Creatives using generative AI trained on other creatives' labor without their consent and compensation doesn't sit well with me. Gives the impression we only care about copyright when our own rights are being infringed. AI certainly has its uses, but we can hardly expect clients to value our creativity if we don't value it ourselves
Why does AI need permission to train? It's just learning from the art, it's not copying it. We don't require humans to get permission to look at art for studying.
They send these offers like: The purpose of this project is to provide training data for AI Voice models from real people in everyday settings. Your video and audio will not be used to create a clone or replication and will not be seen or heard by anyone outside of Voices or the client. Learn more about datasets and how you're protected here. If any of your friends and family members would like to participate in this project and earn up to $100 USD, just forward them this email. Feel free to share it with friends and coworkers and have them share it around as well. More the merrier! But when I ask a question, no answer is offered! If they don't promote someone based on talent, why would I share something back?
Hi Helen, Thanks for your comment. We are hiring for datasets jobs right now, and these jobs have a different and less demanding skillset requirement than a professional voice over job. On our platform, more information around working on Voices as a professional voice actor can be found here: www.voices.com/talent. We're sorry that the question you submitted has not yet been answered. We appreciate your patience as the team is working through high volumes of inquiries. You can certainly follow up with our support team at support@voices.com. We also have an FAQ on datasets here that you might find helpful: www.voices.com/help/knowledge/faq/datasets-jobs. Thank you and wishing you all the best.
