Sign up for Nebula using my link for 40% off an annual subscription: https://go.nebula.tv/peterspittechCheck out Masterful Mimicry by KingK right here:https:...
I just found out that Embark used genAI to replace recalling it’s voice actors. And I am devastated. It was my GOTY and now I’m boycotting it. To the point that I decided to be vocal about it.
I don’t want any AI (not talking about machine learning for the way the Arcs move, I’m talking about the voice actors being replaced) in the work of art that I think are the video games I play.
To game developers: Stop using AI in your video games!
Je viens de découvrir que Embark a utilisé de l’IA générative pour remplacer ses acteurs. Et franchement je suis tellement déçu. C’était clairement mon GOTY, et maintenant je me retrouve à boycotter tout ça, au point de carrément en faire des posts pour toucher le plus de monde possible.
Je ne veux aucune IA (et attention, je ne parle pas du machine learning utilisé pour les déplacements des Arcs) dans les oeuvres d’art que je consomme.
Aux développeurs: Arrêtez d’utiliser de l’IA dans les jeux vidéos !
First of all, I’m not the author of the video. I’m only a concerned customer/fan.
Secondly, I am already boycotting Windows for those kind of reason. And I have been a Linux user for the better part of the last 10 years. You are right, we should fight this kind of stance. But this is a different beast imho.
Now to answer: I will copy/paste most of my answer to kate above.
Stealing might be a strong word, I agree. But because of this policy, Embark won’t need another recording session out of these actors. Designing the project to never pay the actors that could have worked with them again.
I find this really cynical. Because:
Embark has made millions, if not more on this game. Don’t tell me they HAD to use genAI instead of paying those voice actors for reshoot to begin with.
To back this term (“stealing”). I consider that the genAI technology as a whole has been built on the stolen work of the whole world. ChatGPT has been built upon thousands of Github projects without their consent, I suppose Sora, DALL-E, Stable Diffusion, etc have been made in the same way. Training data has been stolen.
Even though it’s a bit far-stretched, using this kind of technology to remove any future human collaboration is stealing to me.
Stealing (copying) their voice (in the Little Mermaid way)
Stealing their money (make profit with their unique trait in the future)
Stealing the work of thousand if not million of people around the world through the genAI technology
I personally do understand how genAI work. But thank you for clarifying what is usually a black box for most people. Let me phrase in detail what my understanding is. And feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.
What Embark did is to train a specific model on a specific voice. I agree.
But the base of this model is to be capable of understanding how any voice works in order to copy how a specific voice work.
In other words. This means that the technology/model has first been built using thousands of recordings to “understand” how human voice works. And then there has been a last layer to copy a specific voice.
I am simplifying of course. But I want to express how much I am disagreeing with the “they only used one specific voice”.
Technology isn’t magic, we as a society don’t understand how to make a program that can copy a single voice to make it say anything perfectly.
We can use an amalgam of thousands of them to build a neural network (what some call AI, it is a broad term often used to describe Machine Learning) to statistically mimic what a human voice is. And then feed it a single voice to mimic.
Don’t tell me they HAD to use genAI instead of paying those voice actors for reshoot to begin with.
The didn’t have to, but it certainly makes it easier. And I find it silly to not use a technology that makes something easier if you have it available. That’s like a farmer plowing his field by hand instead of using a tractor.
But the base of this model is to be capable of understanding how any voice works in order to copy how a specific voice work.
First of all, we had Text-To-Speech way before any kind of generative AI. In germany, we had speech synthesized announcements on railway stations for like 15 years at least. Like this here: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/AuIkJ_UGltI. We also had vocaloids for decades now. So it’s wrong to assume we had no idea how voices work before AI.
Second, I get your stance on “I’m not using AI because somewhere up the chain it was developed by morally ambiguous ways”, but I don’t think that makes anything better. You should rate the current use-case, not something that happened earlier in the production chain. AI in itself is not bad. If used properly, it’s an incredibly helpful tool. There’s other and much better hills to die on imo.
You can’t reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into.
There are many legitimate complaints with ai. And when you confront its most fervent detractors with examples of the technology that addresses these complaints they just double down on their hatred of it, which is not an intellectually honest position to take.
If you have a problem with a model that’s been trained on the work of many artists that haven’t been compensated, then you should be okay with a model that has been trained on data for which an artist has been fairly compensated.
