No Film School: The union, which represents approximately 160,000 entertainment and media professionals, has voiced its staunch opposition to the use of synthetic performers, viewing them as a direct threat to the livelihoods of human actors.
In a powerful statement, SAG-AFTRA declared, "creativity is, and should remain, human-centered. The union is opposed to the replacement of human performers by synthetics."
8 comments:
I personally agree with the standpoint that this article takes. I believe that not only does AI not have the capability to create art with as much merit as humans, but also that creation of AI art undermines human creativity and the potential for art to reflect our current positioning in history and experience of the human condition. Art has deep historical significance that I believe AI skews. I am glad that organizations like SAG-AFTRA are intending to preserve the human role in art and are not willing to sacrifice human jobs in the arts for the cost-efficiency of AI. Whenever I see discussions of AI art, I always see the argument that AI can make art more “accessible.” I argue that art is already incredibly accessible. It is in fact one of the most accessible things a human can do. Anyone can make art, literally anyone. Art has historically been something done by every member of the human race on every corner of the earth, and I believe we do not need the assistance of AI to continue to make art in the way we have done since cave paintings and hieroglyphs.
This is the first I am hearing of the "Actress" named Tilly Norwood, and simply the concept of this character is scary and alarming to me. The growth of AI is quite large, and is affecting many if not all aspects of our word. While AI may be positively affecting certain aspects of our world that dose not mean it is positively affecting all of the aspects of our world. One aspect of our world that AI is negatively affecting is the arts. While AI may be able to make art or even participate in it that dose not mean that they should. An AI is only able to learn from what exists to make something new that has aspect or alterations of what already exits. While there are generative AIs said AI still need a database of information to generate the things it generates. Which still means that even a generative AI is creating something from materials that is has from elsewhere. At this point in technological advancement AIs are not able to think freely like a human dose. At its core art is a representation of free though art is a manifestation of this free thought. So due to the information that I have mentioned an AI should not be tasked with making art, as in art that it creates will be absent of free thought. Which basically means that any AI art is absent of true meaning or purpose. This is especially true when it comes to acting where a person is able to embody a character to tell a story. This act of embodying a character is an extremely artful one that requires the individuals free thoughts to determine how to artfully tell the story as the character they are assigned. An AI actor is not capable of truly replicating this process without simply copying previous things that actors have done. As like I have said the AI can not think of how to act as a character on its own without access to outside or given information that was created by others.
This whole AI actress thing is ridiculous to me. Going to a theatre school and also having a performance roommate I have seen how much work and practice goes into becoming a professional actress/actor. Generally I am pretty opposed to the use of AI but it especially has no place in the arts. Just as they said in the article, AI takes away humanity from performance or piece. I thought it was interestingly noted that Tilly was technically trained for free by other performers and performances yet no compensation was given to anyone, and I don’t think I would have ever thought of it that way. It is just like AI art, the styles and features being taken from other artists and used to create “art”. I hope that AI actors never actually become a thing as it takes away jobs from people who have put their whole life’s work into getting a role just to be passed over by a computer.
This is insanely calculated and downright weird. There are already tons of talented young actresses that are struggling to get booked and support themselves, and instead of employing them, they create a computerized version of an “ideal girl.” Not only will the AI actress harm the careers of actors around the world, it will lack the emotional depth and complexity of human emotion – something that real actresses have been working towards. By creating Tilly Norwood, they created a white, conventionally beautiful woman which further enforces Euro-centric ideals and stereotypes. This may seem like a stretch, but as a woman of color in theater I find it very hurtful that most of the “most beautiful” and the most successful actresses are white women since women of color have still not been given much of a chance to step into these lead, breakout roles. It hurts to see women of color not recognized, and it hurts more to see that they value a computer more than the talents of a living being.
I found this article extremely disturbing. I saw a quick image of Tilly Norwood on Tik Tok but just swiped on, so this is my first time really hearing about her. The fact that AI actors are a thing creeps me out. I feel like such a big part of acting and art in general is having that prior human experience and connection to life. As a result, I am not sure how well AI could act. In fact, I am curious how the AI goes about connecting to life, if it has never experienced it. I would imagine that it would not perform well in those situations. As this type of art is so collaborative, I would like to know how AI can collaborate in this context. In addition, I wonder how it would do things like take notes from directors. I feel like this would not go very well, and the AI might actually refute some notes.
I think it’d be really interesting to see the AI-written defenses in the “actress”’s defense. I think the only defense for Tilly Norwood would have to be created by AI, because a real person actually defending a manufactured thing’s “rights” to take the creation away from film and acting is insane. (At least I think it is, but I’m already so anti-AI.) The only people who benefit from AI actors are the people at the top of the money chain in the industry. It doesn’t help actors, and it doesn’t help the people who actually want to watch movies and shows. No one could ever root for Tilly or praise her acting because it fundamentally wouldn’t be real. Awards shows especially would disintegrate, and movies and films themselves would fall apart completely. You can’t praise AI-created art, which means that it would be purely for consumption and base-level enjoyment.
Huge props to sag aftra for doing this!! The whole concept of an ai actress removes the point of acting and performance itself. The whole point of an act is that it is a human, forming the emotions themselves, and embodying the character themselves. There is no ai actress, it is just an animation doing something. Its basically just a cartoon, and its frankly so gross that this ai “actress” looks like a young girl which is remnant to me of a huge upcoming issue that is ai pornbots, where now people can type in a prompt where an ai form can look and do anything they want. And of course, alot of researchers are noticing that this is becoming an outlet for men to fantasize about abuse. Its absolutely disgusting how unregulated this all is. But everyone says its not going anywhere and is here to stay, i agree that if people want something, there will be a market for it. But regulation is extremely important and needed if these engines can become an outlet or fantasy for abuse.
The human experience that an actor brings is irreplaceable. Actors don’t simply wander the stage reciting lines because the blocking says to go there, and the script says to say that. Actors breathe life into the characters they portray. When performed, a character becomes a blend of not only the words on the script but also the lived experience of that actor. An AI can read lines and follow blocking but it can never fully understand the “why”. AI hasn’t walked our world or shared our experiences so it cannot understand why its character behaves as they do; it simply does as it was told exactly as it was told without bringing any humanity into the character. If seeing how a production was interpreted by those who made it happen was not important to me, I would simply read a book. Movies stand apart from other forms of media because they have so many people bringing their own interpretations into the film. Characters have nuance even when it is not important to the overall theme of the movie because their actor can bring that nuance without it all needing to be thought of by one person. Creativity is about conveying one’s thoughts and feelings through what you create; AI cannot truly replace creativity because it cannot have thoughts or feelings to voice.
Post a Comment