/r/Technology
Last sync: 1y ago
↑
9483
↓
Producers allegedly sought rights to replicate extras using AI, forever, for just $200 (theregister.com)
submitted 6h ago by Sorin61
AlaskaStiletto 381 points 4h ago
This is also union busting. background actors make up the majority of SAG. By paying them for one day and never again, these actors won’t make minimums for health insurance and SAG membership. Less SAG, less Pension/Health to pay out, less leverage to strike ever again.
psychoacer 130 points 1h ago
Also people like Matt Damon and Ben Affleck were extra's in Field of Dreams. Are you telling me if someone wanted to use them as a star in one of their movies they'd have to buy out the studios likeness rights contract?
deathputt4birdie 42 points 54m ago
Imagine the profits if Michael J Fox got scanned one time and they used his scan for Back To The Future and all the sequels.
Actually, they tried to do this to the actor who played George McFly (Crispin Glover). They didn't want to pay him a million dollars for the sequel so they made prosthesis in his likeness and hired another actor to play his part, wearing his face. He sued Paramount and won, but was blackballed and never appeared in a major Hollywood movie after that.*
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/back-future-ii-a-legal-833705/
\* I'm leaving this in as a good example of Cunningham's Law ("The best way to get the right answer on the internet is not to ask a question; it's to post the wrong answer.")
Actually, they tried to do this to the actor who played George McFly (Crispin Glover). They didn't want to pay him a million dollars for the sequel so they made prosthesis in his likeness and hired another actor to play his part, wearing his face. He sued Paramount and won, but was blackballed and never appeared in a major Hollywood movie after that.*
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/back-future-ii-a-legal-833705/
\* I'm leaving this in as a good example of Cunningham's Law ("The best way to get the right answer on the internet is not to ask a question; it's to post the wrong answer.")
Accomplished_Wind104 40 points 48m ago
>was blackballed and never appeared in a major Hollywood movie after that.
Except for What's eating Gilber Grape, Charlie's Angels, Charlie's Angels 2, Willard, Beowulf, Alice in Wonderland and Hot Tub Time Machine.
Except for What's eating Gilber Grape, Charlie's Angels, Charlie's Angels 2, Willard, Beowulf, Alice in Wonderland and Hot Tub Time Machine.
(additional comments not archived)
TheWolfAndRaven 13 points 50m ago
He was in two of the Charlie's Angels movies in the early 2000s. I'd call those Major Hollywood movies.
EldritchAdam 7 points 45m ago
creepy thin man was totally creepy
my wife and I watched that first movie a surprising amount of times, including the director commentary (a thing we did a lot when we were younger) and it's awesome hearing the director McG talk about Glover in that movie. Like that he obsesses over how he holds and smokes a cigarette, and has very specific reasons why he'd do so. Very intense actor!
my wife and I watched that first movie a surprising amount of times, including the director commentary (a thing we did a lot when we were younger) and it's awesome hearing the director McG talk about Glover in that movie. Like that he obsesses over how he holds and smokes a cigarette, and has very specific reasons why he'd do so. Very intense actor!
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
refenton 56 points 1h ago
One of my best friends is a SAG member and (currently) essentially a professional extra. This would completely KILL his current career, and likely kill off his chances of getting any bigger or further in that world, as it would to the tens of thousands of other SAG actors who are primarily background and extras. This is an obscenely transparent attempt to bust this union.
meeplewirp 7 points 53m ago
I think the studios offered this knowing it’s stupid, so they can negotiate down to background getting scanned period. Their strategy is to ask for heavens and stars so when they have walk it back in negotiations, it’s walked back to what they need. If they offered something reasonable then SAG may say they don’t want AI use at all.
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
Slobbadobbavich 1860 points 5h ago
Imagine getting paid $200 and the next thing you know, you're a famous porn star in titles such as 'hot horse lover part 10' and 'gusher lover 5'. I'd definitely want a morality clause in there.
wirez62 605 points 4h ago
They could easily find people too. Literally go on the street and asking a few hundred people. Hey can we offer you $200? All you need to do is let us scan your face and sign this contract.
As much as it's hated here, and hopefully SOMEONE will stop them from doing this, it WILL work if they're allowed. It's such a pathetic amount of money, but people are so broke, and (some) are SO stupid, it WILL work.
As much as it's hated here, and hopefully SOMEONE will stop them from doing this, it WILL work if they're allowed. It's such a pathetic amount of money, but people are so broke, and (some) are SO stupid, it WILL work.
mudman13 347 points 4h ago
But its also so unnecessary when AI can literally create fake people to use. Just make a mashup of these-people-dont-exist or use a mixture of the owners/producers faces.
wirez62 102 points 3h ago
That's true. Not sure why they want these real people.
TheRedditorSimon 119 points 2h ago
Because $1. All these generative AI models are trained using existing text and/or imagery and coming court cases will focus on how the training models used IP without the express permission of the IP holder. Using real people with whom they have contracts mean~~s~~ studios own the images.
Never forget, it's all about the money and studios and producers will fuck over everybody they can for money.
Never forget, it's all about the money and studios and producers will fuck over everybody they can for money.
DaikaijuSokogeki01 245 points 3h ago
Because they want to buy future stars. Imagine you're struggling to break into the industry, you're having a hard time paying your bills, when you get an offer to earn a day's pay just to stand around as some computers scan you. Honestly not a bad deal for people who are desperate.
Now, after a few years, you finally find that one role that gives you your big break. Critics praise your performance, you start to grow a fanbase. Offers are now coming in faster than you can keep up.
But that studio who performed those digital scans on you now own your likeness in perpetuity. So if you do start to break out, they can just slap your face into a movie and have an AI copy your voice without your permission and claim it's you. Nothing you can do about it because you signed the contract and took the paycheck.
Now, after a few years, you finally find that one role that gives you your big break. Critics praise your performance, you start to grow a fanbase. Offers are now coming in faster than you can keep up.
But that studio who performed those digital scans on you now own your likeness in perpetuity. So if you do start to break out, they can just slap your face into a movie and have an AI copy your voice without your permission and claim it's you. Nothing you can do about it because you signed the contract and took the paycheck.
(additional comments not archived)
ScandalOZ 21 points 2h ago
They have been doing this for years but they use a real crowd of people and then duplicate it as many times as they need. Anything you have watched that has a massive crowd scene, like the Washington mall scene in Forrest Gump, or stadium scenes or armies like in Game of Thrones has first filmed real extras then cut and pasted that portion of film over and over to fill in the rest.
What they want to do now is film a variety of crowds using real people for a one time payment and have digital files of crowds to use over and over where ever it works for them. They envision never having to use real crowds again.
The thing these people don't understand is that eventually they will "kill the goose". While technology has improved our ability to create some amazing worlds on screen, our enjoyment has never come from experiencing things as phony. All the changes they want to make will eventually suck the life out of entertainment. It will kill what has always made it great. They don't understand what make stories great because they are not creative and they will kill creativity because of that.
