![]() |
OpenAI forced to drop 'Scarlett Johansson voice'
OpenAI have been forced to drop the female voice of its flirty new 'Her' like AI assistant, as it sounds too like Scarlett Johansson.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c51188y6n6yo It's also been revealed that Sam Altman personally begged Johansson last year to let him use her voice, but she refused. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm559l5g529o She is likely going to sue him for millions of dollars. It would be funny if OpenAI's AI then sued her for impersonating the voice of an AI in the movie. :1orglaugh Anybody who hasn't seen the OpenAI demos should, because it's genuinely crazy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvFTeAVMmAg Her trailer : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJTU48_yghs Not sure it's me or this 90's style forum, but I can't work out how to embed YouTube videos. |
He should have never asked her because she would have never put 2+2 together.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Yes, and he also tweeted the single word 'her' the day before the release.
According to 'The Briefing' : Quote:
|
AI on the internet is just scraping websites and taking their content and then pretending to
be intelligent creators. They create nothing except a montage of other peoples's hard work. It's like when tube sites used to just steal content from pay sites. :2 cents: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
https://i.ibb.co/68WH2XQ/scr.gif Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
what they scraped. It's sad that you think this shit has a brain? :helpme |
Quote:
I am wondering where the class action lawsuits are for AI because AI needs to scrape/use other people's work. How is this legal? Is AI actually 'creating' music and images without scraping, just 'taking inspiration' (like real artists who study past creators) and thus manufacturing (creating) something 'new'? |
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Legally she owns the company now.
|
Quote:
Also, no artist is getting "inspiration" from a billion other artist and doling it out for free for another billion people. (billion is hyperbole) :2 cents: |
Little mirco-example of what happens when "civilization" is defined by who can be the most prolific parasites.
Gotta take the good with the bad and use it all to your advantage in order to be successful in this type of civilization. Being anti-AI will get you as far as it got the anti-Tube people. Sortie, I know you're a script guy, but we're here now... so choose your path forward wisely. |
Quote:
I am against using something in AI that is basically the voice/image of a live person that earns a living with their voice/image. To me this falls under trademark and copyright issues. AI voice overs have been around since "Microsoft Sam"; but people got paid for their voice, or it was completely synthesized, it wasn't just copied off TV, Video, movies of known people for free. :2 cents: |
Quote:
https://www.google.com/search?q=you+... rome&ie=UTF-8 Read the AI answer, then tell me AI invented the law rather than scrape the law sites. If I copied this rapper's shit he'd whine to the end of his law suit against me. :2 cents: |
Quote:
I predicted this: https://m.gfy.com/fucking-around-and...s-lot-fun.html |
Scarlett Johansson's best asset ain't her voice . . .
|
Quote:
Stop it Kang. :1orglaugh I'm not crying; I'm seeing that it doesn't do what I want without me correcting what it puts out. So I end up still writing my own code. If you want a "hello world" script then AI hit's it; but when I get into deeper code, it doesn't deliver like the genius it's billed to be. :2 cents: |
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:11 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc