5 ms·
Same here. Have only watched one or two episodes of his podcast in the past, so was basing my judgement on what sounded natural in general rather than any speci
by codetrotter 7y ago
Same here. Have only watched one or two episodes of his podcast in the past, so was basing my judgement on what sounded natural in general rather than any specific recollection of what he is supposed to sound like.
I voted on each clip without listening to other clips first. I misidentified two that were real as being fake. Wonder if those might have been clips where he was reading from a script with a flatter voice than usual like another top-level comment ITT talks about.
If audio of this quality was being presented in a context where I didn’t know it might be fake, I probably would have chalked it up to issues with the recording mainly, and would have believed that the audio was real.
- sho_hn 7y agoAn interesting question (ignoring how you need Real Rogan to train Fake one for a moment) is whether the Fake Rogan could be as popular, or if the extra personality the real voice has is vital to making him a popular speaker. I suspect that question strikes to things like gaining the tools to transpose speaker affect independent from voice characteristics etc. Imagine a remix culture where a future popular podcast voice is a mashup of different older popular speakers and things like that ...
- soulofmischief 7y agoReminds me of Aldous Huxley's Brave New World when the characters attend a synthetic orchestra. The book goes into vivid detail about the level of craftsmanship achievable by a machine composer and orchestra, yet somehow it all seems so shallow, like the soul of it has long gone.
- hammock 7y agoYou can see examples of visual art created by amalgam of different artists/styles. Sorry I don't have a link. It's not the same.