What they want to do now is film a variety of crowds using real people for a one time payment and have digital files of crowds to use over and over where ever it works for them. They envision never having to use real crowds again.
The thing these people don't understand is that eventually they will "kill the goose". While technology has improved our ability to create some amazing worlds on screen, our enjoyment has never come from experiencing things as phony. All the changes they want to make will eventually suck the life out of entertainment. It will kill what has always made it great. They don't understand what make stories great because they are not creative and they will kill creativity because of that.
(additional comments not archived)
siraolo 6 points 2h ago
I think they just want more data sets. The more stuff you can Train the AI on the better.
SixMillionDollarFlan 3 points 2h ago
I don't know about that. The fake people I've tried to create on Midjourney all end up having 5th arms and melted faces.
(additional comments not archived)
cahcealmmai 5 points 3h ago
Have you seen some the ai generated people? I don't think I'd ever be able to watch a movie again if I thought one of those things might pop up in a scene.
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
iheartpennystonks 10 points 3h ago
Regardless of the technology when you put garbage in you get garbage back
(additional comments not archived)
thefookinpookinpo 9 points 2h ago
You don't have to be stupid if you're broke. The world makes you stupid because you have to do stupid things to survive.
jftitan 3 points 2h ago
Invader Zim. Netflix made a sequel episode that I think nailed the point of what human slavery would be like.
"To enslave the humans, all I had to do was... CHARGE THEM FOR IT!" AAAA HAHAHAHHAA HAHAHHAHA.
you are not wrong.
"To enslave the humans, all I had to do was... CHARGE THEM FOR IT!" AAAA HAHAHAHHAA HAHAHHAHA.
you are not wrong.
(additional comments not archived)
JillSandwich117 123 points 4h ago
This sort of happens with video games now. The main difference being that it's obviously a digital model, and they get paid much better than this $200 nonsense.
While a character like Lara Croft is an original design, Kojima has mostly switched to digitized people. Probably the one hit with the most hardcore porn was model Stefanie Joosten from MGSV, but Death Stranding is full of moderate to highly famous actors who have had plenty, like Margaret Qualley or Léa Seydoux.
Hell, like a decade ago Elliot Page looked into suing but didn't follow through. Quantic Dream had given his character a nude model for a shower scene that couldn't be seen in normal gameplay, but modders could move the camera and see it.
It's very easy to rip character models if they're accessible to consumers. I don't think that exactly would be an issue with Hollywood but I'm sure eventually some actors scans would get out and be used by whoever as long as the tech is available.
While a character like Lara Croft is an original design, Kojima has mostly switched to digitized people. Probably the one hit with the most hardcore porn was model Stefanie Joosten from MGSV, but Death Stranding is full of moderate to highly famous actors who have had plenty, like Margaret Qualley or Léa Seydoux.
Hell, like a decade ago Elliot Page looked into suing but didn't follow through. Quantic Dream had given his character a nude model for a shower scene that couldn't be seen in normal gameplay, but modders could move the camera and see it.
It's very easy to rip character models if they're accessible to consumers. I don't think that exactly would be an issue with Hollywood but I'm sure eventually some actors scans would get out and be used by whoever as long as the tech is available.
42Pockets 80 points 3h ago
NCAA video games. They used the likeness of college athletes and didn't share the money.
PedanticBoutBaseball 29 points 3h ago
to be fair that's not EXACTLY the same issue, while still being unethical. They didnt literally do a face scan of Johnny Manziel and all the other athletes and put them in the game.
EA just made VERY generic models using the in-game engine, but gave the models the same height, weight, ethnicity, school, graduating class, team number, and hometown WITHOUT using their actual name which was the crux of their defense. They LOST that defense, but it's at least plausible, if unethical, logic.
i.e. "Johnny Manziel" in NCAA 14 is Texas A&M "QB #2" who also a redshirt sophmore from plano,tx or whatever.
The Elliot page thing is a bit different in that the game was marketed specifically to be a authentic digital representation of them. they did not allow the devs to scan them nude nor give the devs permission to include a nude version of them in the game. and while the model was "needed" for a shower cut scene there probably could have been more care or work done so that a fully nude model wasnt necessary or something. especially when the nude model you make can probably be highly accurate given that they presumably have full body scans of elliot in some sort of skin-tight suit, at which point you really just need some skin textures to make them.
EA just made VERY generic models using the in-game engine, but gave the models the same height, weight, ethnicity, school, graduating class, team number, and hometown WITHOUT using their actual name which was the crux of their defense. They LOST that defense, but it's at least plausible, if unethical, logic.
i.e. "Johnny Manziel" in NCAA 14 is Texas A&M "QB #2" who also a redshirt sophmore from plano,tx or whatever.
The Elliot page thing is a bit different in that the game was marketed specifically to be a authentic digital representation of them. they did not allow the devs to scan them nude nor give the devs permission to include a nude version of them in the game. and while the model was "needed" for a shower cut scene there probably could have been more care or work done so that a fully nude model wasnt necessary or something. especially when the nude model you make can probably be highly accurate given that they presumably have full body scans of elliot in some sort of skin-tight suit, at which point you really just need some skin textures to make them.
(additional comments not archived)
gingerfawx 14 points 3h ago
If we're talking about illegal / non-contractual use, though, will they even need scans in the future for that? At some point the software is going to be good enough to calculate it based of footage you have available (whether they've got the rights to it or not).
(additional comments not archived)
Randomperson3029 13 points 3h ago
What would be the point of making a full nude model if its not intended to be seen? Like is there a good reason for them doing that?
the_other_irrevenant 13 points 3h ago
I went and watched the scenes on YouTube.
The model is seen blurred out at one point. Presumably it avoids weirdnesses in the blurring if the underlying model is as accurate as possible.
But the main reason is presumably that they don't know when they make the model exactly what angles they'll need to shoot it from so it's easier to include everything and cut what they need to later.
The model is seen blurred out at one point. Presumably it avoids weirdnesses in the blurring if the underlying model is as accurate as possible.
But the main reason is presumably that they don't know when they make the model exactly what angles they'll need to shoot it from so it's easier to include everything and cut what they need to later.
JillSandwich117 9 points 2h ago
It happens in some games. Final Fantasy XIII and Horizon Forbidden West had at least fully modeled boobs that I think were intended to be used to make sure their fantasy armors covered "realistically". Could be the same deal for this but they're basically behind a towel for the scene in Beyond Two Souls and don't really get close to showing anything.
For what it's worth the guy in charge of Quantic Dream is a known scumbag in the industry.
For what it's worth the guy in charge of Quantic Dream is a known scumbag in the industry.
Xerte 4 points 2h ago
Realism. Clothes are modeled directly onto the nude model, so that they can be designed to look natural over the genitals/nipples. It also helps find and avoid camera angles where things would be visible that should be kept unseen.
Unfortunately cases slip through where developers forget or don't care to clean up the base models before launch - the physics of a model can be left intact while removing the nsfw visuals.
