Comment on [deleted]
Goodeye8@piefed.social 1 day agoI don’t know what kind of work you do but let’s say your work requires you to log into some kind a system that somehow knows to track the work you do. Now imagine you start your work and your co-worker logs themselves in your place. You do the labor, they get the benefit. Are you being cheated?
The VA would do that labor if there was no TTS with their voice as a model. The VA labor goes into that model because it is their voice. They do the labor but someone else benefits from it? Are they not being cheated?
And final thought experiment. If the VA-s owned the TTS system and Embark asks for a new voiceline. Are the VA-s supposed to give that new voiceline away for free just because some TTS system generated it? Wouldn’t Embark cheat them out their pay if they said “You made it for free so we should be able to use it for free.”?
The intellectual bankruptcy comes from you because instead of actually thinking about the situation you hide behind the “But they agreed to it” argument. People also agreed with indenture servitude, doesn’t mean it’s acceptable.
_cryptagion@anarchist.nexus 1 day ago
they were paid specifically to make the TTS and voice modulation system. none of the rest of your argument makes any sense whatsoever, because the core fundamental idea behind your entire argument is that they were “cheated”. they were not. they did the labor, they got the compensation. people were bitching because artists “weren’t being paid” for their work with AI, so somebody actually does pay them and you’re still whining. it just shows that you were never concerned with the artist in the first place.
I’m not hiding at all. to be perfectly frank, as an anarchist, I don’t believe in copyright to begin with, and have no issue with genAI copying the work of artists. ideas can not be owned, no matter what some capitalist stans such as yourself believe, and it’s ridiculous people say it’s “theft” in the first place.
but that isn’t even what’s happening here. these VAs were paid to create the system, knowing all along that puritains like you would villainize them for their work for no other reason than you think you should get to tell other people how they can live their lives. the sheer narcissism that you’re displaying is beyond belief.
Goodeye8@piefed.social 1 day ago
Apparently you do think that indentured servitude, at least to the extent where the person agrees to step into servitude, is completely fine. After all they agreed to the contract.
_cryptagion@anarchist.nexus 1 day ago
It’s not indentured servitude, and that’s a weak ass argument trying to spin it like that. Nobody with the brains evolution gave a snail is falling for that shit. And you should be embarrassed that that’s the best argument you can come up with.
It’s such a blatantly, self-evidently wrong argument, that I’m not even going to dignify it with a counter argument because frankly, such grade-school bullshit like that is beneath both of us.
Goodeye8@piefed.social 1 day ago
Since you decided to ignore my argument all I can do is attack your stupid argument, which is that the signed contract is all that matters. I’m attacking it by stating you don’t have a problem with indentured servitude as long the servant accepts the contract. That is not the same thing as stating VA work is somehow indentured servitude, please be capable of telling the difference here. If the agreement is all that matters then you have to be okay with indentured servitude in the manner I originally described.