Spielberg & co never claimed Glover was in BTTF 2. The replacement actor is credited. However they heavily implied that Glover came back, by approximating his appearance with prosthetics, preventing his face from being seen up close, and having the replacement actor mimic Glover's voice.
> they heavily implied that Glover came back, by approximating his appearance with prosthetics, preventing his face from being seen up close, and having the replacement actor mimic Glover's voice
Do you think OpenAI did something similar here? In your case there is some expectation from the first movie, OpenAI doesn't have something similar. I'm really for people getting credit for their work/assets and I would be on the individual's side against the bigtech, but I think this case OpenAI and SJ have at hand already is on the path to set a wrong precedent, regardless of if any and which of them wins.
But there is a connection to it. It's about an AI assistant which is what openAI is releasing. Disregarding Scarlett Johansson completely and it makes total sense Sam Altman made that tweet.
The effects of trauma are not new. What's new is we have a deeper understanding of how it comes about, what the long-term effects are on both an individual and societal level, and what can be done to prevent or remedy it.
Who is we? You talk like there is some hypocrisy here but you’re treating all people as one person. Mental health researchers and workers advocate for more support for people across the board. Politicians don’t give a shit because their constituents, on the whole, don’t either.
I have powerful anecdotal hypocrisy from the closest people in my life.
They work in mental health, but intentionally to a degree much higher than neglect, and over recent and long periods of time: kick people while they’re down, not limited to me.
I don't know anything about your experiences so don't take this as an attempt to defend them but I've been told that the mental health field has a substantial amount of people who suffered or suffer from mental health issues and to some degree their pursuit of the career is an attempt to understand themselves better.
My mom is an alcoholic and also formerly a psychologist and I’ve heard that from her too. Her early childhood bore many of the traumatic experiences that this article warns damage childrens’ brains.
You absolutely can put Kobe on a Wheaties box without problems legally, IF you do not sell it. That's "fair use." It has not been tested in court yet, but precedent seems to suggest that creating voice clones for private use is also fair use, ESPECIALLY if that person is a celebrity, because privacy rights are limited for celebrities.
iOS was never conceived of as something which would run arbitrary code that could access system-level data (the siloed data). So basically the situation exists by design, and in order to achieve security when enabling PWAs from other browser engines, they'd have to add another layer of security that currently doesn't exist (since they never had to trust anyone's code but their own).
So... yes, there is apparently a lack of security there, but that's because the layer in question was never intended to be anything but proprietary until this ruling.
reply