Unfortunately cases slip through where developers forget or don't care to clean up the base models before launch - the physics of a model can be left intact while removing the nsfw visuals.
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
starcube 224 points 4h ago
Watch the new Black Mirror episode with Annie Murphy and Salma Hayek. That's all I'm gonna say.
JustAnotherAlgo 36 points 3h ago
It's called "Joan is Awful".
I thought this episode was deep on several levels.
How the "Netflix" executive said that they have to show a villanized version of Joan because that creates more engagement implying that people aren't interested in watching a "good" version of you.
I thought this episode was deep on several levels.
How the "Netflix" executive said that they have to show a villanized version of Joan because that creates more engagement implying that people aren't interested in watching a "good" version of you.
DiggSucksNow 7 points 2h ago
I am in an industry that tries to improve "engagement" and it is being stretched thin to include time users spent fighting a shitty UI because they can't find anything.
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
starstarstar42 69 points 4h ago
Re-reading the previous comment and then yours has *significantly* motivated me to watch that episode.
number384759 25 points 2h ago
It is the first episode of the sixth season and is called "Joan is Awful".
I just watched a it a few weeks ago and this headline now feels very weird how fast this fiction becomes a possibilty.
And btw if you think the worst thing an AI can do is put you in a porn, watch the episode and you realize there is much worst things.
Because in theory for 200$ the Studios would not only have an AI replica of you but also **your consent** for anything beyond imagination.
I just watched a it a few weeks ago and this headline now feels very weird how fast this fiction becomes a possibilty.
And btw if you think the worst thing an AI can do is put you in a porn, watch the episode and you realize there is much worst things.
Because in theory for 200$ the Studios would not only have an AI replica of you but also **your consent** for anything beyond imagination.
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
donbee28 13 points 4h ago
Salma Fucking Hayek
DinoKebab 21 points 4h ago
Is that the new Black Mirror episode with Annie Murphy.
I_am_a_fern 20 points 4h ago
Also Kate Blanchet, somehow.
(additional comments not archived)
starcube 10 points 4h ago
Yes and also Salma Hayek.
(additional comments not archived)
cd6020 8 points 3h ago
Quant-puta lol
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
ASuarezMascareno 55 points 4h ago
Imagine getting paid $200 and the next thing is that you are out of work forever because your industry doesn't need you anymore. Unintended consequences are not the big issue here. The intended consequences are kicking tons of people out of the industry and pay them peanuts.
US_Condor 14 points 3h ago
A friend of mine was an extra in a large big budget superhero film. Most of the extras were like him, not professional actors. He was just thrilled to maybe get some screen time, possibly meet the main actors, and get fed. They got paid very little.
(additional comments not archived)
garlicroastedpotato 9 points 2h ago
You don't understand the main concern of SAG. Extras aren't typically well trained actors. It's either people just starting in acting or.... regular people pulled off the street.
If I'm down on my luck and the studio says $200 for a day, we scan in your face and we use you in movies. I'm going to take that... as will a lot of people. If you're in a movie studio town (like Hollywood) you could even sell your likeness to a whole bunch of studios (since they can't patent your face).
In most movies these days extras are less than just background. But in scenes where you can see faces it's kinda already happening. Movies will take just a hand full of extras and through CGI editing copy and paste their flat images into a scene. In $1 they grew the size of a crowd by 10x by adding just 8 re-usable extras.
Having a "catalogue of faces" to do this with means people scanned it can be used like stock footage.
If I'm down on my luck and the studio says $200 for a day, we scan in your face and we use you in movies. I'm going to take that... as will a lot of people. If you're in a movie studio town (like Hollywood) you could even sell your likeness to a whole bunch of studios (since they can't patent your face).
In most movies these days extras are less than just background. But in scenes where you can see faces it's kinda already happening. Movies will take just a hand full of extras and through CGI editing copy and paste their flat images into a scene. In $1 they grew the size of a crowd by 10x by adding just 8 re-usable extras.
Having a "catalogue of faces" to do this with means people scanned it can be used like stock footage.
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
FallenFromTheLadder 25 points 4h ago
Problem is you could never see the videos you've been put into. While it won't affect your reputation it will absolutely squeeze money put of you without giving you a fair share.
(additional comments not archived)
VhlainDaVanci 17 points 4h ago
AI got not peaked yet and got abused already.
dcsworkaccount 10 points 3h ago
We don't have to worry about AI becoming self aware and destroying us. Humans will use it to do that long before that.
(additional comments not archived)
TenMoogles 7 points 3h ago
One of the new Black Mirror episodes is literally this. Salma Hayek sells her likeness to be used as AI and they make a show based on someone else's life and it makes Salma look insane since her likeness is associated with the acts. Trippy episode, as usual.
Schapsouille 6 points 2h ago
"up to and including and beyond defecation"
(additional comments not archived)
Fit_Earth_339 1633 points 5h ago
If you replace every worker with AI, who do you think will have money to buy your product?
Woffingshire 1407 points 5h ago
The people in business power seem to be getting increasingly dumb with their greediness.
In times gone by Henry Ford was one of the pioneers of the 5 day work week as opposed to the 6 day one (where shops were closed on the 7th) because he realised that his business would be more successful if people had both the money and time to go and buy his products.
Business leaders these days don't seem to quite grasp that. They think that they key to making money is either to replace peoples jobs with AI so people don't have the money to spend on their things, or keep people in the office as long as possible so they don't have the time to.
In times gone by Henry Ford was one of the pioneers of the 5 day work week as opposed to the 6 day one (where shops were closed on the 7th) because he realised that his business would be more successful if people had both the money and time to go and buy his products.
Business leaders these days don't seem to quite grasp that. They think that they key to making money is either to replace peoples jobs with AI so people don't have the money to spend on their things, or keep people in the office as long as possible so they don't have the time to.
Early-Ad277 1114 points 5h ago
It's because all of their incentives are based on short term profits.
Thats the problem with the "shareholder" ownership model. Everyone only cares about the next quarter and if things go bad, they just dump their stock and move the money somewhere else.
Executives Don't get bonuses for building infrastructure that will benefit the company in ten years when someone else is in their position.
Thats the problem with the "shareholder" ownership model. Everyone only cares about the next quarter and if things go bad, they just dump their stock and move the money somewhere else.
Executives Don't get bonuses for building infrastructure that will benefit the company in ten years when someone else is in their position.
Swimoach 292 points 5h ago
This exactly. I’d add to that the lack of fear of the business going belly up as well. Most these CEOs have “fail safes” built into their contract so if things go south they can still get out with a nice pay day. If you knew no matter what you where going to still get $50mil even if the company you where running went bankrupt would you care much about the future? Or would you want to make as much as you could as quickly as possible.
7screws 277 points 4h ago
Yeah my company’s stock has dropped 47% since the current CEO took over. That fuck gets 4mil a year and over a million in bonuses every year. If the P&L I manage dropped by 47% I’d be fired with no compensation. The 1% don’t even live in the same world.
kent_eh 24 points 4h ago
>Most these CEOs have “fail safes” built into their contract so if things go south they can still get out with a nice pay day. If you knew no matter what you where going to still get $50mil even if the company you where running went bankrupt would you care much about the future?
