The problem being? If the content is good enough and the narration fine (it took you a while to even notice), why does it matter?

> Like is it really easier to generate a video with fake AI narration than just narrating it yourself?

Yes?

Also, they can iterate quicker (don't have to rerecord if content changes).

Maybe its me, but having a human narrate the text is one part of a guarantee that shows an actual team of a few experts took the time to prepare the text and review the finished product.

Commitment. The chances it's sloppy content are much higher when the presentation costs very little.

> If the content is good enough and the narration fine (it took you a while to even notice), why does it matter?

I tend to assume that the production has been cheaper but they aren't passing any of the saving on to me. They are pushing the human out of the loop for the bottom line, and there is no benefit to anyone but the company.

ML/AI is a bonus for society in many things like medical scanning, helping the blind interact with the world, etc, but nobody is using AI voiceovers like this example for anything other than helping the company's bottom line by avoiding paying people.

The great displacement isn't just coming, it is here and happening all around us. I for one am doing what (very little) I can to avoid helping it along and that includes refusing AI generated content wherever practical. I'll accept it from a small local business that possibly has little other choice ATM, because of they pay for someone to do the job they'll probably use generative AI anyway, but not from a larger company.

I've subscribed to paid courses in the past, and sometimes the speaker's voice would be so off-putting that it would really drag down the quality of the experience (looking at you, Steve Kinney). I'd have paid extra to have an option to replace with an AI voice.

It's a strong signal that the person or organization "creating" said video views the person consuming it with open contempt.

The problem is that I personally have a visceral hate against AI-voices.

I would argue it's fraudulent. There's loads of text to speech synthesizers that work just fine but sound robotic. The huge technological advancement of tihs technology is that it 'sounds human', even if it isn't.

LLMs are great, but we should stop bundling fake image generation and fake voice generation with it and calling it AI.

If you truly believe that there's no problem, and that it's fine, then use a TTS technology that didn't spend a gigajillion dollars on trying to sound like it's not what it actually is.

It's like selling soy pellets with synthetic meat flavour and making it look like meat and selling it in butcher shops and not clarifying that it's not actually meat.

On the one hand, I personally believe that meat is better, yes, but on the other hand, that's not what I am going to discuss and it's a disservice to argue about how meat is better, all you need to know is that if you try to pull this off, you will be indistinguishable from unethical fraudsters. Not saying you or Perforce are one at this point, we are all dazzled and confused by the technology, but down the line, when regulations settle in, there will be no gray area, do not do this shit if you care about your reputation. Only do this shit if you want to make quick bucks during during the boom and before the bust.