SAG-AFTRA reveals terms of ‘groundbreaking’ deal::Actors union SAG-AFTRA revealed specifics of its deal with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers in a press conference Friday.

    • Touching_Grass@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Using AI to create voices and audiobooks sounds awesome though. I don’t like that people may lose their jobs. But using AI for this stuff seems like a natural progression. Having an audio book that shifts voices and tone easy but can also include sound effects and background noises would improve the audio. It would make these products better and likely cheaper. It would also give other creators a ton of ability to create their own stuff. Giving indie game developers tools to create games would be great.

      Id love to have a tool to read books to me that can parse any book. Even something like a textbook. I learn much better by listening and no reader has been able to do that yet,but AI looks promising.

      • topinambour_rex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        1 year ago

        But the original voice actor, the one which was used as model for the AI voice should gain something from what is generated from his voice.

        If they decide to put their voice as royalty free, fine, but if it is something who paid their bills by making recordings of their voice, not fine.

      • linearchaos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t mind different voices, but books with sound effects are hot trash. If I want to watch a movie, if watch a movie. Let my mind do the work.

        • Touching_Grass@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I disagree. I loved listening to old time radio programs that added ambiance with creaking doors and wind to set scenes

          • redditron_2000_4@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Soundbooth Theater does “audio immersion” versions of some books and they are amazing. It is genre fiction, but if it they are your genres then you should check them out! (Horror, fantasy, sci-fi, etc)

        • mr_tyler_durden@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Amen. If there are sound effects then I’m not interested. All of those audio presentations or whatever they are called sound so forced and over-acted.

        • essteeyou@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you haven’t listened to Project Hail Mary then I can understand your perspective. PHM works better as an audiobook than a regular book because of the “effects” in my opinion.

          • linearchaos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’ve listened to that twice read by Ray Porter, who is my favorite audiobook narrator. I don’t remember there being any special effects in the book whatsoever on audible. The dude is just a master of different voices One of the reasons why he was so incredible in bobiverse.

            • essteeyou@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Trying to avoid spoilers for others, but think about the other main character’s voice when they first meet.

      • Knitwear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        “Having an audio book that shifts voices and tone easy but can also include background noises”

        That’s not what you’re going to get. Even with A.I they all requires sound editing and reviewing and fixing errors which all costs money. We already have the tech to do A.I voice acting and I’ve tried a few. What we’ll get is what we have now, a single A.I voice with eerie intonation that modifies some words to their context but not others so it functions for a sentence but cannot emote a paragraph.

        • Touching_Grass@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Are you saying that AI isn’t improving?

          I just read someone that said they listened to an audio book that did do this.

          • Knitwear@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            No I’m saying that when we get a new game changing technology things don’t tend to become better produced, they become cheaper to produce cheaply and quality be damned

            • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              The thing is a lot of audiobooks aren’t being produced at all right now, or aren’t being produced to an acceptable quality standard (not because the narrator is bad, but because they and they editor weren’t paid enough to get it right.

              In this case, I think cheaper production would result in better audiobooks.

            • Touching_Grass@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I think game changing tech is always better but we as consumers are complicit in allowing the erosion of the benefit because were complacent.

              Look at podcasts as an example. It beat the shit out of any other media at the time. Just hobbiest and funny people making content. Content that didn’t have any producers making sure people stayed on script. No ads, ever to interrupt or make creators panic about topics. Then rogan started pushing pocket pussies and everybody said its cool because its only 2 mins and skippable. Years later its now multiple unskippable ads on a paid service where we pay to avoid ads.

              The only time we could have stopped the current problem is when it wasn’t a problem. But we don’t have that foresight

              So game changing tech is great, if we keep it on track. Don’t let it erode.

              • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Years later its now multiple unskippable ads on a paid service where we pay to avoid ads.

                You must be listening to different podcasts to me. Those “hobbiest” content creators are still there, and they tend to have decent microphones now and have learned how to create fairly high production value content. Yes, they have ads, but they’re short and skippable (or even at the end of the episode) and you want them to get paid for their work right? Otherwise they won’t do it.

                Sure, shitty podcasts are also available. Just don’t subscribe to them.

                • Touching_Grass@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I don’t want them to get paid. I want people like me who are so passionate about a thing that they make stuff for the community.