Former CEO is a very lucrative job title.
Former CEO is a very lucrative job title.
(additional comments not archived)
doctormoneypuppy 43 points 4h ago
Thanks, Jack Welch, you asshole
(additional comments not archived)
horkley 32 points 4h ago
The Dinosaurs sitcom covers this while they are facing extinction.
The dark clouds instead cause global cooling, in the form of a gigantic cloud cover that scientists, the viewer learns, estimate would take "tens of thousands of years" to dissipate. When he gets a call from Earl, B.P. Richfield dismisses this as a "4th quarter problem" and states that Wesayso is currently making record-breaking profits from the cold weather selling blankets, heaters, and hot cocoa mix as the result of the "cold snap".
The dark clouds instead cause global cooling, in the form of a gigantic cloud cover that scientists, the viewer learns, estimate would take "tens of thousands of years" to dissipate. When he gets a call from Earl, B.P. Richfield dismisses this as a "4th quarter problem" and states that Wesayso is currently making record-breaking profits from the cold weather selling blankets, heaters, and hot cocoa mix as the result of the "cold snap".
Accurate_Koala_4698 10 points 3h ago
Honestly never watched the show because the only thing worse than the baby were people who quoted the baby, but that’s a lot smarter and more subversive than I would have expected for sure
eek04 61 points 4h ago
The problem is that executives get to sell stock in the short term. I think the right solution is to either prohibit executive compensation in stock, or require that they can only sell the stock at least 10 years after they leave as executive.
zotha 50 points 4h ago
The company stock I get as part of my incentives as a regular pleb can't be touched for 2 years. The executive suite has zero limitation on when stock compensation can be liquidated.
(additional comments not archived)
Dont_Be_A_Dick_OK 26 points 4h ago
> Executives Don't get bonuses for building infrastructure that will benefit the company in ten years when someone else is in their position.
When people wonder why things for the working class are shitting the bed, they need to read this sentence several times.
When people wonder why things for the working class are shitting the bed, they need to read this sentence several times.
cretecreep 13 points 4h ago
'Shareholder primacy' has been taken to it's logical extreme where the **only** thing that matters is that the line went up last quarter, and some companies have adopted the same mindset as a desperate junkie to reflect that.
Incarnate_666 10 points 3h ago
Ohhh i've seen this too often, we get a new ceo ever 5 odd years, then there is a new 'vision' for the company. At which point most of the majority of the company wide projects are either cancelled or have their funding reduced to the bare minimum to get what ever they are doing finished even if half of requirements aren't started yet, leaving departments trying to find solutions. The new ceo will spew a bunch of buzz words that have been making the rounds in the corporate world and convince the major shareholders this is the next big thing and start a new batch of projects that will never get finished properly.
Add to this that the previous CEO had the company structured completely wrong and the need to reorganise from the ground up. So everyone is now worried about losing their jobs again.
5 years later the CEO is 0.5% below profit expectations so they give him a golden handshake, get a new ceo and the cycle starts again.
I hate Western corporate mentality.
Sorry for the rant
Add to this that the previous CEO had the company structured completely wrong and the need to reorganise from the ground up. So everyone is now worried about losing their jobs again.
5 years later the CEO is 0.5% below profit expectations so they give him a golden handshake, get a new ceo and the cycle starts again.
I hate Western corporate mentality.
Sorry for the rant
jonr 5 points 4h ago
> It's because all of their incentives are based on short term profits.
Yeah, those quarterly reports gotta look good!
Yeah, those quarterly reports gotta look good!
NicksNewNose 6 points 3h ago
I work for a fortune 50. Place is so poorly run it’s insane. Nothing is integrated because that shit is expensive and executives don’t want to spend their current budget on improvements that won’t matter to them because they won’t be there in 5 years. They’d rather just hire an extra 2 people and ignore it.
Stupid_Triangles 9 points 4h ago
Making buying stocks a monthly/quarterly event. If there's a possibility of someone trying to game a system to squeeze out .01USD for 500k shares to make $5k in an afternoon, they will. Especially when the disincentive is absolutely nothing, despite the consequences having destabilizing effects on a potentially large number of people.
These assholes prefer big highs and deep lows. Deep lows mean government bailouts and putting losses on future taxes owed, while big highs get captured by shareholders.
These assholes prefer big highs and deep lows. Deep lows mean government bailouts and putting losses on future taxes owed, while big highs get captured by shareholders.
(additional comments not archived)
JinDenver 65 points 4h ago
Unions pioneered the 5 day work week. Henry Ford was just smart enough to listen.
wewlad11 54 points 4h ago
Yeah, this makes it sound like the 5-day workweek was just another genius capitalist innovation when really it was working people who struggled, and in some cases died for, the right to have a day off.
Talk about rewriting history!
Talk about rewriting history!
(additional comments not archived)
firemage22 23 points 4h ago
funny you should speak of Ford, after reading the main comment here i remembered a story about Henry Ford II (grandson of the og Ford) talking with Walther Ruther (head of the UAW)
Hank - (pointing at early industrial robots) One day we won't need workers to build cars
Ruther - But who will buy them.
The problem is with the MBAization of our econ, increase in "value", well stock price is often detached from the profit or real productivity of a company as seen in upstart Ford rival Tesla.
We even have the not new issue that it can be more profitable to break your company than to just make money the normal way as seen with Borders and Sears.
Hank - (pointing at early industrial robots) One day we won't need workers to build cars
Ruther - But who will buy them.
The problem is with the MBAization of our econ, increase in "value", well stock price is often detached from the profit or real productivity of a company as seen in upstart Ford rival Tesla.
We even have the not new issue that it can be more profitable to break your company than to just make money the normal way as seen with Borders and Sears.
BaronVonBearenstein 10 points 3h ago
Everyone getting an MBA and trying to extract the most amount of "value" out of a product or a service is becoming the norm and it is killing businesses in the long term.
I have been part of a few companies now that have traded their long term success for a short term win and have seen the effects. One place I worked at went from a 30-40 people operation making \~$35M a year revenue to 100 people making over $100M in revenue but they had no plans on how to scale and they sold out their long term, quality products for cheap garbage thinking they'll make a lot of money in the short term. Literally killed the brand and they have laid everyone off or the employees left. Their down to like maybe 20 people now (I've long moved on)
I have been part of a few companies now that have traded their long term success for a short term win and have seen the effects. One place I worked at went from a 30-40 people operation making \~$35M a year revenue to 100 people making over $100M in revenue but they had no plans on how to scale and they sold out their long term, quality products for cheap garbage thinking they'll make a lot of money in the short term. Literally killed the brand and they have laid everyone off or the employees left. Their down to like maybe 20 people now (I've long moved on)
(additional comments not archived)
kent_eh 7 points 4h ago
> Hank - (pointing at early industrial robots) One day we won't need workers to build cars
>
> Ruther - But who will buy them.
