The Ai thread

mr_roboto said:
Formerly represented, I think... the footnote relates that his current counsel admitted to being unable to verify the citations made by previous counsel.
Click to expand...

True, though I’m not sure if he still represents him or not (a new attorney doesn;t mean the old attorney has ceased the representation)
 
Cmaier said:
Hate to say it, but it’s his lawyer’s fault. I double-check whatever my client tells me, because I have an obligation to do so.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree. I don't think placing the blame on Cohen is going to work out well here, and it looks bad when Schwartz and Perry aren't on the same page when discussing things with the judge. It really seems like his representation is now trying to squirm out of the consequences of the mistakes made here. But yes, if I was a lawyer for a disbarred lawyer (edit: or any lawyer), I'd be scrutinizing the citations provided by my client more, not less.

Clowns all around.
 
Last edited:
www.gamespot.com

SAG-AFTRA Approves AI Voice Acting For Video Games

The union's agreement with AI voiceover studio Replica is being called out by some of the industry's top voice talent.
www.gamespot.com www.gamespot.com

So I don’t know the details of this deal (and apparently neither do the voice actors which is not a good look for their union). But I can see AI voice acting being okay under specific circumstances. This isn’t the only one but the main one I can think of which I think has been mentioned in this thread by others: imagine a massive sprawling RPG like Baldur’s Gate where human writers and an actor have been paid for a huge number of lines to create a compelling character one with an arc or even multiple arcs based on your choices in game. Then imagine being able to interact with said character by simply typing (or speaking!) your lines. Maybe you can still have prompts to trigger their preset responses but even so the AI is trained to reply (and act) as the character and where they are in the story so far. Human creativity for both voice acting and the lines (animation/mocap too) is still being paid, a necessary element for creating a strong character (so far, AI has its limits), but the freedom of expression for the player goes up tremendously. Now there may be other examples where AI can extend human creativity in this space rather than be a shallow imitation of it (and the business/ethics of the former compared to the latter for writers, actors, and animators), but I think that’s certainly the main area.
 
Interesting happens in the book publishing world:

www.wired.com

Scammy AI-Generated Book Rewrites Are Flooding Amazon

Authors keep finding what appear to be AI-generated imitations and summaries of their books on Amazon. There's little they can do to rein in the rip-offs.
www.wired.com www.wired.com

www.theguardian.com

Self-publishers must declare if content sold on Amazon’s site is AI-generated

Retailer announces new rules for its Kindle Direct Publishing forum after complaints about AI-produced works being sold under human writers’ names
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
cbum said:
I wouldn't want to be a journalist these days. Spend 99% of your time figuring out fact from fiction...
Click to expand...
According to some folks Journalism is fake and they make up what they want to hear anyways.
 
This has been making the rounds for how awful it was:

www.gamespot.com

The AI George Carlin Special Sucks For Every Reason You Thought And More

I watched a bad video hocking AI-created comedy pretending to be a beloved comedian so you don't have to, and you shouldn't.
www.gamespot.com www.gamespot.com

fooferdoggie said:
Well George Carlin lives again lots of controversy about this 1hour long AI made comedy show.
Click to expand...

I watched the beginning of this, with the included disclaimer. Did the author say he imitated him or did he feed clips of Carlin into AI software? With the disclaimer, I wonder why it‘s controversial, at least any more controversial than any other recent AI output featuring celebrities? I assume the skit (what is said) was created by the author of this. 🤔

You can be a professional imitator without legal jeopardy especially with disclaimers, but I wonder with the laws as they are, would the Carlin Estate have any legal response to this?
 
Last edited:
Huntn said:
I watched the beginning of this, with the included disclaimer. Did the author say he imitated him or did he feed clips of Carlin into AI software? With the disclaimer, I wonder why it‘s controversial, at least any more controversial than any other recent AI output featuring celebrities? I assume the skit (what is said) was created by the author of this. 🤔

You can be a professional imitator without legal jeopardy especially with disclaimers, but I wonder with the laws as they are, would the Carlin Estate have any legal response to this?
Click to expand...
I saw a podcast about it before I listened to it. it was like soiling his rep or something. it was not bad but it was not great either. I think it i let the dead stay dead. they did not like it but I dont think there was a legal issue.
 
Eric said:
Was just a matter of time. Whoever develops the software that becomes the gold standard in detecting fakes/AI will be a gazillionaire.

www.theverge.com

Trolls have flooded X with graphic Taylor Swift AI fakes

While some accounts have been suspended, many posts remain live.
www.theverge.com www.theverge.com
Click to expand...
Given the nature of the photos this is more just showing how lax Twitter’s security is as them being generated by AI is inconsequential. If they had been real from say a hacked phone there would be just as much reason to take them down. It’s just easier to generate these things now (and make them look “real”).

That said, I agree detecting AI deepfakes will become big business but it will be a running battle. What will be the gold standard won’t be for long.
 
The real problem is social media, because AI becomes less pervasive if people disconnect from their phones, which I will be the first to admit I have no intention of doing. But I recognize the issue 😁

But in all seriousness, if there can be a cultural or societal move to put down social media more often, engage less (I deleted a few myself, which is why I’m on here so damn much), there’s less chance to be fooled, mislead, angered, triggered, whatever. Then people focus less on disturbing media or misleading media, and more on using AI for places where it can be of real benefit to humanity.

If things go south, I suppose it will make the idea of death more palatable. Powerful tools in the hands of dumb people sounds like it could be a problem.
 
Saw this on mastodon

1706313610996.png
 

Similar threads

A
Intel Lunar Lake thread
3 4 5
Replies
80
Views
3K
throAU
T
fooferdoggie
New Study Suggests AI Could Convince Conspiracy Theorists They’re Wrong
Replies
2
Views
72
GermanSuplex
GermanSuplex
N
Impact of AI on GPU costs may work in Apple's favor
Replies
1
Views
234
thenewperson
thenewperson
Huntn
Automation and AI in our Homes
2
Replies
22
Views
1K
Huntn
Huntn
Chew Toy McCoy
The Biden impeachment predicted evidence thread
2 3
Replies
51
Views
2K
GermanSuplex
GermanSuplex
Back
Top