this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2024
156 points (94.8% liked)

Technology

72406 readers
2957 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The BBC has issued a statement that offers important context to Sara Poyzer’s viral social media posts. The British broadcaster said it is using AI technology in a “highly sensitive documentary” to represent the voice of a person who is nearing the end of their life.

Poyzer was penciled in for the job, but her services are no longer required as the BBC attempts to honor the wishes of the contributor’s family by dedicating a brief — and clearly signposted — section of the documentary to recreating “a voice which can now no longer be heard.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] brsrklf@jlai.lu 68 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I'm not sure what to think about that.

I'm all for shitting on replacing people with AI, but in this case it's done with the agreement of the person, who is still able to give it, who can't talk anymore, and for a documentary. So sure, they could have done it with a voice-over actor, and maybe I'd have preferred it too, but I can't really say this feels wrong. At this point it feels a bit like Stephen Hawking using his voice synthesis software.

If the person was unable to agree and didn't write what is being told with "their" voice though? That'd be shit.

[–] gregorum@lemm.ee 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Stephen Hawking grew to like his voice synthesizer. At one point, Intel, who made the device, offered to upgrade it to a more natural voice and he declined, as he identified it (as did the public) as “his voice”.

[–] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah but now that they have it after this person is dead then what? They could then use it without their permission and probably will.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago

They could do that anyway, at least to the same extent that they could in any situation. This stuff isn’t new, it’s been possible to recreate someone’s voice for over a decade. Current generations are just getting more natural sounding, and require much, much less training material.