- Joined
- 13 August 2007
- Messages
- 7,177
- Reaction score
- 6,583
oh the European industry of dubbing actor will loosing there jobs...
AI art and creative content creation
- Thread starter overscan (PaulMM)
- Start date
- Status
It's a bit more complicated than that.
Getting a well-known name to narrate a Warhammer 40K fan film?
"So Reggie, did you really get Peter Sellers to narrate your fan film?"
No. Actually, he died in 1980.
One wonders how far back you have to go before an actors voice (or *anyone*) becomes public domain for uses such as these. A currently living actor will likely sue you silly if you use their voice in a for-profit production without their consent. But Sellers died going on 50 years ago. Marylin Monroe, going on sixty. Bogie, more than sixty. Hitler and FDR going on 80*. You probably have to have a sizable number of audio recordings from around the WWII era in order to get a *good* quality clone of their voice, so we're still some time off from when someone copyable has been dead a century.
*Here's a thought: re-dub an FDR speech with Hitlers voice... in English. Re-dub a Hitler speech with FDR... in German. Re-dub Stalin with Pee Wee Herman. Che Guevara with a hentai voice actress.
Really? And when AI generated art of this or that aircraft, indistinguishable from a real photo, starts flooding the web, what then?
"Looks, here's proof that the TSR-2 was used in the Falklands."
And what is the purpose of *this* forum, The Bar? I quote: "Post anything offtopic (but likely to be of interest) in here"
It's clearly of interest to some.
- Joined
- 3 June 2011
- Messages
- 17,358
- Reaction score
- 9,120
It's one topic in the bar. I'm sure the forum will survive.
If any of us survive the oncoming AIpocalypse, that is...
I believe that retired people will survive because they cannot lose their jobs and never die.
F.L.
ACCESS: Top Secret
It's true, you're right.
I've seen a recent resurgence in 9-11 Trutherism, with people yapping on about Building 7, trotting out arguments that were debunked twenty years ago. Why bring that up? Because with AI art, photos and videos will begin to appear that support whatever potential position someone might take, with doubtless photos and videos showing that the building were brought down with controlled detonations, hot mike recordings of Bush or whoever talking about how it's a false flag operation. There will soon enough be "just discovered" secretly recorded films of General Eisenhower talking with Truman or Churchill or whoever describing how they are going to invent the Holocaust for political reasons. I've recently seen at-first-glance realistic photos showing Kubrick on the set of the Apollo 11 landing fakery. History is very quickly going to become something of a nightmare Some are worried about artists losing their jobs to AI, but that issue is as nothing compared to the forthcoming nightmare in history. And since this is a history-based forum (it's more about projects from the past than projects currently in work), it seems directly relevant.
But as to what can or should be done about it... dunno. Maybe etch our history into vast slabs of granite or carved onto the face of the moon, the sort of thing that would be difficult to revise. But the time to do that is quickly running out.
- Joined
- 3 June 2011
- Messages
- 17,358
- Reaction score
- 9,120
While that may be true elsewhere retired people here in the US are having their retirement savings destroyed by inflation, and would likely get converted to Soylent Green if some people had their way.
As long as they need them to watch TV and vote in elections and attend Rollings concerts, they won't turn them into cookies, they're an electoral majority.
People were already able to believe in anything before AI
Attachments
- Joined
- 19 July 2016
- Messages
- 3,738
- Reaction score
- 2,705
"Damn them, damn them all to hell. They finally did it, they ran out of chocolate Hob Nobs and cocoa".
(Poorly paraphrased from Charlton Heston in Planet of the Apes. "You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell"!)
martinbayer
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 6 January 2009
- Messages
- 2,432
- Reaction score
- 2,141
That is *EXACTLY* why libraries are vitally important. I'd dearly love to see a script kiddie try to hardware forge a Gutenberg Bible say with Adam, Eve and Sheldon as the original throuple, and try to pass it off as the real thing. Books can easily be dated and collectively provide a verifiable historical record, the occasional piece of accidental or deliberate misinformation notwithstanding, at least up to say around the end of the twentieth century, when mass printing crap became way too easy - no need for granite slabs though, really, since they can be forged as well
.
