Yeah I don’t believe a damn thing from wegotthiscovered. Not saying this isn’t true or didn’t happen, but use a legitimate source. This website literally makes shit up for clicks.
I was not aware of this, thanks, I will avoid that site in the future.
Maybe a better source?: https://nerdbot.com/2023/07/14/snowpiercer-cast-unknowingly-scanned-for-ai-use-star-confirms/
My rule of thumb is if I haven’t heard of the website or publication, and none of the trades confirm that story, it’s BS lol. Websites like Vulture, Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, and Deadline. They’re actual Hollywood trades that folks in the industry also read. If one of them, especially THR, Variety, and Deadline report on it, it’s true.
No problem! GiantFreakingRobot is the other one that I see shared often - they do the same thing.
So many sites these days - especially pop culture fluff crap - pump out AI written articles, or copy other sites’ articles verbatim, generate YouTube videos that are nothing more than slideshows with text-to-speech narration, all just nothing more than braindead content for the purpose of framing ads. It’s the shallowest dregs of our society “culture”, the bottom of the barrel to attract the dumbest, most unthinking sheeple whose real lives are literally devoid of substance of any worth.
And they filmed an entire season that wasn’t released. The current studio system is fucked.
https://www.whats-on-netflix.com/news/when-will-season-4-of-snowpiercer-be-on-netflix-2023/
deleted by creator
If I recall correctly it was a rogue developer that decided to make a fully nude model and put Elliot’s head on it. So it isn’t a model of his body at the time, but still obviously a pretty big breach of trust.
Also this article was written in 2015 well before Elliot’s transition so that why it uses the older pronouns. I’m definitely a big believer in using a person’s proferred pronouns but I don’t it is “unfortunate” that older things have their old pronouns in them.
We’re at the point where anyone who’s been photographed from a variety of angles (video definitely counts) can have a reasonably accurate 3D model of their face generated. Bodies are much less important to get the details exactly right on, so that model can be slapped onto an approximately correct one and nobody’s going to notice the difference. Peter Cushing never had a detailed 3D scan done, for example, and they did a pretty good job resurrecting him for Rogue One. We can do even better now.
I have no good ideas for what the laws around this stuff “should” be. Just pointing out that from a technical perspective the question of “consent” is quickly becoming almost irrelevant - you don’t even have to tell someone you’ve made a model of them, and they have no way of knowing you did unless they see the results later on. Interesting times.
I suspect we’ll start seeing laws about it once it starts happening to powerful figures in situations they don’t approve of.
I’m not talking about the porn we’ve been seeing of actresses. Things like politicians acting out of character (or in character depending on your point of view) or the super rich.
Someone’s likely going to have a bad time for having done it too, if they get caught.
Very black mirror like. I can’t imagine they have any legal basis for using their exact likeness for anything though.
Wasn’t it literally the plot of BoJack Horseman that they used his body scan to complete a film after he went off the rails?
deleted by creator
