A high-profile dispute between Scarlett Johansson and the maker of ChatGPT has brought the subject of AI voices to the fore, but many others in the entertainment industry are affected too. Jennifer Hale and Linsay Rousseau say fair treatment for voice actors is important. (May 23, 2024)
from The Canadian Press
This commentary is from labor disputes last year, I wanted to post it here so that people would remember whose jobs they are trying to steal by pushing fake ai VO. We don’t have to push corpo propaganda here. This is our space, err, [Chris Remington, alyaza [they/she], TheRtRevKaiser, gyrfalcon, rs5th, coldredlight, Leigh, TheRtRevKaiser]'s space. I don’t think any of them are corporations, but maybe I am wrong?
Pushing AI propaganda is a bad move for infinite reasons, here are four:
-
it’s usually an attack on workers
-
the industry steals directly from artists
-
these companies are massive polluters/ emitters
-
it makes you look like a rube
*edit 1 According to the laws of debate, one of you must reveal whichever podcast has you parroting comparisons of VO artists to horse workers *edit 2 Horse husbandry is also a major craft and fine art that ought not be mocked, whether or not it is useful to capitalists
What? No? Its just a general term for horse work as far as I know. I was trying not to demean people who work with animals.
Hm, I’ve heard “Animal management” as the general term, with “husbandry” focusing on the breeding and artificial selection, with all the ethical issues around that.
Anyway, it’s kind of off-topic, isn’t it?
Cars replaced horse carriages, fridges replaced ice sellers… new technologies keep replacing old professions. We’re at a large job replacement point right now with AI, new skills will be required, but we’re yet in uncertain times as to what those skills will exactly look like.
Not sure which “corpo propaganda” were you referring to, and maybe it’s just me, but the whole post feels hostile.
I didn’t introduce the analogy so I’m not invested in it. I disagree with your opinions so maybe that’s what you’re reading as hostility.
No… it’s more the strawnan gaslighting to insult people without arguing any point. See ya.
Animal husbandry is the general term and longstanding one for the craft and profession of rearing, training, and yes breeding, non-human animals. this whole argument could have been resolved in 2 seconds with a web search.
also, meekly accepting technology and automation as some impassive unguided thing outside of control or ethics is nonsense. that is why you are being told you are repeating corporate propoganda – you are.
When I get a web search brain implant, I might stop relying on memory. Or better not.
Blindly rejecting technology and automation, for some misguided interpretation of ethics like “work gives a man dignity”, or Gen 2:15, is the feudal corporate propaganda, to put it mildly.
Do you genuinely actually believe automation like llm or voice gen are being developed to free you from work? Nonsense. It’s meant to drive the relative value of your labor into the ground so that everyone can be paid less. you see it literally here, a career set you are simply saying shouldnt exist because a corporation can do it without a human getting economic benefit. You should read about the history of the luddites.
The only blind ones here are those who uncritically accept corporate propaganda about technology and walk stupified towards the facade of a sci fi utopia. if you are going to claim that rejection of losing human artists as the barely viable profession it is is blind, at least put the effort in. Dont walk in and go “just like carriages lol” and try considering the issue for longer.
I think automation only cares about increasing the output, not about the effort or exclusivity of the input.
Since you propose reviewing history, let’s do it together:
…and now neural networks are suddenly the preposterous advance? Nonsense.
Luddite propaganda is corporate propaganda is elitist propaganda, a step back towards less efficient ways of reaping the benefits of labor so it can be more easily controlled and restricted, an elitist approach where artists perform at the whim of someone wealthy enough to be able to afford them.
If you want to discuss the fair compensation for labor, we can start talking about total production, compensation inequality, an UBI system, or whatever. Don’t come in blindly claiming that cutting down technological labor amplification, is the only way to get paid enough to live… or that getting paid is even required to live in a post-scarcity world, much less that artificially imposed scarcity is something positive.
voice generators and generative ai are built with the intent of replacing artists, your incredibly reductive “history lesson” funnily illustrates only situations distinct from the current situation and you gloss over making any specific claims about the technology, just broad vagary about the trajectories of technological advancement. I dont think you are equipped to discuss this topic honestly.
??? actually just a plainly absurd statement. this isnt even worth responding to it’s so absurdly incorrect.
Yes yes ubi, but “technological labor amplification” in this case is driving human artists out of the market. make specific claims, quit hiding behind vague generalizations about automation. it’s a waste of everyone’s time and terminates your train of thought before you get to something relevant.
We can discuss further if you make an effort to understand this topic, but so far you are just speaking largely in cliches that arent worth responding to and arent worth your time writing.