• cybersin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Yeah, except royalties in music are almost always a joke. Those artists are going to make much less off their AI voice than if they actually appeared in studio and the end product is going to be worse. If AI cost the same or more, there would be no market for it. Relevant story about Hollywood actors who sold AI likenesses.

      Even if it was actually “ethically trained”, the end result is still horrible.

      Also, paying to have an AI Snoop Dogg in your song is the lamest shit I’ve ever heard.

    • coolkicks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      16 hours ago

      That AI was trained on absolute mountains of data that wasn’t ethically gained, though.

      Just because an emerald ring is assembled by a local jeweler doesn’t mean the diamond didn’t come from slave labor in South Africa.

      • ArchRecord@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Voice Swap was not trained on any data that wasn’t “ethically gained.”

        Read the bottom of their FAQ that lists the exact databases in question.

        The couple of datasets they used on top of all the data they directly pay artists to consensually provide have permissive licenses that only require attribution for use, and gathered their information directly from a group of willing, consenting participants.

        They are quite literally the exception to the rule of companies claiming they’re ethical, then using non-ethically sourced data as a base for their models.