3 ms·

> if AI generated background/voice actors are actually better than non-AI ones on net For now there's certainly no risk at all of that, unless you've seen some

> if AI generated background/voice actors are actually better than non-AI ones on net For now there's certainly no risk at all of that, unless you've seen something I haven't? I disagree with your OP, a union's power isn't derived by its most powerful members, it's derived by solidarity against a large amount of people. If it's strong enough you can force the industry into union only contracts which makes even the powerful members of your profession need to maintain solidarity - SAG-AFTRA is the perfect example. As for American studios outcompeted, I think that's an oversimplification of the videogame market. People buy terrible games all the time such as all the buggy AAA crap that's been coming out of certain American studios. Not to mention the awful mobile games industry which is worth billions... Quality of voice acting alone doesn't seem like something that could make or break an entire nation's game industry.

mschuster91 3y ago
> I disagree with your OP, a union's power isn't derived by its most powerful members, it's derived by solidarity against a large amount of people. Large amounts of people yes, but it needs the high-skilled (or in case of the movie studios, the high-demand) people in the boat, those that a company can't replace on a whim. Walmart, Starbucks and the likes - corporate doesn't care even about closing down an entire location just because there's unionization talks. People dishing out coffees or stocking shelves can be replaced in an instant, corporate doesn't (need to) care. But the high-skilled labor? Finance, HR, admin in the corporate office... if they were to strike in solidarity with the peasants, corporate would have a much more difficult time to replace them.
- nobodyandproud 3y ago
  > But the high-skilled labor? Finance, HR, admin in the corporate office... if they were to strike in solidarity with the peasants, corporate would have a much more difficult time to replace them. And they should, while their skills are “high-skilled”. Every chance there’s the generic executive looking to cut costs, and the hard to quantify losses like reputation; security; maintenance; and longevity get pushed aside.
  - mschuster91 3y ago
    > And they should, while their skills are “high-skilled”. They won't however, as anti-union propaganda (and in IT, ungodly amounts of venture capital) has convinced them that they'd have a better chance at salary raises if they could have individual negotiations based on something they can control (i.e. work performance metrics) than if they were to collectively negotiate. Young generations thankfully don't drink the koolaid any more, as they see how they live and how their parents lived at the same age.
    - nobodyandproud 3y ago
      > Young generations thankfully don't drink the koolaid any more, as they see how they live and how their parents lived at the same age. I’ll believe it when I see it.
satvikpendem 3y ago
> For now there's certainly no risk at all of that, unless you've seen something I haven't? Most background "actors" are now all CGI. Imagine how it'll change in the next ten years. I imagine all actors will end up being CGI'd / AI generated.

mschuster91 3y ago

> I disagree with your OP, a union's power isn't derived by its most powerful members, it's derived by solidarity against a large amount of people. Large amounts of people yes, but it needs the high-skilled (or in case of the movie studios, the high-demand) people in the boat, those that a company can't replace on a whim. Walmart, Starbucks and the likes - corporate doesn't care even about closing down an entire location just because there's unionization talks. People dishing out coffees or stocking shelves can be replaced in an instant, corporate doesn't (need to) care. But the high-skilled labor? Finance, HR, admin in the corporate office... if they were to strike in solidarity with the peasants, corporate would have a much more difficult time to replace them.

nobodyandproud 3y ago
> But the high-skilled labor? Finance, HR, admin in the corporate office... if they were to strike in solidarity with the peasants, corporate would have a much more difficult time to replace them. And they should, while their skills are “high-skilled”. Every chance there’s the generic executive looking to cut costs, and the hard to quantify losses like reputation; security; maintenance; and longevity get pushed aside.
- mschuster91 3y ago
  > And they should, while their skills are “high-skilled”. They won't however, as anti-union propaganda (and in IT, ungodly amounts of venture capital) has convinced them that they'd have a better chance at salary raises if they could have individual negotiations based on something they can control (i.e. work performance metrics) than if they were to collectively negotiate. Young generations thankfully don't drink the koolaid any more, as they see how they live and how their parents lived at the same age.
  - nobodyandproud 3y ago
    > Young generations thankfully don't drink the koolaid any more, as they see how they live and how their parents lived at the same age. I’ll believe it when I see it.

satvikpendem 3y ago

> For now there's certainly no risk at all of that, unless you've seen something I haven't? Most background "actors" are now all CGI. Imagine how it'll change in the next ten years. I imagine all actors will end up being CGI'd / AI generated.