3 ms·

> "Fake News" is about to get a lot more compelling hen you can make anyone say anything as long as you have some previous recordings of their voice. Adobe has

> "Fake News" is about to get a lot more compelling hen you can make anyone say anything as long as you have some previous recordings of their voice. Adobe has already developed that technology: https://arstechnica.co.uk/information-technology/2016/11/adobe-voco-photoshop-for-audio-speech-editing/ https://arstechnica.co.uk/information-technology/2016/11/ado... Now imagine combining it with this: Face2Face: Real-time Face Capture and Reenactment of RGB Videos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohmajJTcpNk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohmajJTcpNk Perhaps using the intonation from the face-actor's voice to guide the speech synthesis.

stevenh 10y ago
I agree and I've upvoted you, but I feel it's worth pointing out that Adobe's claim about their own progress in this field was fake news. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3l4XLZ59iw&t=2m34s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3l4XLZ59iw&t=2m34s "Wife" sounds exactly the same in both places. All they did was copy the exact waveform from one point to another. Nothing is being synthesized. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3l4XLZ59iw&t=3m54s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3l4XLZ59iw&t=3m54s The word "Jordan" is not being synthesized. The speaker was recorded saying "Jordan" beforehand for this insertion demo and they're trying to play it off as though it was synthesized on the fly. This is a scripted performance and Jordan is feigning surprise. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3l4XLZ59iw&t=4m40s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3l4XLZ59iw&t=4m40s The phrase "three times" here was prerecorded. This was a phony demonstration of a nonexistent product. Reporters parroted the claims and none questioned what they witnessed. Adobe falsely took credit and received endless free publicity for a breakthrough they had no hand in by staging this fake demo right on the heels of the genuine interest generated by Google WaveNet. I suppose they're hoping they'll have a real product ready by whatever deadline they've set for themselves. To be clear, I like Adobe and I think it's a cunning move on their part.
- mbrookes 10y ago
  Thanks for the detailed breakdown. The irony is not lost!

stevenh 10y ago

I agree and I've upvoted you, but I feel it's worth pointing out that Adobe's claim about their own progress in this field was fake news. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3l4XLZ59iw&t=2m34s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3l4XLZ59iw&t=2m34s "Wife" sounds exactly the same in both places. All they did was copy the exact waveform from one point to another. Nothing is being synthesized. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3l4XLZ59iw&t=3m54s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3l4XLZ59iw&t=3m54s The word "Jordan" is not being synthesized. The speaker was recorded saying "Jordan" beforehand for this insertion demo and they're trying to play it off as though it was synthesized on the fly. This is a scripted performance and Jordan is feigning surprise. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3l4XLZ59iw&t=4m40s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3l4XLZ59iw&t=4m40s The phrase "three times" here was prerecorded. This was a phony demonstration of a nonexistent product. Reporters parroted the claims and none questioned what they witnessed. Adobe falsely took credit and received endless free publicity for a breakthrough they had no hand in by staging this fake demo right on the heels of the genuine interest generated by Google WaveNet. I suppose they're hoping they'll have a real product ready by whatever deadline they've set for themselves. To be clear, I like Adobe and I think it's a cunning move on their part.

mbrookes 10y ago
Thanks for the detailed breakdown. The irony is not lost!