10 ms·

Altman would have us believe it's all just an innocent misunderstanding but without actually saying so: "We cast the voice actor behind Sky’s voice before any

Altman would have us believe it's all just an innocent misunderstanding but without actually saying so: "We cast the voice actor behind Sky’s voice before any outreach to Ms. Johansson." Is he trying to suggest the company did not try to make the voice sound like her without her permission? The statement sounds like it's written by a lawyer to be technically true while implying something that is actually false. These are weasel words. He sounds sneaky, evasive and intentionally deceptive. We should not give a sneaky, deceptive and manipulative person this much power over our future.

barfingclouds 2y ago
It doesn’t sound like her
- Reubachi 2y ago
  I listened to a comedy podcast early last week that was using Chatgpt4 with this voice to make some funny bits/jokes. Without having any context about who the voice was, or the "Drama" between OpenAI and actress in question, or even really being aware of Scarlett Johansson's body of work, I immediately went "Oh that's Scarlett Johansson or whatever, cool" To read all of this after the fact is almost comical. It's as if the powers that be realized the issues with the "one-man-in-charge-of-ai" platform and created this almost unbelievable story to decredit him.
dustfinger 2y ago
> We should not give a sneaky, deceptive and manipulative person this much power over our future. I think this should be applied to our government. In my opinion, it is a failing in the structure of our government that those running the country control the police and appear to rarely be investigated unless by the request of a political opponent. They are seemingly outside of the law. It would be better if they were under perpetual investigation; forever kept in check. We should have assurance that those leading our country are not villainous traitors.
- schmidt_fifty 2y ago
  > those running the country control the police Interestingly one of the things that came out of 2020 was that nobody appears willing to control the police. Unless by police you mean FBI, which would both make sense for investigating a national politician and be directly under the control of the executive.
  - dustfinger 2y ago
    > one of the things that came out of 2020 was that nobody appears willing to control the police While I don't agree with that statement, I will clarify that I was using the term "police" to encompass all agencies in both USA and Canada capable of legally conducting an investigation at the federal level and carrying out an arrest. As far as I am aware, these agencies are all funded by our federal governments. Even though in my mind I was thinking of only the USA and Canada, the structural flaw probably applies to most governments, if not all governments ( speculating ). The flaw being that the leaders of our nations conduct national affairs as though they are shielded from the law policing its citizens. They are getting away with using our national resources ( financial, material, human etc ) in ways that may benefit their own agendas, but are observably harmful to our economy and therefore the citizens at large. If an investigation could prove that my speculation is true, then it would be in both our nation's best interest to deal with the problem both swiftly and legally. My hope would be that such an outcome would instigate reform to address the root cause. Without an investigation, we are at the mercy of waiting for the next election, but if our leaders are egregiously harming the interests our nations' citizens as a whole, we should not have to wait until their term is complete. I will add one more thing, the problem is not limited to economics. but also the abuse of the press and education to influence how we as a nation are able to learn about and understand both national and global politics.
caeril 2y ago
I agree that he should have been honest, but from the opposite perspective. Altman should have said, "Yes, we made the voice similar to this washed-up actress, but her voice is not much different from anyone else with similar regional upbringing, year of birth, habits, and ethnic background, so we invite anyone else born in the mid-eighties, raised in Greenwich, and with Danish heritage, to sue us too. We'll see how well you do in court. Otherwise, get fucked." This whole thing with anybody giving a shit about your voice, which isn't even yours, as it's a product of your environment and genes, and will be strikingly similar to anyone with similarities thereof, is insane. Altman shouldn't have used weasel words, I agree. He should have owned it, because it's a total non-issue, and the people upset about it need to be shamed as the Luddite assholes that they are.
- CRConrad 2y ago
  > Danish heritage Swedish, I would have guessed? Danes much more frequently use "Johanssen" with an 'e', AFAIK.
orthecreedence 2y ago
