Comment on After an Arizona man was shot, an AI video of him addresses his killer in court

• joshchandra@midwest.social ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Perhaps; it seemed like they knew the decedent well enough to know that he would appreciate this, from everything that the article says. With that said, I also won’t be surprised if templates for wills or living trusts add a no-duplication statement by default over the coming years.

  source

  • turmacar@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    If my family hired an actor to impersonate me at my killer’s trial and give a prepared speech about how I felt about the situation it would be thrown out of court.

    If my family hired a cartoonist or movie studio to create a moving scene with my face recreated by digital artists and a professional voice actor to talk about my forgiveness for my death, it would be thrown out of court.

    That they used a generative program to do it and the Judge allowed the video to influence the sentence as if it were a statement by the deceased is deeply troubling.

    source

    • joshchandra@midwest.social ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Fair… I suppose the sensationalism of it grips some of us unnecessarily.

      influence the sentence

      From what I’ve seen, to be fair, judges’ decisions have varied wildly regardless, sadly, and sentences should be more standardized. I wonder what it would’ve been otherwise.

      source