Login
You're viewing the pageofwords.com public feed.

Replies

  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 1
  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 1
  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 1
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Eric Gerlachegerlach@hachyderm.io
    Dec 6, 2025, 1:09 AM

    @kirk @pluralistic Hmmm... I wonder if @pluralistic would be okay if I tuned a local AI model on his voice and had it read the article for me. If I imagine being terrified to cross the US border first, I can practically feel like I was there! Just for myself, no distribution.

    I don't know if there are any ethically-trained audio impersonation base models though. So probably impractical. Fun to think about, though. The questions around legality and ethics are fun to consider:

    In what, if any, circumstances is it ethical to tune an AI model to someone else's voice if it's just for personal use? (rhetorical question)

    (Imma buy the book, of course)

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Eric Gerlachegerlach@hachyderm.io
    Dec 6, 2025, 1:25 AM

    @kirk @pluralistic Oh, this goes so much deeper. The steps you would take to tune such a model would be nearly identical, other than the choice of source material and base model, to creating a salacious video generation model tuned to a particular person.

    That feels quite wrong. So why does my hypothetical not feel as wrong? I think it has to do with consent. Cory explicitly consented to giving the speech in that form, with his voice, to an audience. He also consented to giving me the text.

    Thus, the act I would hypothetically be creating is a recreation of something he has already done for another audience, and has publicly shared that performance in one medium (text). In the... other case... what's being created is explicitly not consented to, categorically, and would be objected to by most.

    I wonder if there's some semi-novel right here. Probably not entirely new, but a scope of which has heretofore not been considered. There are likeness rights, but South Park can create a cartoon of anyone they want, and that doesn't run afoul of US law (I'm sure at one point they got sued but I don't recall details and I'm too lazy to look them up today, so 'citation needed'). It's probably context specific, perhaps related to the bounds around defamation.

    This has probably been given a better treatment by legal scholars. Playing with the idea is fun, though.

    (Sorry to use you as a hypothetical subject, Cory)

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Anne PasekAepasek@scholar.social
    Dec 6, 2025, 12:28 PM

    @kirk @pluralistic "AI is the asbestos in the walls of our technological society, stuffed there with wild abandon by a finance sector and tech monopolists run amok. We will be excavating it for a generation or more."

    Yep!

    💬 2🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 0🔄 1⭐ 0
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0