I side with actors and entertainers who want nothing but to have the rights to their own likeness; it feels like an invasion of privacy for there to be no control of AI that can take your face and voice and make you say and do things you would never do. This may contribute to the ruining of a perfectly fine reputation, perhaps someday being marked with disdain because somebody "saw what they (actors) did" and wasn't being told the truth of how what they witnessed was developed. While it is convenient to not have to pay anybody to do exactly what you want them to do as a director or large company, it's your working partners' loyalty that you are risking when using AI to essentially tell them, "there's no need for you."
Introduction to the Issue The ongoing investigation focuses on the SAG-AFTRA strike and how it relates to the free speech and free press clause of the U.S. Constitution. With the entertainment industry increasingly embracing AI technologies, concerns about job stability, ethical technology usage, and the limits of free speech become prominent. This presents a distinctive challenge as technological progress clashes with established media standards and worker rights. From the perspective of an AI developer, the inclusion of artificial intelligence in media production provokes discussions regarding the boundaries of free speech within the context of the digital age. Developers may maintain that AI serves as a means to enhance creativity and expression, thus aligning with the principles of free speech. Nevertheless, there are valid concerns regarding how these technologies are utilized and their potential ramifications. If a SAG-AFTRA member is confronted with a strike, their primary conce...
Comments
Post a Comment