The actor told an audience in London that AI was a “burning issue” for actors.

  • Lexi Sneptaur@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Get your head out of your ass. Their voices are their art and to replicate that is not only disturbing it’s morally wrong. Especially if you do so for profit.

    • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s only wrong when done for profit.

      Otherwise you’re just having their material as data for an algorithm and a personal use case.

      • Lexi Sneptaur@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t know what someone would use AI art for “personal use” aside from trying to make some sort of porn or something for themselves

        • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Use the voices for a film project or machinima if you want, use the picture generation models to create wallpapers, it’s not my fault you insist on being obtuse about this by pretending you can’t figure out a use case that isn’t based around making money.

          • Lexi Sneptaur@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            A film project or a machinima that I won’t be posting online or sharing with anyone? AI art generally doesn’t look very good, so I wouldn’t want to stare at it all day only to notice the imperfections all over it. Idk about you but it seems like these models are designed specifically to avoid paying talented people for their work. Simple as that. If we didn’t have capitalism they would simply not exist

            • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              This website is all the same, just a bunch of luddites mad that technology and advancement is killing jobs. Combines took farming jobs, quickbooks took accounting jobs, AI will take data entry and artist’s jobs.

              The ONLY way to get off capitalism is to automate the economy via robotics and machine learning models, it’s the only way we could ever achieve a stateless society economically.

              If we didn’t have capitalism they would simply not exist

              Put down the crack pipe, any society looking to create a more socialist -> communist economy has developed and leaned on automation to do so. Nothing about that is going to change.

              • Lexi Sneptaur@pawb.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                I’m not against the concept of automation. I’m against the concept of stealing the copyrighted works of artists who rely on this work to survive. AI does this, and it does it pretty poorly.

    • nxfsi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      41
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nobody complained about copyright when Microsoft had the only image ai in the game, only when the open source stable diffusion came out did they start screeching about how ai was “stealing their jobs”.

        • nxfsi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          32
          ·
          1 year ago

          So years of Microsoft’s advertising dalle did nothing to educate the public about how ai works but they’re suddenly all experts the week after stable diffusion comes out?

          • Enigma@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            No, they didn’t because I’ve literally never heard of it until your comment. And I understand that my experience is anecdotal, but I guarantee I’m not the only one, or even one of only a couple thousand. You severely overestimate how knowledgeable the general public is on AI. Most haven’t even heard of Chat GPT, and that’s in the news, let alone expecting everyone to be interested in it enough to actually educate themselves on it.

            Like you’re the only person in this thread that’s even mentioned Microsoft’s version, yet you think “the public” knows about it?

      • Sekoia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Uh no people definitely did. Mostly the people that actually knew how this shit worked. But even laypeople complained when it was just Dall-E and Midjourney.

      • ShadowRam@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        What are you talking about? When MS had the only image AI in the game, it was garbage and couldn’t do anything useful. Of course no one was threatened.

        But after researchers got their hands on nVidia 3000 series cards, and finally had access to hardware.

        More advanced research papers started spilling out, which has caused this crazy leap in AI tech.

        Now the image/audio AI is advanced enough to be useful, hence now the threats…

        • FaceDeer@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          When MS had the only image AI in the game, it was garbage and couldn’t do anything useful.

          And yet it was still doing exactly the same thing that people are now going on about how “unethical” it is.

          Just goes to show that they don’t actually care how “unethical” it is until it actually poses a threat to their income. It’s about money, not about principle.

          • Lexi Sneptaur@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            This is such a ridiculous argument it’s not even funny. You have absolutely no evidence to back up your deranged claim. Take your victim complex somewhere else.