Comment by m_ke
2 years ago
1. The sky voice currently available in the app is a different model from the one they presented (one is pure TTS, the new one in GPT-4o is a proper multi modal model that can do speech in and out end to end)
2. Look at these images and tell me they didn't intend to replicate "Her": https://x.com/michalwols/status/1792709377528647995
Which one are we saying sounds like Johansson? I'm talking about the TTS voice in the app, is everyone else talking about the multimodal voice from the 4o demos?
Also, whether they *intended* to replicate Her and whether they *did* in the end are very different.
This one: https://youtu.be/vgYi3Wr7v_g?feature=shared&t=22
compare it to: https://youtu.be/GV01B5kVsC0?feature=shared&t=125
OK, I watched this expecting to be convinced.
I think they might have mimicked the style. The voice, though, is not even close. If I heard both voices in a conversation, I would have thought 2 different people were talking.
3 replies →
Thank you for providing a nice side-by-side. This makes it clear to me the voices are not very similar at all. If Johansson had agreed, I have to imagine they would've been able to make a much closer (and less annoying!) voice.
1 reply →
I keep reading in the media that Sky was introduced as part of ChatGPT-4o, but that's incorrect. Sky's been around since they introduced the mobile iOS app.
While Sky's voice shares similar traits to SJ, it sounds different enough that I was never confused as to whether it was actually SJ or not.
2 replies →
Well, I thought it will be similar, but at least with how sky voice sounds through the phone speakers, I can hardly find any resemblance.
Those don't sound anything alike, except being two female voices. Sky is clearly a bit lower and with a lot more vocal fry.
Are you using this as an argument about how similar they are? The voice sounds distinctly different, no problem discerning between the two.
I am of two minds here, regardless of the "closeness" there is a whole field of comedy that does impressions of others. That is what is so difficult about the AI discussion. Clearly, there are plenty of humans who can mimic other humans visually, in prose for writing, in voice and mannerisms etc.
Leaving the IP issue aside, they could clearly have hired a voice actor to closely resemble Johansson maybe without additional tweaks to the voice in post processing. If they did do that, I am not totally sure what position to take on the matter
3 replies →
The OpenAI one is recording the audio from a phone, where as the movie version is into a mic directly. They will sound different, but there are elements that are the same. Anyone using these to compare though and saying they don't hear the difference isn't comparing apples to apples.
However, the fact that there is a debate at all proves there should be more of an investigation done.
Holy Crappyness Batman! The OpenAI clip is so bad. Homeboy keeps stepping on "her" lines. So from this I come away with he's just a rude asshat that doesn't know how to socially interact with people, she's just too damn chatty and doesn't know when to shut up, or maybe it was just really bad editing? Either way, it's not an intriguing promo to me in the least.
2 replies →
Genuine question, what's wrong with trying to replicate in real life an idea from a SciFi movie ?
I understand that it could be problematic if OpenAI did one of two things:
- imitated Scarlett Johansson's voice to impersonate her
- misled people into believing that GPT-4o is an official by-product of the film Her, like calling it “the official Her AI”
The first point is still unclear, and that's precisely the point of the article
For the second point, the tweets you posted clearly show that the AI from Her served as an inspiration for creating the GPT-4o model, but not a trademark infringement
Will Matt Damon receive royalties if a guy is ever stuck on Mars ?
> Genuine question, what's wrong with trying to replicate in real life an idea from a SciFi movie ?
The thing is, there are several cases where a jury found this exact thing to warrant damages.
But honestly, that is irrelevant. The situation here is that OpenAI is facing a TON of criticism for running roughshod over intellectual property rights. They are claiming that we should trust them, they are trying to do the right thing.
But in this case, they're dancing on the edge of right and wrong.
I don't mind when a sleazy company makes "MacDougals" to sell hamburgers. But it's not something to be proud of. And it's definitely not a company that I'd trust.
Pretty sure the CEO of OpenAI tweeted "Her." after the reveal of the voice.
Isn't that a suggestion that what they're doing is similar to "the Her AI"?
Yes, the unprecedented conversational functionality of the GPT-4o demo could be compared to the AI in the movie. Why assume that the tweet was about the voice sounding like Scarlett Johansson?
It's a suggestion that they were inspired by the movie, not that they are releasing a product under the "Her" trademark
It's a movie, not a patent on women voice AI assistants
Imagine if Facebook came to you and wanted an exclusive license to white label whatever you work on, then after you rejected them they went and copied most of your code but changed the hue or saturation of some of the colors and shipped it to all of their customers (There's definitely hours of Scarlet Johanssons talking in the dataset that GPT4o was trained on).
Would that be ethical?
EDIT: or even better, imagine how OpenAI would react if some company trained their own model by distilling from GPT4 outputs and then launched a product with it called “ChatGPC”. (They already go after products that have GPT in their name)
> then after you rejected them
The article shows the timeline would make this them already licensing a similar product to your more famous one, then you saying no, and them continuing to use the existing similar one.
> But while many hear an eerie resemblance between “Sky” and Johansson’s “Her” character, an actress was hired to create the Sky voice months before Altman contacted Johansson, according to documents, recordings, casting directors and the actress’s agent.
Facebook does do this, and Google, and Microsoft, and Apple. I believe they call it "Getting Sherlocked."