A high-profile dispute between Scarlett Johansson and the maker of ChatGPT has brought the subject of AI voices to the fore, but many others in the entertainment industry are affected too. Jennifer Hale and Linsay Rousseau say fair treatment for voice actors is important. (May 23, 2024)
from The Canadian Press
This commentary is from labor disputes last year, I wanted to post it here so that people would remember whose jobs they are trying to steal by pushing fake ai VO. We don't have to push corpo propaganda here. This is our space, err, [Chris Remington, alyaza [they/she], TheRtRevKaiser, gyrfalcon, rs5th, coldredlight, Leigh, TheRtRevKaiser]'s space. I don't think any of them are corporations, but maybe I am wrong?
Pushing AI propaganda is a bad move for infinite reasons, here are four:
it's usually an attack on workers
the industry steals directly from artists
these companies are massive polluters/ emitters
it makes you look like a rube
*edit 1 According to the laws of debate, one of you must reveal whichever podcast has you parroting comparisons of VO artists to horse workers
*edit 2 Horse husbandry is also a major craft and fine art that ought not be mocked, whether or not it is useful to capitalists
the number of credulous corpo bootlickers, even on indie social media, is deeply demoralizing
it's important we just keep practicing the arts and ignore the self-styled consumers
consumer normies don't really contribute anything to these conversations but i can't exactly tag a post "don't bother replying if you believe in capitalism"
No. It's innovation. As was horse carriages and other technologies/jobs being out of date
the industry steals directly from artists
Valid Argument!! Training AI based on existing voice actor recordings is true valid concern. But this won't stop the industry with eventually having really good vocaloids, or finding people willing to donate their voice or sell it on the cheap.
these companies are massive polluters/ emitters
Bullshit. There's no reason any AI training needs to happen at 100% duty cycle. It can run straight off pure solar with no batteries. Trains only when the sun shines. That said, the power source is irrelevant to the argument. Not all nations rely on fossil fuels.
it makes you look like a rube
Whining that society is moving forward and a old job is being obsoleted makes you look like a rube. Want to take your voice acting to the next level? Do something like the Critical Role folks did and adapt.
I halfway agree, but the issue with that is, that's not what happens in reality. In reality these things don't run on renewable energy. And not utilizing datacenters at capacity is just a waste of resources. And they could find people who donate their voices, which would be fair... But they're not doing that. So I think half the arguments still apply. It is innovation though, we shouldn't be opposed just for the sake of it. It needs some proper argumentation.
Please list some countries that run on 100% renewables that are massively building AI datacenters, I'll wait. Meanwhile, consider that useful things could be done with the energy required for AI. Even other uses for AI would be better, like automating menial labor or detecting cancer. Instead AI voices replace and devalue human artistic expression, not because they are better, but because they are cheaper.
Even countries can't yet rely on clean energy alone to power everything they have, and for what we know the electric cost for AI has already matched the consumption of some countries. Google promised they would rely only on clean energy for their own AI, only to admit the task is yet impossible.
You also don't mention water consumption, wich is so big it has been made illegal in several countries to prevent shortages.
Tbh it is actually the biggest argument here, because not one AI compagny has ever made a single dime, they all run at an unprecedented loss, without investors continuously wasting money in them they would all have died. The value of AI doesn't outmatch such costs, to a point a lot of economists think it might be a bubble that will eventually explode.
It’s innovation
For it to be innovation, it would need to bring real value, something that eleviate the costs, so far it has none, the only thing AI companies really sell isn't innovation but the idea of it. Funny enough, the tech in itself isn't the problem here, it might sure have real usefull cases and real value, but not in the way we are applying it today and surely not how we are selling it.
Hm, I've heard "Animal management" as the general term, with "husbandry" focusing on the breeding and artificial selection, with all the ethical issues around that.
Anyway, it's kind of off-topic, isn't it?
Cars replaced horse carriages, fridges replaced ice sellers... new technologies keep replacing old professions. We're at a large job replacement point right now with AI, new skills will be required, but we're yet in uncertain times as to what those skills will exactly look like.
Not sure which "corpo propaganda" were you referring to, and maybe it's just me, but the whole post feels hostile.