Last edited:
That is *EXACTLY* why libraries are vitally important. I'd dearly love to see a script kiddie try to hardware forge a Gutenberg Bible say with Adam, Eve and Sheldon as the original throuple, and try to pass it off as the real thing. Books can easily be dated and collectively provide a verifiable historical record, the occasional piece of accidental or deliberate misinformation notwithstanding, at least up to say around the end of the twentieth century, when mass printing crap became way too easy - no need for granite slabs though, really, since they can be forged as well
Libraries are vitally important. As in vitally. Someone decided to sell reprints of a document series I'm looking for. They made it a point to say "NOTHING has been changed." I wonder why that is.
I spent most of the 1980s in multiple libraries doing research and reading military journals. There were a number of cases with books where I was looking for something specific and stumbled across something else of interest on the shelf nearby. I can't say enough good things about libraries.
I would rail against anyone anywhere who thinks historical accuracy is trivial or is now subject to change. I have spent years researching military technology and a bunch of anarchists and radicals will have no say in the end. Other researchers will see to that.
The man who is the subject of this article is obviously intelligent, a few others are not. Allow me to translate "innovating boldly." 'We're going to make billions regardless of the consequences.' To make a somewhat obvious prediction: You asked for it.
www.nbcnews.com
Artificial intelligence pioneer leaves Google and warns about technology's future
Geoffrey Hinton, a trailblazer in AI, has joined the growing list of experts sharing their concerns about its rapid advancement.
www.nbcnews.com
- Joined
- 6 November 2010
- Messages
- 4,245
- Reaction score
- 3,187
That's what I like best about libraries.
Sadly that's becoming a challenge. i used to cross the continent two or three times a year, and at least once a year stopped in the engineering library at the university in Boulder, Colorado. Long stacks of aerospace goodies. I lived there in the late 90's and started at one end and didn't quite get to the end before I moved away. So... now and then I'd stop in and spend a few hours continuing the process.
Until they moved everything off-site. Request a book, they'd get it for you. A day later.
Well, so much for that.
The university library in Logan Utah seemed well stocked. But everything was in human-inaccessible stacks: make your request and a robot gets the books for you.
So much for that.
While this is certainly true, the level of evidence presented was often poor enough that those uninvolved could easily discount the claims. But a lot of people bought into Nessie and Bigfoot and UFOs because a few *crappy* photos were faked. In recent years CGI and photoshop have made passable photos and videos of such things, good enough that reasonably sane people are regularly taken in. Soon AI will vomit forth *tsunamis* of utterly believable videos of any damn wacky thing you can imagine. The common culture will be inundated with masses of crap that overwhelm reasonable skepticism.
There is another side to the coin. People acting as crap detectors. There is no need to succumb to the 'next big thing.' As if passive viewing and beliefs are givens. Those who see the potential of this - for bad - will call out the bad and the fake. As far as large data feeds, it doesn't matter. There are still 24 hours in a day and of that time, minus eating and sleeping, not much time to consume the next crap-fest.
Fake exhibits at carnivals to photoshop and CGI to this. This didn't happen overnight. Anyone with one whit of knowledge of hucksters and previous scams/frauds will see this for what it is.
- Joined
- 3 June 2011
- Messages
- 17,358
- Reaction score
- 9,120
And yet people do, and will. And that's without utterly believable video evidence.
Right now if a criminal case includes a clear CCTV shot of the suspect Doing The Thing, everyone involved will likely believe what they're seeing is accurate. In a few years, though, doubt will be sown over whether the video is real or was cooked up by the prosecution down in the DeepFakeLab. And in some case,s the video *will* be fake, and a lot of people will believe it.
martinbayer
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 6 January 2009
- Messages
- 2,432
- Reaction score
- 2,141
"You can fool some people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time."
Forging a scientifically convincing "antique book" is possible, just difficult. For example: the paper needs to be old. Say, 1,400 years old. Where ya gonna get that? Assumign you don;t have a stash of millenium-and-a-half old paper, you make it, using cotton and linen you grow yourself. And because you're smart, it will pass a carbon dating test, because you grew the plants in a greenhouse on a diet of carbon dioxide you provided yourself, generated by burning coal. The plants grown from that will carbon 14 test as millions of years old, so you mix some atmospheric CO2 in to tweak the ratio.
