Yes, but something like that costs productions a boat load of capital to pull off. They can't really half-ass it either because then you run up against Uncanny

Yes, but something like that costs productions a boat load of capital to pull off. They can't really half-ass it either because then you run up against Uncanny Valley and people end up rejecting the movie or show, wasting your investment. So the bar is high. Second, I'm not yet worried about this for credited actors, as audiences right now go see movies because they actually have the real actor of their choice in it. It asks a lot of your audience to be fine with a movie that "stars" someone who wasn't actually in it, and it's too early to see how well an AI credited actor would bring people to the theaters. My current guess is that it would cost a lot to make, not really bring anything new to the screen and turn off a sizable chunk of the audience. HOWEVER, the actors strike is calling out that background actors who have only a line or two of dialog are getting paid for 1 day of work so that their likeness could be scanned in and they are used in perpetuity. You're diluted if you think this benefits college film projects, or your favorite YouTube channel. This stuff is expensive and time consuming to adopt. I mean, it is super cool that scenes like in House of Dragon, where they need to fill stadiums of citizens, can use this to make worlds seem much richer and larger than life. Still, it's not about compensation from what I understand, it's that actors worry this is gating off new actors from getting experience and exposure since many of them started out as background characters.