3 ms·

Have you seen how big studios treat vfx artists? They absolutely will replace voice actors with AI. Also: > This technology is incredibly powerful and useful

Have you seen how big studios treat vfx artists? They absolutely will replace voice actors with AI. Also: > This technology is incredibly powerful and useful At what, exactly? The only "useful" case you presented is "actually, replacing voice actors with AI isn't so bad".

CuriouslyC 3y ago
You want a world where only the rich can create beautiful experiences. You're either rich or short sighted. Edit: If you've got a cadre of volunteer voice actors that don't suck hidden somewhere, you need to share buddy. That's the only way your comments make sense.
- tonnydourado 3y ago
  I don't know what else to tell you, I just think people deserve to be paid for the work they do. Your vision of a world where anyone can create voice for their projects for cheap CAN NOT exist without someone getting exploited. Nor is it sustainable, really. You said they this world would be worth some people losing their careers, but what do we gain? More games/audiobooks of questionable quality? Is this really worth fucking a whole profession over?
  - CuriouslyC 3y ago
    We agree that people should be paid for the work that they *DO*. Your view smacks of elitism, and voice actors don't have any more right to be able to make decent money peddling their voice than indie game devs have to peddle games with synthetic voices.
    - tonnydourado 3y ago
      Your view smacks of contempt for workers, particularly in the arts. Specially the emphasis on "do", as if voice actors don't actually work, and just live of royalties or something. The kind of worldview that the rich and the delusioned working poor tend to share.
  - amarant 3y ago
    Professions disappear, it's a natural side effect of progress. Stablehands aren't really that common anymore, because most people drive cars instead of horses. I really hope we can deprecate a whole bunch of professions related to fossil fuels, including coal miners and oil drillers etc. I sympathise with the people working in those professions, I do, but times change and professions come and go, and I don't buy the argument that we should stop inventing new stuff because it might outcompete people. As for positive uses of this technology, it might be used to immortalise a voice actor. For example Sir David Attenborough probably won't be around forever, but thanks to this technology, his iconic voice might be!
    - wsintra2022 3y ago
      I made an e book of Carl Rogers narrated by David Attenborough, turned out decent, I used coquai who sadly have closed with all my API credits
- Osmose 3y ago
  You have a narrow view of what a beautiful experience is. It does not require professional-level voice acting. It is not unfair that, in order to have voice acting, you must have someone perform voice acting. You don't have the natural right to professional-level voice acting for free, nor do you need it to create beautiful things. The tech is simply something that may be possible, and it has tradeoffs, and claiming that it's an accessibility problem does not grant you permission to ignore the tradeoffs.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    > You don't have the natural right to professional-level voice acting for free I also don't have the natural right to work as a professional-level voice actor. "Natural rights" aren't really a thing, the phrase is a thought-terminating cliché we use for the rhetorical purpose of saying something is good or bad without having to justify it further. > The tech is simply something that may be possible, and it has tradeoffs, and claiming that it's an accessibility problem does not grant you permission to ignore the tradeoffs. A few times as a kid, I heard the meme that the American constitution allows everything then tells you what's banned, the French one bans everything then tells you what's allowed, and the Soviet one tells you nothing and arrests you anyway. It's not a very accurate meme, but still, "permission" is the wrong lens: it's allowed until it's illegal. You want it to be illegal to replace voice actors with synthetic voices, you need to campaign to make it so as this isn't the default. (Unlike with using novel tech for novel types of fraud, where fraud is already illegal and new tech doesn't change that).
- Riverheart 3y ago
  “You want a world where only the rich can create beautiful experiences. You're either rich or short sighted.” Being rich to create a beautiful experience is neither required nor does it require a synthetic voice to achieve. It does require effort and being rich can reduce that effort for sure.

CuriouslyC 3y ago

You want a world where only the rich can create beautiful experiences. You're either rich or short sighted. Edit: If you've got a cadre of volunteer voice actors that don't suck hidden somewhere, you need to share buddy. That's the only way your comments make sense.

tonnydourado 3y ago
I don't know what else to tell you, I just think people deserve to be paid for the work they do. Your vision of a world where anyone can create voice for their projects for cheap CAN NOT exist without someone getting exploited. Nor is it sustainable, really. You said they this world would be worth some people losing their careers, but what do we gain? More games/audiobooks of questionable quality? Is this really worth fucking a whole profession over?
- CuriouslyC 3y ago
  We agree that people should be paid for the work that they *DO*. Your view smacks of elitism, and voice actors don't have any more right to be able to make decent money peddling their voice than indie game devs have to peddle games with synthetic voices.
  - tonnydourado 3y ago
    Your view smacks of contempt for workers, particularly in the arts. Specially the emphasis on "do", as if voice actors don't actually work, and just live of royalties or something. The kind of worldview that the rich and the delusioned working poor tend to share.
- amarant 3y ago
  Professions disappear, it's a natural side effect of progress. Stablehands aren't really that common anymore, because most people drive cars instead of horses. I really hope we can deprecate a whole bunch of professions related to fossil fuels, including coal miners and oil drillers etc. I sympathise with the people working in those professions, I do, but times change and professions come and go, and I don't buy the argument that we should stop inventing new stuff because it might outcompete people. As for positive uses of this technology, it might be used to immortalise a voice actor. For example Sir David Attenborough probably won't be around forever, but thanks to this technology, his iconic voice might be!
  - wsintra2022 3y ago
    I made an e book of Carl Rogers narrated by David Attenborough, turned out decent, I used coquai who sadly have closed with all my API credits
Osmose 3y ago
You have a narrow view of what a beautiful experience is. It does not require professional-level voice acting. It is not unfair that, in order to have voice acting, you must have someone perform voice acting. You don't have the natural right to professional-level voice acting for free, nor do you need it to create beautiful things. The tech is simply something that may be possible, and it has tradeoffs, and claiming that it's an accessibility problem does not grant you permission to ignore the tradeoffs.
- ben_w 3y ago
  > You don't have the natural right to professional-level voice acting for free I also don't have the natural right to work as a professional-level voice actor. "Natural rights" aren't really a thing, the phrase is a thought-terminating cliché we use for the rhetorical purpose of saying something is good or bad without having to justify it further. > The tech is simply something that may be possible, and it has tradeoffs, and claiming that it's an accessibility problem does not grant you permission to ignore the tradeoffs. A few times as a kid, I heard the meme that the American constitution allows everything then tells you what's banned, the French one bans everything then tells you what's allowed, and the Soviet one tells you nothing and arrests you anyway. It's not a very accurate meme, but still, "permission" is the wrong lens: it's allowed until it's illegal. You want it to be illegal to replace voice actors with synthetic voices, you need to campaign to make it so as this isn't the default. (Unlike with using novel tech for novel types of fraud, where fraud is already illegal and new tech doesn't change that).
Riverheart 3y ago
“You want a world where only the rich can create beautiful experiences. You're either rich or short sighted.” Being rich to create a beautiful experience is neither required nor does it require a synthetic voice to achieve. It does require effort and being rich can reduce that effort for sure.