The elder Ford understood that.
For his many faults, he did realize he had to pay his workers enough to buy one of the cars they were building.
>
> Ruther - But who will buy them.
The elder Ford understood that.
For his many faults, he did realize he had to pay his workers enough to buy one of the cars they were building.
BuddhaFacepalmed 6 points 3h ago
> For his many faults, he did realize he had to pay his workers enough to buy one of the cars they were building.
And even then he pick and chose who could get paid the big bucks. If you were men, you had to be married with kids, a wife who didn't work, and no alcohol even during off-hours. If you were women, you had to be single but still support their family. And he enforced all of that by having the Ford Socialization Organization. This was a committee that would visit the employees’ homes to ensure that they were doing things the “American way.”
Ford was a fucking Nazi so thorough he got the highest Nazi award they could give to a non-Aryan citizen.
And even then he pick and chose who could get paid the big bucks. If you were men, you had to be married with kids, a wife who didn't work, and no alcohol even during off-hours. If you were women, you had to be single but still support their family. And he enforced all of that by having the Ford Socialization Organization. This was a committee that would visit the employees’ homes to ensure that they were doing things the “American way.”
Ford was a fucking Nazi so thorough he got the highest Nazi award they could give to a non-Aryan citizen.
firemage22 4 points 3h ago
I live in the shadow of the Glass House (Ford world HQ) and having a history degree and being from the area i've studied Henry Ford a lot.
I've written major papers on the guy, and he's alot more complex than people give him credit for.
I've written major papers on the guy, and he's alot more complex than people give him credit for.
(additional comments not archived)
nonzeroanswer 84 points 5h ago
I don't know anything about the situations but my guess is that Henry Ford could think long term because his shareholders weren't watching his stock price at nanosecond increments with "expert" analysis being widely available.
And obligatory, Henry Ford was a massive piece of shit even for his time. Most know he liked Nazis and Nazis liked him but he's also the reason why many schools teach line dancing.
>To understand how square dancing became a state-mandated means of celebrating Americana, it’s necessary to go back to Henry Ford… Ford hated jazz; he hated the Charleston. He also really hated Jewish people, and believed that Jewish people invented jazz as part of a nefarious plot to corrupt the masses and take over the world—a theory that might come as a surprise to the black people who actually did invent it.
https://chicago.suntimes.com/2017/12/22/18340507/steinberg-henry-ford-america-s-hateful-square-dance-instructor
Edit:I forgot the best part. As with most racists, Ford was ignorant of history
>Perhaps ironically, given Ford’s intent to squash the influence of black music, America’s square dancing tradition—like nearly everything else—was in fact built by black people. While European dance traditions like the French quadrille certainly informed the evolution of square dancing, the addition of the call-and-response form of calling out dance moves initially started with the black slaves, who were required to perform at white dance balls in order to reproduce the steps themselves without formal dance training.
https://qz.com/1153516/americas-wholesome-square-dancing-tradition-is-a-tool-of-white-supremacy
And obligatory, Henry Ford was a massive piece of shit even for his time. Most know he liked Nazis and Nazis liked him but he's also the reason why many schools teach line dancing.
>To understand how square dancing became a state-mandated means of celebrating Americana, it’s necessary to go back to Henry Ford… Ford hated jazz; he hated the Charleston. He also really hated Jewish people, and believed that Jewish people invented jazz as part of a nefarious plot to corrupt the masses and take over the world—a theory that might come as a surprise to the black people who actually did invent it.
https://chicago.suntimes.com/2017/12/22/18340507/steinberg-henry-ford-america-s-hateful-square-dance-instructor
Edit:I forgot the best part. As with most racists, Ford was ignorant of history
>Perhaps ironically, given Ford’s intent to squash the influence of black music, America’s square dancing tradition—like nearly everything else—was in fact built by black people. While European dance traditions like the French quadrille certainly informed the evolution of square dancing, the addition of the call-and-response form of calling out dance moves initially started with the black slaves, who were required to perform at white dance balls in order to reproduce the steps themselves without formal dance training.
https://qz.com/1153516/americas-wholesome-square-dancing-tradition-is-a-tool-of-white-supremacy
DixieHail 12 points 3h ago
I’m confused how this has literally anything to do with the subject at hand but thanks for the info I guess
RandomShit8211 13 points 3h ago
Redditors all have their pet issues that they bring up any chance they get. I’ve been on Reddit for far too long and you basically “learn” the same things every week in a comment section and half of it is false.
(additional comments not archived)
Wishing4Signal 6 points 4h ago
You should post this in the TIL sub
nonzeroanswer 20 points 4h ago
I didn't learn it today.
(additional comments not archived)
Avestrial 35 points 4h ago
I think they’re keeping people in the office purely because they own the office real estate and if everyone works from home something currently hugely valuable plummets to no value.
It’s evil.
The carbon footprint of all of this commuter traffic could easily be halved. Human happiness could be doubled. But, hey, property values.
It’s evil.
The carbon footprint of all of this commuter traffic could easily be halved. Human happiness could be doubled. But, hey, property values.
ReadyThor 11 points 3h ago
A billionaire $1 because he is afraid that with a lot of people out of work and with nothing to keep them occupied they will come for him and others like him.
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
Zebidee 8 points 3h ago
This is like what happened to fishermen after Brexit.
They voted "leave" because they wanted a bigger slice of the fishing grounds.
They forgot the part where they sold their catch in France.
They caught more fish, that then rotted in their holds because it turns out the selling is as important as the catching.
They voted "leave" because they wanted a bigger slice of the fishing grounds.
They forgot the part where they sold their catch in France.
They caught more fish, that then rotted in their holds because it turns out the selling is as important as the catching.
Jojoangel684 19 points 4h ago
The higher ups in the business world saw a red crab in blue business attire say "I like money" on a cartoon their kid was watching on TV and decided to reconstruct their business practices through the words of the crab.
tunaman9000 16 points 4h ago
Higher ups are probably older than that, they were more likely inspired by a duck swimming in gold coins.
Ellamenohpea 4 points 4h ago
you're naieve if you think that this has only been happening for the 20years that spongebob has been around.
(additional comments not archived)
AltairsBlade 5 points 5h ago
Swine at the trough.
(additional comments not archived)
Otherwise-Olive-4771 113 points 5h ago
The people making these decisions dont care. They just want to raise profits for one quarter, collect a fat bonus and quit/sell the company/go public and then sell their share or whatever. They personally want to make money in the short term and dont care if it wrecks the company long term
Achillor22 24 points 3h ago
Exactly. If the company goes under the CEO will just get a $20 million bonus, get fired, and get hired the next day at a new company with a huge multi million dollar sign on bonus.
The stock market has ruined the American economy because all anyone cares about is this quarters profits and stock price.
The stock market has ruined the American economy because all anyone cares about is this quarters profits and stock price.
