Current Events > Do you think AI will eventually replace voice actors?

(+) Yeah! (+)

I think part of the issue here is that most scenes do not need a great delivery, and also that most existing scenes already do not have a great delivery.

you don't need to be a literary master to replicate or even improve on this, lol

+19 whip
-11 scythe
stop reading now

you don't need to be a literary master to replicate or even improve on this, lol

Lol, this Natsu dude is just arguing for no reason. He knows he's wrong.

I know no such thing lol.

But I get the bravado performance is what you need of everyone agreeing with your bubble.

My post isnt discussing whether I think AI will take VA roles.

Or , you're just wrong as fuck and now getting butt hurt because everyone is starting to call you out.

Yes because it will be cheap and capitalism

The irony I see in this AI tech is with businesses trying to replace workers with it it will eventually just lead to consumers replacing the businesses. If someone can make a blockbuster-grade movie at home and put it online for free with AI why pay Hollywood to do it?

Some of the best lines (or at least some famous lines) from certain movies were improvised Usually because people forgot the actual line So, If AI takes over, well lose that

Eh, I don't think animation works like that.

Im not sure, tbh That said, I could see someone easily messing up a line, but them keeping it in if they like it better

only for a part that requires a monotone voice that has 1 state of range. Cause that's where AI mostly is right now. It's good mimicry but it has next to no range capability.

That is correct. (Depending on the studio and director).

Voice actors sometimes are able to change lines (intentionally or unintentionally), and they just role with it because they love it.

https://youtu.be/feEW8p3Q5ow

Game development isn't anywhere near as expensive as it's touted. Most of the budget is blown on advertisement,

Yeah. And if we go to AI generated VAs, you can say goodbye to all those moments

Another one who has no idea what he's talking about. Even the most basic A. I. voice sites have sliders for tone and intonation.

Not to mention the fact that you're only thinking of text to speech Ai and not the AI which just takes somebody's voice and places it over somebody else's vocals. Doesn't need "range".

'm aware of the sliders that can alter all that. But, the voice still sounds monotone. It lacks the range a human can pull off.

Yes.

And the things they are replaced in will suck ass.

"Hmm, I know this show sucks, but I'm unable to tell why"

This would make no sense.

Now. Give it a few years. AI is growing at an exponential rate

But who thought that AI could sortie term papers or poetry or create art?

Most of you are naively underestimating what AI could do

But who thought that AI could sortie term papers or poetry or create art?

Most of you are naively underestimating what AI could do

Or you won't even know

But who thought that AI could sortie term papers or poetry or create art?

Most of you are naively underestimating what AI could do

But who thought that AI could sortie term papers or poetry or create art?

Most of you are naively underestimating what AI could do

But who thought that AI could sortie term papers or poetry or create art?

Most of you are naively underestimating what AI could do

The difference is that when a person has a hard time, it's usually just costing us some food and drink, maybe something generating background noise. When an AI does it, it helps rocket us towards a water crisis and a dead planet.

Not totally sure what you're trying to say here but isn't this more a reflection of the amount of power given to humans vs ai rather than anything to do with their actual abillities

It's an infantile tech that was belted out to make a quick buck and nothing else.

Just because most companies are probably a bit too eager to entrust large amounts of control to AI doesn't mean that they couldn't trial run it in lower stakes environments instead. well actually it sort of does because then all the companies that use it in higher stakes environments will totally push them out of the market and they will cease to exist. so turning the AI back off might be harder than it seems

first half maybe, second half definitely not, and this sort of few in general is so shortsighted it makes you look like you have no idea what you're talking about <_<

even currently, AI empowers a lot of people and companies in our world (for better or for worse) and it's only going to get more extreme from here as AI tech and development has been in overdrive recently

AI currently empowers lazy or talentless people, honestly. Or people that want less overhead.

To be precise, I want AI. But what we've done with it is the laziest most money grubbing way to put it out we could've done.

Expect there to be less and less human jobs as time goes on. There will be no more cooks, no more therapists, no more human cops, no more voice actors, and even Youtube and Twitch will phase out their content creators with AI.

This is the future.

I mean...some folks say the same about current voice acting, so I'd expect to see more A.I. voiced extras in the near future.

I'm a little curious what other way you think it could have been done?

It's a very technical research subject that requires significant amounts of computing power, data collection and analysis, etc etc. It's not something you can just make in your garage on the cheap, AI development really does require a significant investment into it to get anything useful back out. If there was no "money grubbing" nothing would ever get done because it would have no funding

BUT if I were to take a shot I would started with small scale specialized models for advertising research, then medical/military research and expand to other applications in the field, then advance to a specialized clerical/productivity model. As for for how to start. The chatbot for general use would follow.

All these things certainly exist already as well, just that you don't really see them if you're not in the field. Especially military use which I have no evidence of at all and it would definitely be under some security restrictions but it's just crazy to think they aren't doing something with it since the potential is just so vast they'd be foolish to pass it up.

I see where you're coming from a little better now though, you basically think it would have been better with a more gradual / structured rollout of AI. I don't think it's really realistic without some heavy restrictions from the government, because there's no other way to get so many disparate groups to sync up, but I guess it's not impossible. Though personally I'm kinda of the opinion that the general use chatbot has the least potential for being destructive, because it is made available to the public at large rather than kept in the hands of a few behind closed doors. So if we're going from your list I think I would have liked to see it go in the exact opposite direction lol

Nah Hollywood animation studios have a hard on for hiring celebs not actual voice actors for their characters.