If you take issue with the huge power usage for training LLMs then you should be okay with a model that has been trained in such a manner that the huge power usage of LLMs does not apply (many voice models are really fucking lightweight).
Many of the complaints people have are salient, but when someone doubles down when the complaints are addressed it’s abundantly clear that the issue is “I hate this” and not “I hate this because”
“The tractor isn’t made off of other people living wage” is what I was starting to answer but… it does a bit, so you are right in a sense. Previously, people where hired to plow the field I guess. And I don’t see this as big of a problem as genAI. But this subject touches more on mass production and capitalism.
I would like to intentionally bend your analogy by stating that it’s not inherently true: if anybody could access a technology that helps them by magically destroying lives in another country far away, would you say the same thing? “It would be silly to ignore it as it makes things easier for me” seems quite short-sighted to me.
You are right. Now, should we then condone any kind because we condone one? It might be hypocritical to condone one and not the other. But I prefer to chose my fights instead of going for none.
True, but there are far better things to fight when it comes to AI then companies that properly make contracts with voice actors to use their voice for AI training.
if anybody could access a technology that helps them by magically destroying lives in another country far away, would you say the same thing?
Might be cruel to say it, but that’s called “progress”. The world needs to continue to evolve - latching to old jobs seems silly. We got rid off of blacksmiths because we don’t have the need anymore. Europe once had a huge horse stable industry spanning the entirety of central and western europe. We don’t have that anymore either, because we now have cars. We also don’t have any telegraph operators or switchboard operators (necessary for long distance communication back then), elevator operators or laundry washwomen - these jobs have all been made obsolete by technical advancements.
“It would be silly to ignore it as it makes things easier for me” seems quite short-sighted to me.
I think quite the opposite - it’s the long-sighted better option. Progress is never good for those negatively affected in the short term, but we can’t keep jobs around that aren’t really necessary anymore just for the sake of those people having a job.
And in this particular case, there’s not even any loss involved. They used their voice to train an AI, it was explicity part of the contract and they got paid for it. I honestly do not see the problem.
I have played enough games that have lasted enough time to know that it’s not uncommon to be unable to get a voice actor to come back for many reasons up to and including death or retirement. Which results in worse experiences for the player because now there’s just a sudden voice change which is unpleasant. Or your developers are now limited because of scheduling another issues which causes problems.
For them to be able to have a consistent voice throughout without having to rely on that in the voice, actor only has to do a one-time gig get paid in the potentially earn a small annual stipend from the project depending on their contract.
Genai for voices is really really good in that case. You can sell the use of your voice to train a model for a small lump sum with a yearly licensing fee or a large up front sum.
Easier in a more reliable paycheck for the voice actor. As long as the contract is fair and compensation is done correctly and the licensing is on a strictly project by project basis. So no using that trained AI from multiple projects.
Like this is probably the single best example of using genai that we can really hope for. It could be a slight bit better. Sure, but this is already leaps and bounds ahead of anything else.
Bespoke case by case trained AI with contractual agreements for payment in licensing.
And the best part of all of this since it’s contractually agreed, it means no one is forced to do s***
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Rules
1. Submissions have to be related to games
Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.
This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.
2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.
We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.
3. No excessive self-promotion
Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.
This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.
4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you’re submitting before posting to see if it’s already been posted.
We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.
5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW
Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.
No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.
6. No linking to piracy
Don’t share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.
We don’t want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.
Thank you for the sourced answer.
First of all, I’m not the author of the video. I’m only a concerned customer/fan.
Secondly, I am already boycotting Windows for those kind of reason. And I have been a Linux user for the better part of the last 10 years. You are right, we should fight this kind of stance. But this is a different beast imho.
Now to answer: I will copy/paste most of my answer to kate above.
I find this really cynical. Because:
I personally do understand how genAI work. But thank you for clarifying what is usually a black box for most people. Let me phrase in detail what my understanding is. And feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.
What Embark did is to train a specific model on a specific voice. I agree.
But the base of this model is to be capable of understanding how any voice works in order to copy how a specific voice work. In other words. This means that the technology/model has first been built using thousands of recordings to “understand” how human voice works. And then there has been a last layer to copy a specific voice.
I am simplifying of course. But I want to express how much I am disagreeing with the “they only used one specific voice”. Technology isn’t magic, we as a society don’t understand how to make a program that can copy a single voice to make it say anything perfectly.