(additional comments not archived)
7screws 36 points 4h ago
They don’t care. Just like the environment, it’s a problem for the next generation. As long as they get their third beach house they don’t care
Scalage89 79 points 5h ago
That's the self destructive nature of capitalism. The race to the bottom it its own demise.
FirstRedditAcount 29 points 4h ago
It trends towards feudalism. It works for a bit but it's not stable, income inequality accelerates, it does not remain constant. Einstein literally predicted this.
conquer69 10 points 3h ago
Feudalism requires laborers. Where we are going, the nobles don't need the peasant class.
Once they have reliable robots capable of doing 90% of the tasks, they could easily genocide 90% of the population and their own quality of life wouldn't be affected at all.
Once they have reliable robots capable of doing 90% of the tasks, they could easily genocide 90% of the population and their own quality of life wouldn't be affected at all.
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
Redpin 6 points 4h ago
I think stuff is gonna get really weird when someone gives an AI a bank account, and that AI buys 51% of a company, pays itself a salary, and pumps its own money into hostile acquisitions.
We tacticly accept the Musks or Bezos' of the world becoming billionaires while depressing the wages of the largest and hardest working segment of their employees, celebrate them, even. What if there's no aspirational billionaire at the top?
We tacticly accept the Musks or Bezos' of the world becoming billionaires while depressing the wages of the largest and hardest working segment of their employees, celebrate them, even. What if there's no aspirational billionaire at the top?
(additional comments not archived)
Avestrial 21 points 4h ago
If the answer to the problem of wealth and economies were “jobs” we’d benefit from, like, getting rid of massive digging machines and giving a thousand men small spades.
The problem here isn’t the elimination of jobs. Probably AI is going to necessitate some kind of UBI eventually.
The problem here is the right to someone’s image for public use in perpetuity for a measly sum. As someone who’s done some extra work that’s pretty disturbing. A lot of people who worked on those extra lots were in the middle of temporary hard times. You need to be free allll day for very low wages and the promise of a meal. Imagine going through that and then 20 years later having made something of yourself and you still keep spotting young you in airport scenes and whatnot and you get nothing for it. No thanks.
The problem here isn’t the elimination of jobs. Probably AI is going to necessitate some kind of UBI eventually.
The problem here is the right to someone’s image for public use in perpetuity for a measly sum. As someone who’s done some extra work that’s pretty disturbing. A lot of people who worked on those extra lots were in the middle of temporary hard times. You need to be free allll day for very low wages and the promise of a meal. Imagine going through that and then 20 years later having made something of yourself and you still keep spotting young you in airport scenes and whatnot and you get nothing for it. No thanks.
(additional comments not archived)
FlowBot3D 16 points 4h ago
There seems to be an increasing trend towards very short term profits at the cost of long term sustainability. Either the elite know it’s all about to crash down around them due to economic collapse and they are trying to stockpile as much cash as possible, or they know something is about to get announced (UAP disclosure?) that could destabilize the economy completely, and are working towards cashing out and getting yachts to go hide and watch the world burn.
Fit_Earth_339 17 points 4h ago
The short term outlook is being dictated by the stock markets, which only care about what have you done lately to make the stock price go up.
(additional comments not archived)
worotan 10 points 4h ago
> due to economic collapse
Blows my mind that people ignore the locked-in effects of climate change. Are you really that greenwashed?
They’re throwing an end of the world party.
Blows my mind that people ignore the locked-in effects of climate change. Are you really that greenwashed?
They’re throwing an end of the world party.
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
gold_rush_doom 2 points 5h ago
Well, actually that's an excellent idea. Let them spend money producing stuff nobody can buy. Or in other words, let them lose all their money.
webs2slow4me 10 points 5h ago
Every worker? Obviously we need UBi at that point, but we are a very long way from that.
InterPunct 7 points 4h ago
The same thing that happened with water mills, the cotton gin, steam power, automobiles, computers, etc. The technology will be leveraged by workers.
In this case it's negotiating equitable IP rights and capital distribution to workers and producers.
In this case it's negotiating equitable IP rights and capital distribution to workers and producers.
(additional comments not archived)
Head_Haunter 3 points 4h ago
They dont care about 5 years from now when everyone is poor and homeless. They want all our money **now**.
Warod0 3 points 4h ago
That's a problem for future generations and other businesses. For the first 5-20 years, where they will be one of the only ones who do it, they will make bank.
This is the thought process. The same "fuck you got mine" that is everywhere.
This is the thought process. The same "fuck you got mine" that is everywhere.
(additional comments not archived)
LincHayes 325 points 6h ago
Fran Drescher's statement kicked ass. I love her all over again.
chingy1337 119 points 4h ago
It was pretty incredible. She did a good job of framing the problem with relation to other industries. The Nanny has turned into The Asskicker.
procrastinagging 43 points 3h ago
tbf Fran Fine already kicked ass
Lexi_Banner 13 points 1h ago
I rewatched the series not long ago, and she really did kick ass. Yes, there are a lot of jokes about her voice and mannerisms, but she was such a *positive* influence on the kids in that house. And not just the girls, or in fluffy feel-good stuff. Genuine things, like teaching the kids to accept themselves as they are, helping them find ways to remember their mother (who had passed away, to anyone not in the know), how to express themselves, and showed her boss (and eventual husband) how to be a better parent and person. There were a few hiccups, sure, but it was surprisingly awesome, considering the generation.
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
FenwayFranks 56 points 4h ago
What a 24 hours for her, I thought she was going to be crucified Wednesday.
LincHayes 110 points 4h ago
When she said "We are labor!" I was like "Fuck yeah!". She made the point very clear that this can and will happen to everyone if the buck doesn't stop right here. They're already setting up for it.
I've never felt I had anything in common with "Hollywood" and their issues don't affect me, and "fuck 'em, they make a lot of money." .
But I do now and agree, people need to take a stand right now.
Dave Chappelle and Prince tried to warn us.
I've never felt I had anything in common with "Hollywood" and their issues don't affect me, and "fuck 'em, they make a lot of money." .
But I do now and agree, people need to take a stand right now.
Dave Chappelle and Prince tried to warn us.
eeviltwin 93 points 4h ago
The vast majority of people working in Hollywood do NOT make a lot of money.
LincHayes 25 points 4h ago
Of course. I'm talking about the perception. The only people we see are the successful ones. You don't see a lot of extras on Jimmy Kimmel talking about their background, crowd work and how they were paid $200 for an 18-hour day,
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
butyourenice 7 points 3h ago
I couldn’t get the sound to play on the video posted to some subreddit yesterday - is it up on YouTube somewhere?
evilada 19 points 3h ago
https://youtu.be/J4SAPOX7R5M
Passion724 4 points 2h ago
Holy shit that was amazing
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
7screws 48 points 4h ago
It’s just like every other publicly traded company. Whatever profit is being made is not enough.
(additional comments not archived)
Kalepsis 374 points 5h ago
$200???
