Why the fuck would people make this? There is NO WAY this won’t be abused.
That’s why they made it
I’ve wanted something akin to this for D&D played online. I could activate my “elf NPC” mode and have an elf avatar redub what I’m saying in a distinct voice, inflections to match gender, etc. It’s a very niche usecase and I definitely don’t mind doing a mild voice and having everyone fill in with their imagination. But it would be cool if implemented well.
Problem is, once this exists, it’s a misinformation nightmare for the rest of the world.
I mean it has some SNL potential but that’s about it.
We could use it to make SNL funny?
All I’m sayin is that as long as you are using it openly for comedic effect it could be a hoot in some ways. I don’t want to comment specifically on SNL which I’m sure people have varying opinions on.
Of course the downside potential is greater than any upside.
It’s clearly to continue our long tradition of blackmail against our shitty members of society and smear campaigns against our good citizens.
We will keep playing the red vs blue game though.
Maybe next election will be a “bash at the beach” or cage match or something since our country is really just a large WWE production with nukes
of course it will be abused for fake mediaIt will make media better!
Who would have thought AI would be used for this?
Everyone, forever.
Why the fuck would they invent this? Goddamn I hate the business world.
Those, “your friend likes shitty product x” ads will now include a deepfake of your friend’s endorsement.
To be honest, I personally would rather be nonconsentually deepfaked with a 2 inch penis than put into a conconsentual ad for a product I don’t endorse.
To me this is like reading that locks are now obsolete because somebody invented a way to unlock them just by touching them. On one hand it makes me angry that somebody would invent such a thing. On the other hand it means locks have always had this hidden weakness which would eventually be figured out, and now here we are. So what do we do next? I mean, in terms of things that might actually help?
So what do we do next? I mean, in terms of things that might actually help?
Become a society with strong critical thinking skills who values people based on reasoned takes based on experience and science over people who value rapid, loud appeals to emotion.
One piece of that is recognizing that doing things like putting flat earthers up in high altitude planes or near space is a waste of resources that could’ve been spent doing something better.
EDIT: that last paragraph was an incomplete thought. Individual flat earthers have done the whole scientific method thing, and proved themselves incorrect and stepped away from it. How do you handle the people that refuse to be convinced? If there’s no level evidence that a person will accept and they’re out in the forest commons chopping down trees to build a tower to whatever is on top of earth, how do you tolerate it at a societal level? It’s still an incomplete thought.
Surprised it wasn’t youtube. Sometimes the AI voice is good enough I don’t realize it’s an autodub, atleast untill I notice the mouth is moving wrong or the text they show is a different language.
This would solve that basically, which is both cool and a bit scary, more scary if it is used in AR and in the real world.
I live in Québec. I’m anglophone but can speak French and do some things in French, so I also get Youtube ads in French and English. I saw an ad that show the same people speaking French and English, in places where it makes little sense for them to know French, and their accents are just…correct but it doesn’t line up?
For years we’ve been told to watch the full clip for context. Now two people can watch the same live event, hear completely different words, and both have video evidence. Microsoft has somehow found a way to make »I saw it with my own eyes« even less reliable.
This was always the goal of AI
Pssst, you’re replying to an AI bot.
Maybe so, but not everyone reading is a bot.
Everyone on Lemmy is a bot except you
Bold of you to assume we can read. Sidenote, not a bot, dictated but not read -elchinchilla
Yup, been saying for years that this is one of the reasons it’s a fundamentally fascist technology.
Hey - I know I’ve asked this before, but you must have forgotten to reply. Are you a real person?
But think how much easier it will be for the Ministry of Truth to retroactively update all the telescreen feed archives!
“If we didn’t create the evil misinformation bot, someone else would have. You should be happy it was a massive corporation that controls this patent, not some soulest unethical entity whose motives are profit over everything. That was a close one. Phew.”
If it can be done, they will do it. Power is unconstrained by ethics, empathy, or morality. Never assume that anyone in power shares these traits with the rest of us, they do not.
The only thing that constrains power is enforced laws with teeth.
Guillotines. Heads rolling.
There is no other way at this point.
Well, Time to burn down their offices.
… isn’t this already a thing?
I thought this was already done for dubs?
The patent also posits that such a tool could be used to remove filler words like “um” or “ah” from live speech, or to erase stutters or speech impediments.
That’s kind of fucked up. Let people speak for themselves; don’t “”“improve”“” their speech without permission
and it also makes it more difficult for people with speech impediments to speak. Imagine seeing absolutely no one have any speech quirks or anything and have some of your own, would you feel secure about opening your mouth? Then there is this handydandy tool, now you are mentally chained to it to even speak.
LLM are just new chain on our necks that make us less free and able.
All I can think of reading this is…LA LI LU LE LO. IYKYK
I hate the patent system so much. There’s already software that does this, all they did was add the word “live” in front. So now they own every live broadcast translation even though the techs been out to do it for a solid 2 years.
Patents aren’t given for what they do. They are given for how they do it. Two patents can exist for the same thing they do. But you cannot have two patents for the same mechanism by which they do it.
That being said, if the patent is “make AI do it”… I’m not sure that is patent-worthy.
Is there really no legal liability for the defamation cases this seems sure to produce?
Oh hey, it’s the tech from the running man.
Cool cool cool