                  What I don’t want are for those people to not bother creating things because the whole technology shifted towards profit motivations and the space and tech was taking over by the 1000th comedian who is leveraging a free advertising method to sell tickets and still ends up selling ad space like they’re a fender in NASCAR.

                  And no ads are not all skippable. No they’re not short, they interrupt, they infiltrate every corner of our lives and podcasts were popular early on because they were the exact opposite of what they are now. Now its just radio 2.0.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Actors union SAG-AFTRA revealed specifics of a new labor deal with Hollywood studios Friday that they said included groundbreaking raises, benefit increases and protections around artificial intelligence.

    He said the contract includes $1 billion in new wages and benefit plan funding and a participation bonus for actors on successful streaming shows.

    There are also “successful minimum compensation increases that break the so-called industry pattern and help our members keep up with the harm that’s been caused by inflation,” Crabtree-Ireland said.

    Studios will have to provide informed consent for the creation of any kind of digital replica of a performer or background actor, with a specific description of the intended use, the union officials said.

    The writers strike ended on September 27, making the time period between the tentative deal and ratification roughly two weeks.

    Some writers were concerned about the growth of streaming, because they lost out on residuals that traditional television shows paid when they were re-run.


    The original article contains 678 words, the summary contains 158 words. Saved 77%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • Mahlzeit@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    The tech angle are the AI provisions? Can someone provide some context for that? Doesn’t sound like much of a win for the little guy.

    • Shazbot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The short version is that an actor’s AI double, and an AI amalgam of several actors, will be treated as a proxy for the actor(s). The actor can agree or decline the use of their AI proxy based on the scene, and are compensated for use of their likeness as if they had gone in person. It’s a pretty big win for actors considering studios wanted unlimited usage for a one time payment.

      • Mahlzeit@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        29
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Must be nice being famous. Get paid for the work of the CGI people (and stunt/body/etc. doubles?), as if you were also doing something. The stars at the top can probably negotiate even better terms on their own, So I guess that this is basically a win for the mid-level guys, who do have a somewhat valuable likeness but not the negotiating power to get a good price on their own.

        ETA: What’s with the downvotes? Do you all disagree that the mid-level famous win from this or what?

        • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Didn’t downvote you - but “mid-level” artists are generally paid well when the and stunt doubles are paid very well. The union terms are fair for content broadcast on cable TV and theatres.

          They weren’t fair for content broadcast on streaming services - which was the main issue being negotiated here. And hopefully now that’s been fixed.

          • Mahlzeit@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yes. I am sure the somewhat famous are paid well. I don’t understand how this could explain why I am downvoted?

            Longer explanation of why I wonder about doubles: One will probably use AI to make them look more like the real thing. IF this means that the “likeness owner” needs to be paid, then that becomes an extra cost factor. So the incentive will be to avoid this. This may mean that the doubles either lose employment opportunities or have to take a pay cut. The CGI artists obviously lose out in any case (not to mention the viewers).

            ETA: Is the idea that doubles and CGI artists are overpaid relative to famous actors? Actually, at this point, I’m thinking it was just a troll with a bot and there’s nothing much wrong.

        • essteeyou@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I imagine a somewhat valuable likeness will have someone “close enough” at a lower price in most cases. I would imagine that only the massively famous will benefit from this.

          • Mahlzeit@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            True, but I doubt there is a point in using a likeness if you can’t advertise it.

    • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The tech angle are the AI provisions?

      Not really.

      Internet based content streaming has created new business models that didn’t fit the way artists are paid, which resulted in artists taking a massive pay cut while still being paid the full amount they were due under union rules.

      It’s also bad for viewers - ever wonder why your favourite TV series didn’t get renewed for a new contract? A big part of it is if they did another season they’d have to pay the artists a lot more than they did for previous seasons. Because artist royalties scale up as the show gets more “successful” and creating another season is one of the yardsticks.

      The AI stuff added complexity to the negotiations but it wasn’t really what all this was about.

    • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s likely that background actors will get a boilerplate contract stating their likeness can be ai generated for other projects and current project for the use of background. Don’t sign it, you don’t get to do it.

      Everyone else should be fairly good and protected from ai issues. At least until enough starving actors are willing to sign away their rights for a chance at a better casting in hopes of “making it big”