Maybe a few different things, one requires physical effort and skill the other, while impressive tech wise, is relatively easy to use and replicate. The other reason is probably because it’s easy to abuse as we’ve already seen with other news about “fans of x celebrity get scammed by deepfake”. And another even if it’s not a scam using their voice for financial gain is really easy
Comment on GTA 5 Actor Ned Luke Calls Out 'Bulls**t' AI Chatbot That Uses His Voice
DreadPotato@sopuli.xyz 8 months ago
Why is it that when a human impersonator mimics a voice, it’s just fine. But when a computer does it, it becomes a huge ethical conundrum?
I’m not saying they’re not wrong here, I just find it interesting that using an organic method of recreation (an impersonator) is considered fine, but an electronic method (the “AI” in this case) to be ethically wrong.
qooqie@lemmy.world 8 months ago
DreadPotato@sopuli.xyz 8 months ago
Well, scams are unethical regardless of method used. It would equally unethical even if done by a human. So that’s not the difference.
And Impersonators are already profiting off of someone else, since they’re specifically hired to mimic someone.
And the other points you mention all boil down to being ethically wrong because it’s easy, which doesn’t really make any sense IMO. why is a thing ethically wrong just because it’s easy?
tonyn@lemmy.ml 8 months ago
Social animals like us invent ethics. It all comes down to what most people find appalling vs what most people find acceptable. A lot of that comes down to empathy. How would you feel if it was done to you?
DreadPotato@sopuli.xyz 8 months ago
Impersonating my voice? Not really something I have an issue with as such. From the article they are using the voice of the actor to impersonate a fictional character. If someone used my voice to create a fictional character that neither acts or looks like me, I probably wouldn’t have an issue with it.
MajesticSloth@lemmy.world 8 months ago
I see ads all the time now using various famous actors voices for spamming cammer crap. If someone didn’t know better they would absolutely think these actors were shilling the stuff.
TORFdot0@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Hiring a sound-alike isn’t taking a job out of the economy for one. The original voice is able to accept the job at the pay rate the sound-alike took usually.
Not to mention impersonators are usually doing the voice according to parody/fair-use
Nobody wants to end people using AI to make Johnny Cash sing “Barbie Girl”, but using it to replace Keanu Reeves in John Wick 8 for instance would be across the line. Recasting the role is one thing, but replacing the human altogether is another.
DreadPotato@sopuli.xyz 8 months ago
That is a Luddite approach to the subject I would say. Technology has always displaced jobs and rendered some skills useless. For a long time it has just only occurred to unskilled labour, most people have no issue with that. Now we’re starting to see skilled labour getting hit by it, but why should that be any different?
TORFdot0@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Replacing an assembly line worker with a more efficient machine creates jobs as the machines need to be manufactured, serviced, designed, and replaced. Jobs are created in shipping and logistics as factories are able to create more product. Meanwhile the costs of goods go down and benefits the whole economy.
Art is uniquely human. Art is sacred. Art created wholly by a machine with nothing but a human prompt is not art. People using AI to rip off content from existing YouTubers and reupload it with AI generated voice and script rewrites aren’t making art. People who use AI to create demented kids videos so they can steal from advertisers are definitely not creating art. Someone who may use an AI narration and AI assisted graphics may be creating something worth calling art but it’s going to be seen as lesser by everyone else.
Hollywood executives using AI to replace extras, writers and talent are not causing more jobs to be created else in the economy, they are not causing the costs of entertainment to go down, and they aren’t making it more accessible for creatives to make it in mainstream entertainment. It is a net-drag.
I’m not saying your opinion is wrong, just that I disagree with it on the arbitrary standard that art is sacred.
DreadPotato@sopuli.xyz 8 months ago
That kind of opens a completely different discussion on what should be considered “art” or worthwhile of consumption, but I get your point.
bilb@lem.monster 8 months ago
There’s plenty of art that I don’t value the human element of at all. I don’t think any of the Corporate Memphis blob people on tech sites or the designs on a billboard are “sacred,” for instance, but they are unambiguously art. If you do these things with generative AI, I won’t regret the loss of human involvement.
Art done to express something human will never go away as long as people feel a need to express themselves that way. Companies will hire fewer graphics designers, true, but I don’t really give a fuck to be honest.
Wrench@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Just like musicians, voice actors have spent years working on their style and range, making their particular flavor unique.
AI is essentially stealing their entire product for cheap.
AI will eventually be able to convincingly clone music styles and voices. You don’t think NIN would be justified in being upset when AI will be able to put out entire fake albums in their style and voice?
DreadPotato@sopuli.xyz 8 months ago
Anyone is allowed to mimic or copy anyone’s style. A style is not something that you can copyright, only the individual works.
Kbobabob@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Correct, but this can also backfire as they are just proving to the world that they don’t have what it takes to be original.
sir_reginald@lemmy.world 8 months ago
the AI generated one is super easy to (ab)use.
DreadPotato@sopuli.xyz 8 months ago
I completely agree, but why would there be a skill-component to the ethicalness of impersonation?
sir_reginald@lemmy.world 8 months ago
I haven’t heard of voice-changers that can replicate other people’s voices that aren’t made with machine learning.
The issue is impersonation. An AI voice generator that does not imitate anyone in specific and has a “unique” voice, I have no issue with that.
And obviously, a human voice imitator that uses it for impersonating others is also an issue. But that’s far less common and accessible than a computer powered option.
maness300@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Why is it that when a human impersonator mimics a voice, it’s just fine. But when a computer does it, it becomes a huge ethical issue?
💰💰💰
We’re just seeing how white collar workers react to their jobs being automated akin to blue collar workers’.
takeda@lemmy.world 8 months ago
It’s because it is about the voice. A good voice actor can produce many voices. Yes you can find someone else but it almost always is not identical. And since you have to hire someone anyway and they are good, what even make them pretend to be someone else? They might have better voices.
With computers you can essentially steal someone’s voice and the way they act and use that for cheap.
Those companies cry about piracy, that someone downloaded something and that made them not purchase the movie, music or game that many wouldn’t purchase anyway.
This actually is the real piracy. They can steal the likeness of those people and make profit without needing to hire them ever again.