Um... if you want to buy the rights to reproduce my likeness and voice in perpetuity, then the amount you pay should be enough to compensate me in perpetuity. If my likeness and voice are doing work on my behalf, I should never need to physically work again.
I'll sell those rights for $20M.
Um... if you want to buy the rights to reproduce my likeness and voice in perpetuity, then the amount you pay should be enough to compensate me in perpetuity. If my likeness and voice are doing work on my behalf, I should never need to physically work again.
I'll sell those rights for $20M.
JimK215 170 points 5h ago
they ultimately won't need real people though, so I feel like this is just a stepping stone to something worse and possibly inevitable.
$1
$1
spin81 51 points 4h ago
Did you mean https://thispersondoesnotexist.com/
(additional comments not archived)
Baykey123 65 points 4h ago
This. They will make up fake AI generated people
(additional comments not archived)
NeilDegrassedHighSon 12 points 4h ago
Great. Best worse case scenario for everyone is that we Marie Antoinette those with control over the means of production, after they've frozen enough of us out of the fruits of capitalism by replacing us with non-person AI laborers.
Fucking can't wait, bring it on
Fucking can't wait, bring it on
jamesbiff 10 points 3h ago
And, ultimately, that will be the only way to disuade them from this hubris. All these anti-ai movements are so fucking shortsighted because they are just attacking a symptom, not the root cause; the people in charge. They have enough money to simply move onto a new technology if AI is killed in the crib.
If you want change, some capitalists are going to need to get crushed.
If you want change, some capitalists are going to need to get crushed.
(additional comments not archived)
DujonMustard 13 points 3h ago
They wouldn't be buying your voice if your an extra, that's the whole point of an extra.
(additional comments not archived)
maraca101 6 points 3h ago
They don’t care about specifically you enough. They can find someone else very similar who would do it for significantly less.
AllLimes 3 points 3h ago
Eight billion people on the planet. Not all suitable of course, but ultimately you would not have an issue finding broke people that would take such an easy payout.
(additional comments not archived)
thissomeotherplace 115 points 5h ago
The very definition of exploitation
(additional comments not archived)
LincHayes 73 points 4h ago
This is the same shit Dave Chappelle fought against, as well as Prince. All that "in perpetuity forever" bullshit where they reserve the right to keep selling your likeness and performance for as long as they want, and keep all the money for themselves.
MaybeICantFly 125 points 5h ago
What if we just stopped paying for films and cancel our subscriptions? 🏴☠️ It would terrify them if consumers joined the strike.
Gas_Bat 79 points 4h ago
It’s taken til now for Phoenix to finally say no more grass lawns in the middle of the desert. Unfortunately the critical mass of people insists on being pushed to the edge of catastrophe before it behaves sensibly. We should have been wielding mass strikes decades if not centuries ago. Maybe there’s an outside chance we figure out how to wield the power we have and do go on mass strike and bring the greedy and the fascists to their knees.
ZincMan 10 points 1h ago
We had strikes a century ago. We lost considerable grounds for unionized labor in this country in the last 100 years. SAG is 90 years old this year.
(additional comments not archived)
matt95110 7 points 4h ago
Might as well. I pay for those services to watch new content, I’m not going to pay to rewatch crap I’ve already seen.
worotan 20 points 4h ago
That’s why there’s so much hype about how boycotts don’t work, and engagement is the only way to change someone you don’t agree with.
It’s absolute nonsense, but people seem convinced because they trust that the trickle down lifestyle benefits will always flow down to them. So long as they get to show off and don’t need to do anything serious, they don’t need to think about the future and the obvious way their behaviour is leading.
Give people a few superhero franchises and use pr pander to their inferiority complexes, and they act like they own society and no one’s going to take their power away from them. As they dig their own graves.
It’s absolute nonsense, but people seem convinced because they trust that the trickle down lifestyle benefits will always flow down to them. So long as they get to show off and don’t need to do anything serious, they don’t need to think about the future and the obvious way their behaviour is leading.
Give people a few superhero franchises and use pr pander to their inferiority complexes, and they act like they own society and no one’s going to take their power away from them. As they dig their own graves.
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
Dedsnotdead 86 points 6h ago
I’ve always enjoyed trying to spot the bloopers that extras are involved in, particularly the fight scenes.
All that and the many other idiosyncrasies that having real people on set creates will slowly disappear.
All that and the many other idiosyncrasies that having real people on set creates will slowly disappear.
dgdio 62 points 6h ago
Before too long there won't even be real actors, the studios will want AI generated actors. It'll be like Clonewars only more realistic.
TheMasalaKnight 32 points 5h ago
Have you watched the Black Mirror ep “Joan in Awful?” ;)
starcube 14 points 4h ago
>Joan *is* Awful
But your typo is actually appropriate...
But your typo is actually appropriate...
(additional comments not archived)
cartsucks 7 points 4h ago
To be fair Joan was a pretty awful person in her real life
(additional comments not archived)
tastygrowth 7 points 4h ago
I watched a Netflix original kids movie with my daughter a few nights ago and the whole thing seems like it was created with AI. The story, the dialog, the animations. She liked it, but it stunk really.
the_harakiwi 5 points 4h ago
So just replacing the floating head in a green suit.
(additional comments not archived)
Jessepiano 4 points 3h ago
On the bright side, you’ll have video game style glitches. People’s arms clipping through furniture etc
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
subtilitytomcat 45 points 4h ago
Joan is Awful
(additional comments not archived)
DoomedKiblets 13 points 3h ago
Holy shit this is problematic
WrongEinstein 39 points 5h ago
The Wilhelm extra.
(additional comments not archived)
elfthehunter 13 points 4h ago
I mean, if you're going to go mask-off exploitation, why not just use AI to generate background characters from scratch? Is it just necause of the current technological limitation? Soon they won't have to deal with pesky humans and personal rights.
(additional comments not archived)
annndaction12 24 points 5h ago
Pure sociopathy
Rickety_Crickel 87 points 6h ago
Behold the innovations of capitalism
(additional comments not archived)
techguyone 29 points 5h ago
Wait until they start making A list movie stars from AI, they'll save a fortune in fees and % of takings etc.
Baykey123 23 points 4h ago
This is what’s coming next
Fully AI generated actors
Fully AI generated actors
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
Kablaow 29 points 4h ago
Almost black mirror
jaam01 8 points 2h ago
ALMOST!? They already have an episode about generated artists, it's the one with Miley Cyrus.
smoq_nyc 13 points 1h ago
The new one with Salma Hayek is even closer to the real life.
(additional comments not archived)
L0ST-SP4CE 19 points 3h ago
Everything nowadays is turning into a subscription cost where you can’t make a single purchase to own a thing, but these corporations want paying us to only be a single cost rather than continual pay.
