• kromem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The fact that this is upvoted so much is just sad.

    While at face value it appears to be critical of AI, and thus bandwagoning on a very popular slant these days online, the inherent anthropomorphizing of the model in question is extremely wrong in so many ways.

    LLMs are trained to complete human thought. And as a result, that very narrow class of machine learning ends up being oddly good at seeming human in responses.

    But a diffusion model for generating images? Or text to voice generation?

    To anthropomorphize these models is like saying that your cell tower triangulating your position won’t care about you as much as your mother would.

    It’s just incredibly bizarre.

    It is going to get better and better at replicating human speech patterns, and is going to be able to be further customized in how it expresses sounds mimicking human emotions. Already it can get uncannily good off just a few seconds of a sample.

    As for the actors - as soon as residuals get figured out such that they get paid per hour of secondary usage of their recordings, they are going to go from “I’ll never deign to let AI replace me” to “yes, of course I’ll let you pay me more for me to do less work.”

    The creativity of Matt Mercer in deciding on as frightened goblin voice for an innkeeper is going to be years before an AI successfully replaces that contribution.

    But for Matt Mercer to provide samples of many different voices to an AI which pairs with GPT-5+ to DM your DnD campaigns with that voice pack for a monthly fee he gets a large cut from?

    That’s not only going to be extremely possible sooner than you might think, but you’ll be seeing serious voice actors falling over themselves to directly market their voices to main street for personalized content.

    It’s all about economical fairness, and those rigidly protesting change that endangers the status quo are very much like the MPAA fighting Napster instead of funding its successor - who as a result left a clear victory open to Apple and then Spotify and others by resisting change rather than embracing it.