Or are they just incentivized to try to get rid of pesky deontological and virtue-based constraints like empathy and universal rights?

Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

#948

Post by spullara »

burntalmonds wrote: post #608
spullara wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The voice was shipped last september.

Do you know if the voice was the same back in september?

It was essentially the same, the new one is definitely more human like. I have been calling it Scarjo since then.

    Sam Pullara @sampullara
    If you have the ChatGPT app, set it to the Sky voice and talk to it. It is definitely a clone of ScarJo from Her.
    6:21 PM · Dec 13, 2023
https://x.com/sampullara/status/1735122897663094853

Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

#949

Post by Intralexical »

lawn wrote: post #633
ocodo wrote: post #560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Altman has proven time and again that he is little more than a huckster wrt technology, and in business he is a stone cold shark. Conman plain and simple.

You'd think that Worldcoin would be enough proof of what he is but I guess people missed that memo.

I think people tend to assume our own values and experiences have some degree of being universal.

So scammers see other scammers, and they just think there's nothing wrong with it.

While normal people who act in good faith see scammers, and instinctively think that there must be a good reason for it, even (or especially!) if it looks sketchy.

I think this happens a lot. Not just with Altman, though that is a prominent currently ongoing example.

Protecting yourself from dark triad type personalities means you need to be able to understand a worldview and system of values and axioms that is completely different from yours, which is… difficult. …There's always that impulse to assume good faith and rationalize the behavior based on your own values.

Re: Statement from Scarlett Johansson on the OpenAI "Sky" voice

#950

Post by bonton89 »

justinclift wrote: post #504
ethbr1 wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would have thought that if they made the decision to go ahead despite getting two "no"s, that they at least had a legal position they thought was defensible and worth defending. They likely have a legal position which is defensible. They're much more worried that they don't have a PR position which is defensible. What's the point of winning the (legal) battle if you lose the war (of public opinion)? Given the res…

> They likely have a legal position which is defensible. Doesn't sound like they have that either.

Copilot still tells me I've commit a content policy violation of I ask it to generate an image "in Tim Burton's style". Tim Burton has been openly critical of generative AI.
Post reply on HN