This video horrifies me, not because "Hetfield's" voice is uncanny (and the end of all his words is creepy), but precisely because one day it WON'T be uncanny anymore. It's convincing as it is now (the "inhaling" after every word screams AI, however). There will come a point where humans won't be able to decipher between what's AI generated and what's real, and people are going to get real f**ked over. Why as a society not only are we not challenging this future but actually embracing it I will never know. 

But that's a pessimistic outlook. Remember how I stated that AI is basically just the application of glorified markov chains? That means that as AI penetrates the internet further, the information that it is being fed to generate said markov chains will start coming from other AI output. This means they "human touch" of AI will eventually be lost, in applications in which the "AI" feeds from large samples (eg, ChatGPT). Yes, AI will eventually begin to inbreed, if you will, and the "wonders" of "AI" will start to become lost... on a grand scale. At least that's my personal belief.

Of course the situation will only get worse before it gets better. But in cases where the "AI" is fed very specific information, such as eponymous-era James Hetfield's voice, the accuracy will only continue to improve. This feeds into my fear that people are going to get f**ked...

Edit: Also, why is this under "prog polls? I don't see any polls here. You're not an an inbred AI sentient, are you? 

I agree, this is scary/depressing and inherently uncanny. I've not seen/heard any AI generated content yet which wasn't uncanny. There are situations though where it goes well with the music ...  

You know a university professor checked an essay he wrote in the 1980s - hopefully without AI - and the "AI Checker" accused him of using AI. 

This is going to ruin people's lives. f**k this. Nope. 

And the effect that these... essentially witch huts are going to have on our children is heartbreaking. It's sad enough that everything is virtual in school at this point, and students used to have to wear masks. This generation of children is going to have some serious trust problems after all of this.

This is anti-art. Simple as that. 

I mean I don't have an issue with AI being used for original art, such as in the case of this video. When it's used for impersonation, cheating, anti-cheating, "beautification" (eg, Instagram filters), and other measures I find unethical, then I have issues. I don't like how 90% of AI art is regurgitated garbage, which makes the majority of "AI Artists" look low-effort and unoriginal, yet I don't see it being problematic per se; but in cases like this video, where the uncanny psychedelic product that AI generates actually works then it is actually kind of cool - really shows how powerful probabilistic predication can be. But it's a powerful tool that can be too easily abused for non-artistic purposes, and impersonation, like the Hetfield video, is a no-go for me.

It is interesting. This AI tool could potentially spark creativity instead of being used as a method for cheating. It depends on how you use it and who uses it. 

There are countless bands today who auto-generate their album covers with AI. Personally, I don't like to do that. I want my album covers to be recognizable as my unique style. Most AI-made album covers (and every single one that was not edited/reworked by a human being) look very predictable, bland and have that fake, cookie cutter vibe to it.

It sounds like ass.

Yup, I really don't like AI for the future of mankind either.

Even the proposed truce from one of the worst arseholes on the planet hasn't be observed.

He was on about thinking of where AI would lead, but plenty of potential wrongdoers don't want to put a "frame" around it.

It will not be used wisely - probably (read most likely) will make cheating even more "undetectable".

As for checking who has cheated in school copy/pasting the work of others, my opinion is that there are plenty of them since the 00's.

Before that (the birth of copy/paste), you could plagiarize someone else' work, but you still had to retype the text, which means that you had to at least read it (and appropriate the knowledge in it). Plenty of "Kids" nowadays haven't even read their own thesis.

.