Hard? Yes. Stupidly expensive? Sure. *Possible*? You betcha. If you want to, say, produce a first generation Koran that says some *interesting* new things, either to make a ton of cash, to mess with a religion, to sow political chaos, or just for the lulz... cost might well not be an object.
I don't know that that's absolutely true. Pick an objective historical Fact, something that is clear and obvious. Start telling the population an Anti-Fact about it. Barrage the media with Anti-Fact. Get it into the textbooks and the docudramas. Most people won't believe it, but some will. Mostly the younguns. The old farts who know better? They die off in time. Keep up the pressure. Do what you can to scrape Fact out of the records. Get Anti-Fact into the museums. As time passes, the ratio of Anti-Fact believers to Fact believers will climb. It's entirely possible that Anti-Fact comes to dominate, perhaps universally. It's just a matter of pressure and time.
How many people and *peoples* were erased from the record by their conquerors, their achievements claimed by the newcomers? We don't know. We'll never know. All of the people, all of the time have been successfully fooled.
Excellent example. I'm sure attorneys are preparing to counter the threat right now.
AI and Evidence: Let’s Start to Worry
When researchers at University of Washington pulled together a clip of a faked speech by President Obama using video segments of the President’s earlier speeches run through artificial intelligence, we watched with a queasy feeling. The combination wasn’t perfect – we could still see some seams...
- Joined
- 19 July 2016
- Messages
- 3,738
- Reaction score
- 2,705
With all this talk of AI, I wonder why we cannot do something more grounded. I live in rented property and frankly the nanny state is bugging in more than one direction. I made toast again, I know stupid, the series of nannying detectors decide the place is on fire and screams the place down. I have winodows open until the screaming stops and the toast is bloody cold.
Thanks folks, muchly.
Thanks folks, muchly.
In my opinion the consequences of the two sides of the coin working together can produce a humanity more intelligent, more cynical, more invulnerable to advertising, propaganda, religion, more free to make its own decisions, although not necessarily more responsible. Something good could come out of all this.
martinbayer
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 6 January 2009
- Messages
- 2,432
- Reaction score
- 2,141
I most certainly hope you're right.
Yesterday I used ChatGPT to write a couple of songs, one for me on my birthday and one for a long time friend of mine. The results were not bad. When I showed them to my friend, her first comment was Hallmark will be out of business soon.
martinbayer
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 6 January 2009
- Messages
- 2,432
- Reaction score
- 2,141
No, Hallmark will be using AI soon.
Time for AI to step up:
Are chatbots up to scripting whole shows? Probably not. Not yet. But there is a clear and obvious starting point:
Hollywood writers go on strike after contract negotiations fail
Are chatbots up to scripting whole shows? Probably not. Not yet. But there is a clear and obvious starting point:
Hollywood strike: Late night comedy shows to go dark as writers' walkout begins
These shows haven't been funny in *years,* so putting not-quite-ready AI in the drivers seat there seems a good compromise.I strongly disagree. A friend of mine worked in Hollywood. Creativity is not like turning on the kitchen tap and scripts pour out.
Yeah, but this is late night TV. Creativity isn't really a prerequisite.
According to you. I screen promotional text weekly. It's not plug and play, or just bullet points. A lot of data feeds go into it but those can't be used 'as is' either. A lot of subtle clues from the constant monitoring of various pop culture resources need to be distilled down. We're dealing with people who are looking for entertainment options. We don't like "corporate speak." Or dry recitations. It has to be dynamic, engaging, fun even, to read. The person in charge often asks for my suggestions and sometimes he uses them.
On a related note, we just rejected a pitch. That involved long discussions about why it was rejected. The people I work with are "rocket scientists." They get it - on a level that is beyond average.
Yup. The only opinion that matters on whether or not I think a show is good: mine. And I've not seen a late night show that was worth watching in well over a decade. So if they get replaced with Humorbot 5.0, hey, it's worth a shot.
But, but, I thought the only opinion that mattered was mine - only.
Sorry. But having worked with professionals for decades, the idea of a bot doing anything is beyond ridiculous. People relate to people, from writers to actors. Why? Because they are like everyone else, filled with hopes, dreams and a future. Some dead program owned by billionaires? No, not at all. At all. I can see the credits roll right now: Tonight's show written by ChatGPT V. 12. How NOT heartwarming.
- Status