(additional comments not archived)
Mondored 37 points 5h ago
I don't really understand why the studios are fighting this battle. For background extras, AI-generated faces will work just as well as real faces scanned in for a day, surely? I mean, it's still scary and a shitty move (not to mention self-defeating: you don't keep a vibrant cultural scene by cutting off opportunities for young and unloved talent to make a few bucks when they're "resting"...). But they seem to have picked this fight...
ethertrace 45 points 4h ago
The ultimate point isn't to use these people's likenesses *for* background or extras. It's to get the *rights* to the actor's likenesses when they're still poor, desperate, and exploitable, in the hopes that some of them will make it big and then they'll be able to sell their now famous likeness for huge advertising dollars or as cameos or even major roles or whatever else. Ever see the more recent terminator movie where they used cgi to $1? Think of stuff like that. They want to stamp trading cards out of people they can use however they want, without compensating the people they made those cards from, forever.
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
FairlyUormal 11 points 4h ago
This was literally a black mirror episode lol
(additional comments not archived)
M_Mich 11 points 4h ago
“It’s one likeness, Michael, what can it cost? $10?”
IlijaRolovic 5 points 4h ago
Watch The Congress with Robin Wright - trust me guys. This exact topic, and then some.
ZaMr0 5 points 2h ago
Until people stop supporting things by actually voting with their wallets, things like this will never stop or change. Why would companies not try and reduce costs if consumers will still purchase their products and services anyway. Online outrage ultimately means nothing. Relying on laws and regulations to catch up to a lot of these things will take forever.
If you're against Ai, boycott things that use it. Until you do there's no incentive for there's companies to not use it and they will keep pushing for things like this.
If you're against Ai, boycott things that use it. Until you do there's no incentive for there's companies to not use it and they will keep pushing for things like this.
skyfishgoo 4 points 2h ago
organized LABOR is the answer to organized MONEY
solidarity.
solidarity.
Robbidarobot 10 points 3h ago
Actors and writers should request that AI replace the CEO producers. What they do (green light project, manage production, fundraiser) an AI can do for free. That would save studios a lot of money not having to pay CEO millions and bonuses.
(additional comments not archived)
ChampionshipKlutzy42 16 points 4h ago
Imagine being an up and coming actor, taking a day gig as a background extra.
Then you get your big break, win an Oscar even, but now you find your cgi likeness being used in all sorts of ways you didn't approve of like hocking STD medication.
Then you get your big break, win an Oscar even, but now you find your cgi likeness being used in all sorts of ways you didn't approve of like hocking STD medication.
(additional comments not archived)
antisweep 3 points 4h ago
Lol, then how will they test new talent? Shut off your acting pipeline seems blind to how Hollywood works.
Significant-Chip-703 4 points 3h ago
Wow, go Fran! What a lady!
thatredditdude101 4 points 2h ago
Fran Drescher was a client where I used to
work several years ago. She always came in dressed modestly but at the same time
elegantly. She always smelled of a very light but also beautiful Lilac perfume. Furthermore she was also insanely kind, modest, gentle and considerate. I am happy to see she is the SAG president.
work several years ago. She always came in dressed modestly but at the same time
elegantly. She always smelled of a very light but also beautiful Lilac perfume. Furthermore she was also insanely kind, modest, gentle and considerate. I am happy to see she is the SAG president.
ColoradoMan878 4 points 2h ago
"You mean you're gonna give me a whole $100 for all of my songs? Where do I sign, Mr. Berry Gordy?"
listgrotto 5 points 2h ago
As a "people too" organization, corporations appear quite hostile to actual people. Can we fix that please?
WingLeviosa 15 points 4h ago
Why not have AI generate a new star and pay no one?
Vogon-Poetry-Slam 16 points 4h ago
[Hatsune Miku] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatsune_Miku) has entered the chat.
(additional comments not archived)
(additional comments not archived)
PristineSpirit6405 5 points 2h ago
the actors who get used as AI faces should get paid perpetual royalties
(additional comments not archived)
ronsta 8 points 4h ago
Unrelated but Jesus, Fran still looks good.
sweeneyty 3 points 3h ago
calculon's career has to begin somewhere..
illgot 3 points 3h ago
imagine if the DMV got involved and started requiring 3D scans for new IDs then sold that information to studios.
DMVs already sell personal information to corporations, why not sell 3D scans as well.
DMVs already sell personal information to corporations, why not sell 3D scans as well.
(additional comments not archived)
vernes1978 3 points 2h ago
Producers claim to be unaware of "portrait rights".
theagnostick 3 points 2h ago
I will say, Fran Drescher is exactly the type of leader that industry needs. Wish there were more people like her in positions of authority.
Fluffy_Turnover_7391 3 points 2h ago
End slave owners
Zanchbot 3 points 2h ago
Almost comic-bookishly evil of them. Corporate greed truly knows no bounds.
Kwith 3 points 2h ago
In the immortal words of Burt Reynolds from Smokey and the Bandit:
"Do the letters....F-O mean anything to you?"
You want to use my likeness in perpetuity? You can pay me for every use of it in perpetuity.
"Do the letters....F-O mean anything to you?"
You want to use my likeness in perpetuity? You can pay me for every use of it in perpetuity.
Typical-Coyote49 3 points 2h ago
“AMPTP member companies entered the negotiations with SAG-AFTRA with the goal of forging a new, mutually beneficial contract.”
“Mutually beneficial” is such a heinous way to phrase what is essentially firing someone from an industry.
I bet walmart has better severance packages than 200$
“Mutually beneficial” is such a heinous way to phrase what is essentially firing someone from an industry.
I bet walmart has better severance packages than 200$
jacobtfromtwilight 3 points 2h ago
The movie industry is fucked lol. Holy christ this is a dystopian hell hole
SabMayHaiBC 3 points 2h ago
The current actors may not give their ai models today, but future struggling actors might give it without knowing the consequences or might give it out of desperation. Laws need to come in place before their bodies are digitalized and used forever. Otherwise they'll lobby the govt and screw over struggling actors forever.
Andreus 3 points 1h ago
The producers that came up with this idea - and anyone who supported it - should be jailed for life without possibility of parole.
wildcarde815 3 points 1h ago
do they just have a think tank sitting around coming up with the most malignant ideas possible.
pistachiodisgusting 3 points 1h ago
I could totally see them reselling these rights to whoever for a lot more than $200 without those extras seeing an extra penny.
mephitopheles13 3 points 1h ago
Why don’t the execs scan themselves for 200$ for eternal corporate use? They won’t because it’s insulting and exploitative, that’s just unacceptable for the ruling class.
dfsaqwe 3 points 1h ago
george lucas: cgi everything
everyone: boo-urns
hollywood 30 years later: cgi everything
everyone: boo-urns
everyone: boo-urns
hollywood 30 years later: cgi everything
everyone: boo-urns
(additional comments not archived)
This nonprofit website is run by volunteers.
Please contribute if you can. Thank you!
Our mission is to provide everyone with access to large-
scale community websites for the good of humanity.
Without ads, without tracking, without greed.
scale community websites for the good of humanity.
Without ads, without tracking, without greed.
©2023 HumbleCat Inc • HumbleCat is a 501(c)3 nonprofit based in Michigan, USA.