Defamation, slander, and libel are concepts that rely on being able to exact punishment or compensation for someone telling lies (falsehoods, untruths, etc) about you, in essence trying to use your likeness for things that are not true and damaging. I can't see how to avoid classifying the vast majority of deepfakes as defamation, because they are all untrue by definition, even if they're supposed to be positive, a la Super-Biden Punches Oil Baron In The Face And Rescues A Baby Deer.
It might be a matter of interpretation regarding the Voice, but you and ScarJo drew opposite conclusions in this instance, which is what Altman & ilk count on. And in this instance, Altman, whose role in this Voice debacle has already been explained in many places and has not been "consistently candid" in multiple other instances, has ample motivation to harness ScarJo's impressive celebrity to increase his own gravitas, especially if he can get it for free under a veneer of plausible deniability.
I feel like it’s worth noting that while you don’t see the resemblance between Scarlett Johansson’s voice and the GPT version - the was GPT voice cloning works is that the person’s actual voice is used. IF they don’t want it to be an exact replica it can be ‘tuned’. I like where you’re going with it though, because it certainly makes my job easier - not needing to take any precautions at all in using other peoples’ stuff for monetization in AI algorithms. I think you’re going to like what my friend Boris is working on. Here’s the book he has in the works — the full text will be self-published and available on his website in about 2 hours. It’s definitely the kind of subject matter you love, but has more of a Danielle Steele writing style.
Cancelling People in North America by Boris Lubalio
In “Cancelling People in North America,” Boris Lubalio delves into the complex and often contentious world of cancel culture in America. This thought-provoking book explores how the rise of social media and the increasing polarization of society have led to a culture where individuals and ideas are swiftly judged and often harshly condemned.
Lubalio examines the historical roots of cancel culture, tracing its evolution from early forms of public shaming to the modern-day phenomenon that permeates every aspect of our lives. He provides a balanced analysis, highlighting both the positive intentions behind holding people accountable and the negative consequences of mob mentality and the suppression of free speech.
Through a series of compelling case studies, Lubalio illustrates the real-world impact of cancel culture on individuals, communities, and institutions. He offers insights into how this culture affects mental health, public discourse, and the very fabric of democracy.
“Cancelling People in North America” is not just a critique but also a call to action. Lubalio urges readers to engage in more thoughtful and compassionate dialogue, to resist the urge to rush to judgment, and to foster a culture of understanding and forgiveness. This book is essential reading for anyone seeking to navigate the complexities of modern social dynamics and to contribute to a more just and open society.
FIRE naturally focuses on the freedom of speech aspects of the new Title IX rules, to me the issue of women’s privacy is equally troubling.
In my opinion the worst aspect of the Democrats’ new Education Act Title IX regulations that go into effect on August 1 of this year is that boys and men will be able to to shower with high school and college girls (including my 17 year old granddaughter).
They will have no shame in doing that when it's perfectly legal. Unless Kamala disavows this new rule she deserves to lose the election on this issue alone.
Here's an analysis of the new regulations by the Foundation Against Intolerance and
Racism (FAIR):
"The Final Rule is likely to result in sex-integration of all bathrooms and locker rooms because it prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender identity. After August 1st, if a school requires students to use facilities that align with their biological sex (which they are currently allowed to require under Federal law and regulations), a transgender student may file a discrimination complaint alleging that the school has violated Title IX by preventing him or her from using the bathroom that aligns with their gender."
Wasn’t she the voice in that movie “Her”? This is very strange.
Defamation, slander, and libel are concepts that rely on being able to exact punishment or compensation for someone telling lies (falsehoods, untruths, etc) about you, in essence trying to use your likeness for things that are not true and damaging. I can't see how to avoid classifying the vast majority of deepfakes as defamation, because they are all untrue by definition, even if they're supposed to be positive, a la Super-Biden Punches Oil Baron In The Face And Rescues A Baby Deer.
It might be a matter of interpretation regarding the Voice, but you and ScarJo drew opposite conclusions in this instance, which is what Altman & ilk count on. And in this instance, Altman, whose role in this Voice debacle has already been explained in many places and has not been "consistently candid" in multiple other instances, has ample motivation to harness ScarJo's impressive celebrity to increase his own gravitas, especially if he can get it for free under a veneer of plausible deniability.
I feel like it’s worth noting that while you don’t see the resemblance between Scarlett Johansson’s voice and the GPT version - the was GPT voice cloning works is that the person’s actual voice is used. IF they don’t want it to be an exact replica it can be ‘tuned’. I like where you’re going with it though, because it certainly makes my job easier - not needing to take any precautions at all in using other peoples’ stuff for monetization in AI algorithms. I think you’re going to like what my friend Boris is working on. Here’s the book he has in the works — the full text will be self-published and available on his website in about 2 hours. It’s definitely the kind of subject matter you love, but has more of a Danielle Steele writing style.
Cancelling People in North America by Boris Lubalio
In “Cancelling People in North America,” Boris Lubalio delves into the complex and often contentious world of cancel culture in America. This thought-provoking book explores how the rise of social media and the increasing polarization of society have led to a culture where individuals and ideas are swiftly judged and often harshly condemned.
Lubalio examines the historical roots of cancel culture, tracing its evolution from early forms of public shaming to the modern-day phenomenon that permeates every aspect of our lives. He provides a balanced analysis, highlighting both the positive intentions behind holding people accountable and the negative consequences of mob mentality and the suppression of free speech.
Through a series of compelling case studies, Lubalio illustrates the real-world impact of cancel culture on individuals, communities, and institutions. He offers insights into how this culture affects mental health, public discourse, and the very fabric of democracy.
“Cancelling People in North America” is not just a critique but also a call to action. Lubalio urges readers to engage in more thoughtful and compassionate dialogue, to resist the urge to rush to judgment, and to foster a culture of understanding and forgiveness. This book is essential reading for anyone seeking to navigate the complexities of modern social dynamics and to contribute to a more just and open society.
FIRE naturally focuses on the freedom of speech aspects of the new Title IX rules, to me the issue of women’s privacy is equally troubling.
In my opinion the worst aspect of the Democrats’ new Education Act Title IX regulations that go into effect on August 1 of this year is that boys and men will be able to to shower with high school and college girls (including my 17 year old granddaughter).
They will have no shame in doing that when it's perfectly legal. Unless Kamala disavows this new rule she deserves to lose the election on this issue alone.
Here's an analysis of the new regulations by the Foundation Against Intolerance and
Racism (FAIR):
"The Final Rule is likely to result in sex-integration of all bathrooms and locker rooms because it prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender identity. After August 1st, if a school requires students to use facilities that align with their biological sex (which they are currently allowed to require under Federal law and regulations), a transgender student may file a discrimination complaint alleging that the school has violated Title IX by preventing him or her from using the bathroom that aligns with their gender."