> We should not give a sneaky and deceptive man this much power over our future. We should not give anybody this much power over our future.
- ryandrake 2y ago
  Just to state the obvious, "we" are not doing anything here. "We," as in "the general public 'we'" don't have much of a choice when someone has lots of money and lawyers and wants to use those resources to sneakily and deceptively make more money. Unless "we" elect better representatives who are willing to write and enforce laws governing the wealthy's ability to effectively do whatever they want, then "we" don't have much of a say.
- a_wild_dandan 2y ago
  This is why open source must win. I mean, it won't, but it's the only path to avoiding a silicon aristocracy.
  - dbuder 2y ago
    Yes, an Open AI
  - mensetmanusman 2y ago
    The code for these systems is around 1000 lines. It just takes $100,000,000 in electricity costs to execute the program. Open source might not matter.
    - nradov 2y ago
      I guess what we really need is super cheap fusion power or something? Or perhaps a way to easily share the cost by spreading the training load and electricity bill across millions of home computers?
      - mikhailfranco 2y ago
        You are 2.5 years and $375m behind Sam :) Nuclear fusion start-up Helion scores $375 million investment from Open AI CEO Sam Altman https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/05/sam-altman-puts-375-million-into-fusion-start-up-helion-energy.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/05/sam-altman-puts-375-million-...
miohtama 2y ago
There are hundreds of people with similar voices. If any voice actor can pull the same accent than Ms. Johansson, it should be fair game, as long it was the original training material? Voices cannot be copyrighted or be exclusive, although I am sure Hollywood will try to copyright them in some point.
- tangentstar 2y ago
  No, voices can be exclusive. One good example is Bette Midler, who sued Ford in tort for misappropriation of voice and won on appeal to CA9. 849 F.2d 460.
- riku_iki 2y ago
  With generative AI training may not be needed, it can be part of prompt: imitate voice like in this file: her.mp3.
  - CRConrad 2y ago
    If that's not training, then it is, as you say in your suggested prompt... Imitation. You think that's somehow better?
  - BobbyJo 2y ago
    that's..... that's training.
    - rockemsockem 2y ago
      It's, not though.
    - px43 2y ago
      It's only training if it remembers it after the conversation is over.
      - Cheer2171 2y ago
        Absolutely false.
pmarreck 2y ago
It doesn't matter because Sky's voice is materially and objectively different from ScarJo's. Anyone who heard them both side by side would immediately realize this.
- kalupa 2y ago
  lol
  - pmarreck 2y ago
    https://soundcloud.com/peter-marreck-fb/sky-voice-and-scarjo-comparison https://soundcloud.com/peter-marreck-fb/sky-voice-and-scarjo... I'm sorry but either you are tone-deaf or these are not remotely the same voice. I made this myself after getting fed up with this bullshit.
- flumpcakes 2y ago
  The clips that I have seen sound very similar to Scarlett Johansson to me, to the point that I thought it was her likeness on purpose. Is this Sky? https://www.tiktok.com/@kylephilippi/video/7318516928509775146 https://www.tiktok.com/@kylephilippi/video/73185169285097751...
  - pmarreck 2y ago
    https://soundcloud.com/peter-marreck-fb/sky-voice-and-scarjo-comparison https://soundcloud.com/peter-marreck-fb/sky-voice-and-scarjo... I made this myself. They do not sound the same to me. Am I living in a bizarro world? In fact I think Rashida Jones would be a closer (but still not identical) match vs Scarjo IN FACT, I bet any young woman's voice spoken clearly would sound as similar
- nomel 2y ago
  Comparison: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40435695 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40435695
  - 2y ago
WalterBright 2y ago
Jim Carrey made his career by impersonating celebrity voices. So did Rich Little.
- akaru 2y ago
  Pop goes the weasel.
- ugh123 2y ago
  Did Jim Carrey provide a service for anyone to impersonate a voice?
  - WalterBright 2y ago
    Sure. How do you think he made money at it?
- rawrawrawrr 2y ago
  Parody is covered under fair use.
  - sneak 2y ago
    As pointed out upthread, fair use is an exemption for copyright. You don’t need fair use for something that isn’t copyrighted (and, indeed, isn’t even copyrightable).
    - okanat 2y ago
      The voice and expression is copyrightable, that's just how audio books are under copyright protection.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- orthecreedence 2y ago
  "I think it's fine for a profit-driven corporation to impersonate people on a large scale without their permission. Jim Carrey did it..."
xyst 2y ago
> We should not give a sneaky, deceptive and manipulative person this much power over our future. sneaky, deceptive, and manipulative is a tag line for many billionaires. you don't get that rich without stepping on many people.
- Xeyz0r 2y ago
  In highly competitive industries, some may resort to ruthless tactics to outmaneuver their competitors... But I want to bleieve that not all billionaires are like that
SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
It's not a vague suggestion - in the full statement that's been reported elsewhere, he explicitly says it. > The voice of Sky is not Scarlett Johansson's, and it was never intended to resemble hers. We cast the voice actor behind Sky’s voice before any outreach to Ms. Johansson. Out of respect for Ms. Johansson, we have paused using Sky’s voice in our products. We are sorry to Ms. Johansson that we didn’t communicate better. I'm skeptical whether this is true, but it's a pretty unambiguous and non-sneaky denial.
- Reubachi 2y ago
  scenario -the creator of a new widget takes tha widget to another widget manufacturer and says "Would you like to put your stamp on this? It's similar to yours, yet derivative enough and we would both benefit." - other widget manufacturer says "no" -Creator of widget then puts the badge on the widget anyway, gets called out/faces legal action -Creator of widget says "Well, we planned to put the badge on there anyway before even considering the other widget manufacturer. It's just coincidence. This shouldn't even go to court. Laughable that the face of modern tech is cheesing this much.
lenerdenator 2y ago
If the voice actor was cast... why bother reaching out to ScarJo? Like, do you want to pay her fee, Sam? Because the general idea is to not pay the fee. Which is why you probably cast the voice actor before reaching out to Johansson.
- Lerc 2y ago
  A potential answer to that is liability protection even when you feel like you are legally in the clear. It is still worth paying a sum to avoid a lawsuit you think you will win. An example of this is Weird Al pays for the rights to things that are probably ok under fair use parody protection. Paying for the rights removes the possibily of a challenge.
  - hluska 2y ago
    Does Weird Al pay rights? I know he asks for permission to maintain his relationships with artists and to make sure he gets his share of songwriting credits (and the fees). But does he pay for rights? I’ve never seen that before and I’d love to read more.
    - jprd 2y ago
      IANAL - but I think there is some sort of carve-out for parody? @sama and OpenAI are clearly not parodying "Her" - especially with that paper trail. This is a great question and I hope someone here with requisite knowledge can help.
      - hluska 2y ago
        My understanding is he doesn’t have to ask permission but does for two purposes. It’s important to him to keep good relationships with artists, and he wants to make sure that he gets songwriting credits because those are paid differently (and are often more lucrative) than royalties from recordings. I’d love to find out if he directly pays artists for rights. That would be really interesting and would add a whole dimension to his problems with Prince.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
chx 2y ago
> He sounds sneaky, evasive and intentionally deceptive. Well, here's Yishan Wong describing how Altman and the Reddit founders have conned Conde Nast: https://reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3cs78i/whats_the_best_long_con_you_ever_pulled/cszjqg2/ https://reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3cs78i/whats_the_bes... he answers at https://reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3cs78i/whats_the_best_long_con_you_ever_pulled/cszwpgq/ https://reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3cs78i/whats_the_bes... Cool story bro. Except I could never have predicted the part where you resigned on the spot :) Other than that, child's play for me. Thanks for the help. I mean, thanks for your service as CEO.
Repulsion9513 2y ago
> The statement sounds like it's written by a lawyer to be technically true while implying something that is actually false. That describes nearly every statement to ever come out of a CEO's mouth. (Or anyone else who's primary job is marketing)
carabiner 2y ago
I'm surprised no one's pointing out the similarity between initial consonants in Sky and Scarlett. It seems deliberate.
NautilusWave 2y ago
Non-sequitur statements like this drive me nuts. Somehow, politicians and executive types learn how to use just enough of them to make the audience forget what they're not saying.
- piva00 2y ago
  It's quite funny (not sure if ironic) in the context of OpenAI, ChatGPT can do exactly the same thing: generate a string of sentences that from cursory skimming might sound about right but when reading with attention you find all the cracks and incongruences in the generated text.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
quantified 2y ago
Recall the adage that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. It certainly changes your perspective.

barfingclouds 2y ago

It doesn’t sound like her

Reubachi 2y ago
I listened to a comedy podcast early last week that was using Chatgpt4 with this voice to make some funny bits/jokes. Without having any context about who the voice was, or the "Drama" between OpenAI and actress in question, or even really being aware of Scarlett Johansson's body of work, I immediately went "Oh that's Scarlett Johansson or whatever, cool" To read all of this after the fact is almost comical. It's as if the powers that be realized the issues with the "one-man-in-charge-of-ai" platform and created this almost unbelievable story to decredit him.

dustfinger 2y ago

> We should not give a sneaky, deceptive and manipulative person this much power over our future. I think this should be applied to our government. In my opinion, it is a failing in the structure of our government that those running the country control the police and appear to rarely be investigated unless by the request of a political opponent. They are seemingly outside of the law. It would be better if they were under perpetual investigation; forever kept in check. We should have assurance that those leading our country are not villainous traitors.

schmidt_fifty 2y ago
> those running the country control the police Interestingly one of the things that came out of 2020 was that nobody appears willing to control the police. Unless by police you mean FBI, which would both make sense for investigating a national politician and be directly under the control of the executive.
- dustfinger 2y ago
  > one of the things that came out of 2020 was that nobody appears willing to control the police While I don't agree with that statement, I will clarify that I was using the term "police" to encompass all agencies in both USA and Canada capable of legally conducting an investigation at the federal level and carrying out an arrest. As far as I am aware, these agencies are all funded by our federal governments. Even though in my mind I was thinking of only the USA and Canada, the structural flaw probably applies to most governments, if not all governments ( speculating ). The flaw being that the leaders of our nations conduct national affairs as though they are shielded from the law policing its citizens. They are getting away with using our national resources ( financial, material, human etc ) in ways that may benefit their own agendas, but are observably harmful to our economy and therefore the citizens at large. If an investigation could prove that my speculation is true, then it would be in both our nation's best interest to deal with the problem both swiftly and legally. My hope would be that such an outcome would instigate reform to address the root cause. Without an investigation, we are at the mercy of waiting for the next election, but if our leaders are egregiously harming the interests our nations' citizens as a whole, we should not have to wait until their term is complete. I will add one more thing, the problem is not limited to economics. but also the abuse of the press and education to influence how we as a nation are able to learn about and understand both national and global politics.

caeril 2y ago

I agree that he should have been honest, but from the opposite perspective. Altman should have said, "Yes, we made the voice similar to this washed-up actress, but her voice is not much different from anyone else with similar regional upbringing, year of birth, habits, and ethnic background, so we invite anyone else born in the mid-eighties, raised in Greenwich, and with Danish heritage, to sue us too. We'll see how well you do in court. Otherwise, get fucked." This whole thing with anybody giving a shit about your voice, which isn't even yours, as it's a product of your environment and genes, and will be strikingly similar to anyone with similarities thereof, is insane. Altman shouldn't have used weasel words, I agree. He should have owned it, because it's a total non-issue, and the people upset about it need to be shamed as the Luddite assholes that they are.

CRConrad 2y ago
> Danish heritage Swedish, I would have guessed? Danes much more frequently use "Johanssen" with an 'e', AFAIK.

orthecreedence 2y ago

> We should not give a sneaky and deceptive man this much power over our future. We should not give anybody this much power over our future.

ryandrake 2y ago
Just to state the obvious, "we" are not doing anything here. "We," as in "the general public 'we'" don't have much of a choice when someone has lots of money and lawyers and wants to use those resources to sneakily and deceptively make more money. Unless "we" elect better representatives who are willing to write and enforce laws governing the wealthy's ability to effectively do whatever they want, then "we" don't have much of a say.
a_wild_dandan 2y ago
This is why open source must win. I mean, it won't, but it's the only path to avoiding a silicon aristocracy.
- dbuder 2y ago
  Yes, an Open AI
- mensetmanusman 2y ago
  The code for these systems is around 1000 lines. It just takes $100,000,000 in electricity costs to execute the program. Open source might not matter.
  - nradov 2y ago
    I guess what we really need is super cheap fusion power or something? Or perhaps a way to easily share the cost by spreading the training load and electricity bill across millions of home computers?
    - mikhailfranco 2y ago
      You are 2.5 years and $375m behind Sam :) Nuclear fusion start-up Helion scores $375 million investment from Open AI CEO Sam Altman https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/05/sam-altman-puts-375-million-into-fusion-start-up-helion-energy.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/05/sam-altman-puts-375-million-...

miohtama 2y ago

There are hundreds of people with similar voices. If any voice actor can pull the same accent than Ms. Johansson, it should be fair game, as long it was the original training material? Voices cannot be copyrighted or be exclusive, although I am sure Hollywood will try to copyright them in some point.

tangentstar 2y ago
No, voices can be exclusive. One good example is Bette Midler, who sued Ford in tort for misappropriation of voice and won on appeal to CA9. 849 F.2d 460.
riku_iki 2y ago
With generative AI training may not be needed, it can be part of prompt: imitate voice like in this file: her.mp3.
- CRConrad 2y ago
  If that's not training, then it is, as you say in your suggested prompt... Imitation. You think that's somehow better?
- BobbyJo 2y ago
  that's..... that's training.
  - rockemsockem 2y ago
    It's, not though.
  - px43 2y ago
    It's only training if it remembers it after the conversation is over.
    - Cheer2171 2y ago
      Absolutely false.

pmarreck 2y ago

It doesn't matter because Sky's voice is materially and objectively different from ScarJo's. Anyone who heard them both side by side would immediately realize this.

kalupa 2y ago
lol
- pmarreck 2y ago
  https://soundcloud.com/peter-marreck-fb/sky-voice-and-scarjo-comparison https://soundcloud.com/peter-marreck-fb/sky-voice-and-scarjo... I'm sorry but either you are tone-deaf or these are not remotely the same voice. I made this myself after getting fed up with this bullshit.
flumpcakes 2y ago
The clips that I have seen sound very similar to Scarlett Johansson to me, to the point that I thought it was her likeness on purpose. Is this Sky? https://www.tiktok.com/@kylephilippi/video/7318516928509775146 https://www.tiktok.com/@kylephilippi/video/73185169285097751...
- pmarreck 2y ago
  https://soundcloud.com/peter-marreck-fb/sky-voice-and-scarjo-comparison https://soundcloud.com/peter-marreck-fb/sky-voice-and-scarjo... I made this myself. They do not sound the same to me. Am I living in a bizarro world? In fact I think Rashida Jones would be a closer (but still not identical) match vs Scarjo IN FACT, I bet any young woman's voice spoken clearly would sound as similar
nomel 2y ago
Comparison: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40435695 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40435695
- 2y ago

WalterBright 2y ago

Jim Carrey made his career by impersonating celebrity voices. So did Rich Little.

akaru 2y ago
Pop goes the weasel.
ugh123 2y ago
Did Jim Carrey provide a service for anyone to impersonate a voice?
- WalterBright 2y ago
  Sure. How do you think he made money at it?
rawrawrawrr 2y ago
Parody is covered under fair use.
- sneak 2y ago
  As pointed out upthread, fair use is an exemption for copyright. You don’t need fair use for something that isn’t copyrighted (and, indeed, isn’t even copyrightable).
  - okanat 2y ago
    The voice and expression is copyrightable, that's just how audio books are under copyright protection.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
orthecreedence 2y ago
"I think it's fine for a profit-driven corporation to impersonate people on a large scale without their permission. Jim Carrey did it..."

xyst 2y ago

> We should not give a sneaky, deceptive and manipulative person this much power over our future. sneaky, deceptive, and manipulative is a tag line for many billionaires. you don't get that rich without stepping on many people.

Xeyz0r 2y ago
In highly competitive industries, some may resort to ruthless tactics to outmaneuver their competitors... But I want to bleieve that not all billionaires are like that

SpicyLemonZest 2y ago

It's not a vague suggestion - in the full statement that's been reported elsewhere, he explicitly says it. > The voice of Sky is not Scarlett Johansson's, and it was never intended to resemble hers. We cast the voice actor behind Sky’s voice before any outreach to Ms. Johansson. Out of respect for Ms. Johansson, we have paused using Sky’s voice in our products. We are sorry to Ms. Johansson that we didn’t communicate better. I'm skeptical whether this is true, but it's a pretty unambiguous and non-sneaky denial.

Reubachi 2y ago
scenario -the creator of a new widget takes tha widget to another widget manufacturer and says "Would you like to put your stamp on this? It's similar to yours, yet derivative enough and we would both benefit." - other widget manufacturer says "no" -Creator of widget then puts the badge on the widget anyway, gets called out/faces legal action -Creator of widget says "Well, we planned to put the badge on there anyway before even considering the other widget manufacturer. It's just coincidence. This shouldn't even go to court. Laughable that the face of modern tech is cheesing this much.

lenerdenator 2y ago

If the voice actor was cast... why bother reaching out to ScarJo? Like, do you want to pay her fee, Sam? Because the general idea is to not pay the fee. Which is why you probably cast the voice actor before reaching out to Johansson.

Lerc 2y ago
A potential answer to that is liability protection even when you feel like you are legally in the clear. It is still worth paying a sum to avoid a lawsuit you think you will win. An example of this is Weird Al pays for the rights to things that are probably ok under fair use parody protection. Paying for the rights removes the possibily of a challenge.
- hluska 2y ago
  Does Weird Al pay rights? I know he asks for permission to maintain his relationships with artists and to make sure he gets his share of songwriting credits (and the fees). But does he pay for rights? I’ve never seen that before and I’d love to read more.
  - jprd 2y ago
    IANAL - but I think there is some sort of carve-out for parody? @sama and OpenAI are clearly not parodying "Her" - especially with that paper trail. This is a great question and I hope someone here with requisite knowledge can help.
    - hluska 2y ago
      My understanding is he doesn’t have to ask permission but does for two purposes. It’s important to him to keep good relationships with artists, and he wants to make sure that he gets songwriting credits because those are paid differently (and are often more lucrative) than royalties from recordings. I’d love to find out if he directly pays artists for rights. That would be really interesting and would add a whole dimension to his problems with Prince.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

chx 2y ago

> He sounds sneaky, evasive and intentionally deceptive. Well, here's Yishan Wong describing how Altman and the Reddit founders have conned Conde Nast: https://reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3cs78i/whats_the_best_long_con_you_ever_pulled/cszjqg2/ https://reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3cs78i/whats_the_bes... he answers at https://reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3cs78i/whats_the_best_long_con_you_ever_pulled/cszwpgq/ https://reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3cs78i/whats_the_bes... Cool story bro. Except I could never have predicted the part where you resigned on the spot :) Other than that, child's play for me. Thanks for the help. I mean, thanks for your service as CEO.

Repulsion9513 2y ago

> The statement sounds like it's written by a lawyer to be technically true while implying something that is actually false. That describes nearly every statement to ever come out of a CEO's mouth. (Or anyone else who's primary job is marketing)

carabiner 2y ago

I'm surprised no one's pointing out the similarity between initial consonants in Sky and Scarlett. It seems deliberate.

NautilusWave 2y ago

Non-sequitur statements like this drive me nuts. Somehow, politicians and executive types learn how to use just enough of them to make the audience forget what they're not saying.

piva00 2y ago
It's quite funny (not sure if ironic) in the context of OpenAI, ChatGPT can do exactly the same thing: generate a string of sentences that from cursory skimming might sound about right but when reading with attention you find all the cracks and incongruences in the generated text.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

quantified 2y ago

Recall the adage that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. It certainly changes your perspective.