When your company becomes the enemy, all that matters to people is what feels true. OpenAI’s Sky voice shipped months ago, not last week. We hear what we want to hear. OpenAI mishandled this, no question, but most likely Her is ingrained in Sam’s head vs. intentionally ripping off Scarlett.
@michaelgemar It fits the facts at the moment, yes. I'm assuming that OpenAI's account of the process isn't a total lie, though.
nary a day goes by where i don’t increasingly regret contributing to that original micro-dot-blog kickstarter
@manton It became the enemy for reasons like this one. It’s just another example on the heap of misconduct they have already committed. Not sure why anyone would continually give them the benefit of the doubt.
@jimmylittle Sam was clearly inspired by and obsessed with Her. I don't think it was subconscious, but that also doesn't mean they sampled her voice explicitly.
@manton You may be right about the Sky voice. The creation of the company’s flagship product required a very loose interpretation of copyright and totally ignored consent. That is what this is really about. Facts matter, of course, but Altman’s continued non-transparency is what makes this stick.
@manton @jimmylittle I didn't think the claim was that they actually sampled her voice, but that they tried to reproduce it with another actor as closely and possible (and then Sam promoted it by tweeting "her").
@fgtech I agree with that. The board firing Sam Altman is looking more and more rational. Which is why I think this should be an "all hands on deck" moment for OpenAI.
@michaelgemar @jimmylittle When I saw the "her" tweet last week, I honestly didn't consider the voice. It was about what was actually new: the responsiveness and expressiveness.
@manton @jimmylittle I appreciate your generosity towards these folks, but I think it is misplaced (as history demonstrates). If the point was just the responsiveness and and expressiveness, there was no need to use a voice so close to hers. There was no need to use a female voice at all.
@manton I think the “her” tweet was definitely pushing it too far. I get the impression that law around what you can do with celebrity likenesses is… complicated, but it sounds like deliberately trying to imply that you’re using said celebrity is where it goes wrong.
Laws aside, it does sound like it’s in the same category of scumminess as doing extensive meetings with a startup, then dropping them and cloning their product. Probably legal, but dickish.
@manton This is such a bad take. Why do this? You make me as a mb user look bad by association. I get that you're trying to say that it was wrong and trying to say that people are emotional about this. But what you're also saying - inadvertently perhaps - is that Altman (et. al.) didn't do it on purpose, because he's obsessed with the movie Her and therefore people should have not freaked out or, if anything, freaked out earlier since that voice was already out there for a while?
And what does it even mean to say that their account is not a total lie? Does it need to be a total lie?
Why protect a company and a CEO like this? I myself am using AI here and there and I think it is an interesting technology and probably here to stay (for better or worse), but there is no need for "both-side-sing" it here.
@matti You’re right on the “total” lie, I shouldn’t have phrased it that way, because anything misleading in the OpenAI post would be dishonest. I was trying to respond to folks who are saying that when Scarlett declined to lend her voice, OpenAI copied it anyway. I don’t think that’s true. If I’m wrong, I’ll stop using any tech from OpenAI.
@jonah Yep, that could be it. They already have the technology to actually clone someone's voice, which I assume they didn't use here because it would be an even closer match.
@manton OpenAI / Sam Altman could have found a similar voice actor to hedge their bets before they received a response from Scarlett. The other voice actor being hired before Scarlett declined, does not rule out foul play.
