“This ‘groundbreaking’ AI proposal that they gave us yesterday, they proposed that our background performers should be able to be scanned, get one day’s pay, and their companies should own that scan, their image, their likeness and should be able to use it for the rest of eternity on any project they want, with no consent and no compensation. So if you think that’s a groundbreaking proposal, I suggest you think again.”

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 37 points 3 years ago (3 children)

Can we replace the studios execs with AI instead?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 3 years ago (34 children)

    Sounds like they want to put actors out of work, while painting it as a good thing. Ai is already at the point where it's being exploited by the wealthy to fuck the poor even more, and it needs to be legislated. Nip this bullshit in the bud.

  • source
  • hideshow 34 child comments
  • load more comments (34 replies)
    [–] 18 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    Isn't this already covered with the Back to the Future 2 lawsuit? They can't use an actors likeness without thier explicit permission. Just because it's "ai" doesn't make it any different, ai is just a SFX.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 3 years ago

    Aw Hell No! Actors should setup a trust for their image likeness that lives on forever. If Hollywood every uses their likeness the fees go into that trust.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    SAG-AFTRA president Fran Drescher said that “If we don’t stand tall right now, we are all going to be in trouble, we are all going to be in jeopardy of being replaced by machines.”

    Can’t stop smiling now that I know what Fran Drescher has been up to :-)

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    Its always funny how the US are likey some third world country where entrepreneurs/rich people always try the worst ethically possible thing first, asking shamelessly.

    In europe, entrepreneurd and corps arent saints but they dont start with the worst shameless proposal possible.

    I guess the difference is knowing shame

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 3 years ago (5 children)

    Do you know why Star wars, Indiana Jones, The breakfast Club ect, are fantastic. The acting. We humans can only be tricked for so long witha a placebo. These films I mentioned, you can tell the hard work that went into them, the love and detail. Also taking someone's life right sounds like digital slavery.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 5 points 3 years ago

    No shit? It's basically slavery but not as morally objectionable.

    It's still morally objectionable, but not as much.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    The age of generative AI is upon us, and you can't stop progress. There's no putting that genie back in the bottle.

    Generative AI, like your image and speech, are just tools, it's your responsibility to use it for good or bad, and it shouldn't be owned by anyone else.

    But since the cat's out of the bag now, so the next best thing is that this power should belong to everyone. There will be bad actors of course, but security through obscurity has rarely ever worked, if more people are exposed to AI generation, then they will understand what it can and can't do, and thus can better look out for themselves.

    Besides, StableDiffusion is pretty fun.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago

    The big difference is the keeping it forever part of the proposal. Background actors have already been digitally inserted into movies for a while and only get a days pay to get the scanning and motion capture done.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›