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

991–1000 of 1001 posts

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

#991

Post by CRConrad »

FergusArgyll wrote: post #361
itsoktocry wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As an aside, I find it bewildering the hate for success that I see on this site. Some of us find the "great man" worship bewildering. You know, how we think the leaders of these companies are geniuses and have insightful things to say about everything.

I don't mean OpenAI only, I include Google, (which doesn't have any leader, basically) MSFT, TSLA (which does, I know...) etc etc I know that there are problems with each of those companies, but to hate all of them seems like a pattern to me

> I know that there are problems with each of those companies, but to hate all of them seems like a pattern to me

Yeah, the pattern is that all these companies behave in ways so problematic that they generate hate. That shows the problem is with the companies, not the people who hate on them.

(If there's a problem with any people outside them, then that would be with the ones who don't hate on the companies. "Hey, just because all these plantations are based on slavery, what's with the hate on plantation owners?!?" That seem like something "good people" sould say, to you?)

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

#992

Post by CRConrad »

Angostura wrote: post #425

Get tapes from 100 actors. Select the one who sounds closest to Scarlett

Hey, the tape from Johansson herself will probably be in the top ten most popular choices! Maybe not top five, but at least top twenty, for sure! ;-)

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

#993

Post by CRConrad »

m3kw9 wrote: post #463

Is funny seeing some peoples head get yanked back and forth because they have a predetermined bias against Sam and OpenAI. Critical thinking would have saved you the trouble.

It's funny seeing some people immediately being convinced by this weak-sauce defense. Critical thinking might have saved you the embarrassment.

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

#994

Post by CRConrad »

ThinkBeat wrote: post #466
omnicognate wrote: post #171

Comments full of people reading the headline and assuming that what OpenAI did here is fine because it's a different actress, but that's not how "Right of publicity" (*) laws work. The article itself explains that there is significant legal risk here: > Mitch Glazier, the chief executive of the Recording Industry Association of America, said that Johansson may have a strong case against OpenAI if she brings forth a l…

"Mitch Glazier, the chief executive of the Recording Industry Association of America, said that Johansson may have a strong case against OpenAI" Of course he does. RIAA thinks nearly everything is illegal, and in general mocked or critiqued on the site when they go after some shared mp3s or whatever. His opinion is neither authoritative or informative.

Oh lovely, RIAA mingling in among the good guys...

This may well be the only taint on Johansson's case.

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

#995

Post by CRConrad »

moi2388 wrote: post #616
comfysocks wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can’t really fault the voice actor for having a specific voice. The question is whether or not OAI traded on the similarity to Scarlet Js likeness. The “her” tweet raises suspicions.

Even if they did. How does that matter? Let’s say I want to shoot a movie. Id love to have Scarlett star in it. But I can’t afford her, so I hire some b actress that kind of looks like her. What’s wrong with that? The only way I could see this being wrong is if they then processes the voice of this different person to make it sound more like Scarlett.

> Even if they did. How does that matter?

How the heck could that not matter?!?

Making the voice similar enough that the public will associate it with the recognition and popularity of the movie is obviously capitalizing on the movie, including Johansson's performance. If they did that intentionally, they owe Johansson (and the movie studio) recompense for that. And Altman's tweet rather obviously shows it can at the very least be argued that such intent was present.

> Let’s say I want to shoot a movie. Id love to have Scarlett star in it. But I can’t afford her, so I hire some b actress that kind of looks like her. What’s wrong with that?

Depends on intent. If that's all you do, then fine. But if you dress your movie up to heavily imply it's a sequel to a movie with Johansson in it, and put the actual name of your "B actress" down in the fine print(1), and then tweet the name of the Johansson movie when yours is released... Do you think movie makers get away with shit like that? Or that they should?

What is it about this that you don't understand? Do you genuinely not see that those are two different things, distinguished by intent? Or did you just not know that intent is often a rather vital part of whether something is legal or not?

___

(1): Or omit it altogether, like this allegedly-existing Sky voice actress is still (last I read, before the weekend) anonymous.

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

#997

Post by the_af »

Completely sidestepping whether OpenAI did a scummy or underhanded thing here: I don't find Sky's voice to be all that close to Scarlett Johansson's. Scarlet has a "hoarseness" to her voice that is completely missing from Sky. It's difficult to describe, but you can see hear it in any clip from the movie Her, but that's what she actually sounds like in most movies.

I can completely buy that they were looking for a voice actress that sounded kind of like Scarlett, but this mimic isn't perfect because it misses this "raspiness".

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

#998

Post by moi2388 »

CRConrad wrote: post #995
moi2388 wrote: post #616

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if they did. How does that matter? Let’s say I want to shoot a movie. Id love to have Scarlett star in it. But I can’t afford her, so I hire some b actress that kind of looks like her. What’s wrong with that? The only way I could see this being wrong is if they then processes the voice of this different person to make it sound more like Scarlett.

> Even if they did. How does that matter? How the heck could that not matter?!? Making the voice similar enough that the public will associate it with the recognition and popularity of the movie is obviously capitalizing on the movie, including Johansson's performance. If they did that intentionally, they owe Johansson (and the movie studio) recompense for that. And Altman's tweet rather obviously shows it can at the…

They definitely should. Plenty of movies are based on other movies or hommages to it, and typecasting exists as long as cinema.

I remain with my point that if they did any processing that made the voice sound more like Scarlett they most definitely should compensate her.

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

#999

Post by onethought »

CRConrad wrote: post #996
onethought wrote: post #357

They should rename the voice: Sosumi Come on OpenAI - do it!

Yeah, that would be stupid AF. Hope you have a better one sometime soon.

Thanks for the contribution. I think challenging the screen actors guild and calling bullshit on “I own the sound of my voice” would be a good thing.

Open AI already took a stance like this challenging copyright threats against llms.

But maybe you haven’t considered it that way. Or you think unions (representing the 1%) are cool! I think they are stupid AF

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

#1000

Post by [deleted] »

benzible wrote: post #928
tptacek wrote: post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They hired the actor that did the voice months before they contacted SJ . The reaction on this site to the news that this story was false is kind of mindbending.

Your immediate acceptance that a timeline that represents the best spin of a deep-pocketed company in full crisis PR mode proves the story "false", full stop, no caveats is... I wouldn't say mind-bending, but quite credulous at a minimum. The timeline they present could be accurate but the full picture could still be quite damning. As Casey Newton wrote today [1]: > Of course, this explanation only goes so far. We do…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN