Robin Williams' daughter Zelda says AI recreations of her dad are 'personally disturbing'

Comments

• Case@unilem.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Imagine losing your father in a tragic fashion, only for Hollywood execs to make a marketable facsimile of appearance and voice. If they could store his corpse and make it dance like a marionette they would.

  Talk about retraumatizing the poor lady.

  source
• AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Hate it all you want. There’s a buck to be made by you our owners, so it will proceed.

  Humanity at large is literally letting humanity’s owner class destroy our species’ only habitat, Earth, in the name of further growing their ego scores in the form of short term profit.

  Who gives a shit about them stealing a dead celebrity’s voice in the face of that? Let’s say we put all our effort into stopping them from doing that. We’re still terraforming the planet to be less hospitable to human life.

  Priorities, can we have them? And no we can’t “do both,” because we have had no success stopping the owner class from doing anything that hurts others to further enrich themselves.

  source

  • daemoz@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Extremely anti post-modern-organic bias you seem to have. If we dont fill space with plastic and heat it enough, then HOW exactly do you propose we encourage establishing an entire Carbon-Polyethylene based evolutionary tree ?? 🌳

    source
• scarabic@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  This is such a random thought and I don’t mean to conclude anything by it:

  I’ll bet people felt this way about the very first audio recordings.

  How creepy to hear your sibling’s voice when that sibling is not even in the room!

  …and moving pictures:

  It looks like your mother is right there but she’s been dead for 10 years! Gah!

  source

  • UnD3Rgr0uNDCL0wN@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I think the issue is more that he wasnt involved. You tend to consent to a photo or video. The AI stuff is being done for money, not to remember, not really as an exploration of the artform…

    source

    • scarabic@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      You tend to consent to a photo or video

      I’m not sure what you mean. There’s nothing more consensual about photography necessarily. Paparazzi are a thing, for example.

      I think the real difference here is that we understand video and audio recordings, we even have some laws governing when you can record someone. So we are comfortable with those technologies. Above all, we’re used to them.

      AI isn’t the exact same thing but I think the main source of discomfort is its newness and mysteriousness. We don’t have laws governing it. We don’t understand it very well. This makes it creepy.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Something_Complex@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    To be honest it is a bit if it wasn’t from him so yhe. If you hear a message you brother left you is one thing. But listening to him taking when someone else is faking his voice and saying whatever they want.

    That’s the only difference, those video recording where of you brother.

    These deep-fake things are someone else speaking in your brother’s voice. A corporation using your brother to sell products and services.

    Nothing to do with him and his personality

    source

    • Comment105@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Yeah, there’s a significant difference between a recording and generating.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • eumesmo@lemmings.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    It’s not just a matter of discomfort for something new, but at something highly dangerous. Deepfakes have several bad and disturbing use cases, like itentity theft, sexual exploitation, marketing abuse, political manipulation, etc. In fact, I hard to find a significant good use of such technology.

    source

    • stevedidWHAT@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Ops point remains, this is exactly what everyone said about photos and then videos and then video with sound etc.

      You’ve always been told you can’t see what’s on the internet, now that’s even more true.

      There are ways we process and handle new tech, there’s a grace period to figure out issues and solutions.

      Part of the problem is regressionist ideals holding everyone back from making real changes. Being able to generate nudies of your crush is the tip of the iceberg burger and demonstrates our ability to create teachable models that perform well and reliably to reconstruct images from noise. There lots of applications but ultimately making images is just art and it’s sorta hard to break out of that sphere easily.

      source
• anon_8675309@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Almost 10 years without him. He was so great. This should not be his legacy.

  source
• WuTang@lemmy.ninja ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  You don’t need to be the son or daughter of a celebrity, just think about it 5 freaking seconds.

  source
• Blizzard@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Another repost by the bot.

  source
• _number8_@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  imaginary scenario:

  you love good will hunting, you’re going thru a tough time, and you use AI to have robin williams say something gentle and therapist-y that directly applies to you and your situation – is this wrong?

  source

  • Naz@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I’ve asked extremely high end AI questions on ethics of this nature and after thinking for exactly 14.7 seconds it responded with:

    • The ethics of generating images, sound, or other representations of real people is considered no different than active imagination when done for fun and in privacy.

    • However, spreading those images to others, without the original person’s consent is considered a form of invasion of privacy, impersonation, and is therefore unethical.

    Basically, you’re fine with imagining Robin Williams talking to you, but if you record that and share it with others/disseminate the content, then it becomes unethical.

    source

    • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      • The ethics of generating images, sound, or other representations of real people is considered no different than active imagination when done for fun and in privacy.

      That doesn’t sound right at all. Copying and processing somebody’s works for the sake of creating a replica is completely different than imagining it to yourself. Depending on how its done, even pretending that it’s being done solely for yourself is incorrect. Many AI-based services take feedback from what their users do, even if they don’t actively share it.

      Just like looking at something, memorizing it and imitating it is allowed while taking a picture may not be, AI would not necessarily get the rights to engage with media as people do. It’s not an independent actor with personal rights. It’s not an extension of the user. It’s a tool.

      Then again I shouldn’t be surprised that an AI used and trained by AI users, replies about its use as basically a natural right.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Empricorn@feddit.nl ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I wouldn’t apply morality, but I bet it isn’t healthy. I would urge this theoretical person to consult with an actual licensed therapist.

    source
  • BuckyVanBuren@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Ask Tom Waits…

    source
• ShittyRedditWasBetter@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Get used to it. Best case stuff like this gets covered commercially. Nobody is going to be able to regulate what individuals can do.

  source

  • wanderingmagus@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Give me a launch order, and I’ll EMP this entire planet back to the stone age. Easy and semi-permanent regulation for the next few millennia.

    source

    • ShittyRedditWasBetter@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      👌

      source
• banneryear1868@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Seeing 50 Cent’s hologram perform to a cheering crowd was when it crossed the line in to creepy for me. A lot of people seem turned off by this at least, and it’s really exposing how these studios think of people. I think this could turn in to a thing where the studios really push these personality constructs, while many actors and the public will be morally opposed to it. So the studios might have to appeal to a moral justification for when it’s appropriate to use these AI constructs, like, “we really wanted to honor Robin with this project that we felt carried on his legacy, and a percentage of proceeds will go to the good foundation to help other’s who suffer like Robin did, so seeing Robin’s personality construct perform for you is really a moral duty and helps make the world a better place.” Also anywhere AI isn’t noticeable to the viewer, for the cost savings and avoiding the negative reaction to it.

  I think there will be studios producing fully AI-driven content though. They’ll be like low budget and corny, a diarrhea level of quantity and quality. Not unlike those campy dramatized skits on YouTube now where it’s like, “homeless girl steals a rich man’s heart, will make you cry.” They’ll be these ultra-niche AI generated shorts that are a mix of advertisement and generic story arc. The AI spam is already pretty hilarious, “Elon has an invention that can make anyone a millionaire in 30 days.” I think we’re about to witness a dearth of content so shitty that no present day comparison could describe.

  source

  • BillMurray@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Hold on, 50 cent had a hologram? Would it be easier and cheaper to just hire him, since he’s still alive… when was this?

    source
• thecrotch@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Celebrity impersonators have existed for a really long time, I don’t see how this is any different

  source
• Zehzin@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Kind of a mean thing to say about her dad

  source

  • TimeNaan@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    But it’s not her dad so I don’t get wym

    source

    • Zehzin@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      The bad joke is that she’d be calling them disturbing not because it’s fucked up, but because she thinks her dad is ugly.

      source
• synceDD@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I’m byproduct of his sperm so my opinion counts !@!@!!

  source