We can use an amalgam of thousands of them to build a neural network (what some call AI, it is a broad term often used to describe Machine Learning) to statistically mimic what a human voice is. And then feed it a single voice to mimic.
Sorry for the long response.
The didn’t have to, but it certainly makes it easier. And I find it silly to not use a technology that makes something easier if you have it available. That’s like a farmer plowing his field by hand instead of using a tractor.
First of all, we had Text-To-Speech way before any kind of generative AI. In germany, we had speech synthesized announcements on railway stations for like 15 years at least. Like this here: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/AuIkJ_UGltI. We also had vocaloids for decades now. So it’s wrong to assume we had no idea how voices work before AI.
Second, I get your stance on “I’m not using AI because somewhere up the chain it was developed by morally ambiguous ways”, but I don’t think that makes anything better. You should rate the current use-case, not something that happened earlier in the production chain. AI in itself is not bad. If used properly, it’s an incredibly helpful tool. There’s other and much better hills to die on imo.
Stop trying to reason with this person.
You can’t reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into.
There are many legitimate complaints with ai. And when you confront its most fervent detractors with examples of the technology that addresses these complaints they just double down on their hatred of it, which is not an intellectually honest position to take.
If you have a problem with a model that’s been trained on the work of many artists that haven’t been compensated, then you should be okay with a model that has been trained on data for which an artist has been fairly compensated.
If you take issue with the huge power usage for training LLMs then you should be okay with a model that has been trained in such a manner that the huge power usage of LLMs does not apply (many voice models are really fucking lightweight).
Many of the complaints people have are salient, but when someone doubles down when the complaints are addressed it’s abundantly clear that the issue is “I hate this” and not “I hate this because”
To follow your analogy:
“The tractor isn’t made off of other people living wage” is what I was starting to answer but… it does a bit, so you are right in a sense. Previously, people where hired to plow the field I guess. And I don’t see this as big of a problem as genAI. But this subject touches more on mass production and capitalism.
I would like to intentionally bend your analogy by stating that it’s not inherently true: if anybody could access a technology that helps them by magically destroying lives in another country far away, would you say the same thing? “It would be silly to ignore it as it makes things easier for me” seems quite short-sighted to me.
You’re already using something convenient to you at the cost of exploiting other lives far away. It’s your smartphone.
You are right. Now, should we then condone any kind because we condone one? It might be hypocritical to condone one and not the other. But I prefer to chose my fights instead of going for none.
True, but there are far better things to fight when it comes to AI then companies that properly make contracts with voice actors to use their voice for AI training.
Might be cruel to say it, but that’s called “progress”. The world needs to continue to evolve - latching to old jobs seems silly. We got rid off of blacksmiths because we don’t have the need anymore. Europe once had a huge horse stable industry spanning the entirety of central and western europe. We don’t have that anymore either, because we now have cars. We also don’t have any telegraph operators or switchboard operators (necessary for long distance communication back then), elevator operators or laundry washwomen - these jobs have all been made obsolete by technical advancements.
I think quite the opposite - it’s the long-sighted better option. Progress is never good for those negatively affected in the short term, but we can’t keep jobs around that aren’t really necessary anymore just for the sake of those people having a job.
And in this particular case, there’s not even any loss involved. They used their voice to train an AI, it was explicity part of the contract and they got paid for it. I honestly do not see the problem.
I have played enough games that have lasted enough time to know that it’s not uncommon to be unable to get a voice actor to come back for many reasons up to and including death or retirement. Which results in worse experiences for the player because now there’s just a sudden voice change which is unpleasant. Or your developers are now limited because of scheduling another issues which causes problems.
For them to be able to have a consistent voice throughout without having to rely on that in the voice, actor only has to do a one-time gig get paid in the potentially earn a small annual stipend from the project depending on their contract.
Genai for voices is really really good in that case. You can sell the use of your voice to train a model for a small lump sum with a yearly licensing fee or a large up front sum.
Easier in a more reliable paycheck for the voice actor. As long as the contract is fair and compensation is done correctly and the licensing is on a strictly project by project basis. So no using that trained AI from multiple projects.
Like this is probably the single best example of using genai that we can really hope for. It could be a slight bit better. Sure, but this is already leaps and bounds ahead of anything else.
Bespoke case by case trained AI with contractual agreements for payment in licensing.
And the best part of all of this since it’s contractually agreed, it means no one is forced to do s***