He’s losing work and the effectiveness of his strike. Either they want his voice and they’d pay for it if he wasn’t striking, in which case his literal voice is working against his figurative one against his will, or they just need a voice and there was no fucking reason to steal a real person’s.
Dkarma@lemmy.world 1 year ago
You have to prove that in court. And no he’s not losing work cuz theres no one paying in the first place. Chatgpt didn’t get a job over him. No one said oh we don’t need him to do this voice-over we have ai.
Also Remember we are not talking about replicating his voice we are talking about training an AI with it. Technically different subjects.
idiomaddict@feddit.de 1 year ago
He has to prove it in court if he wants accurate compensation, but that’s not really on the table atm.
Did you read the article? I’ll quote the relevant section.
They are replicating his voice.