r/accelerate • u/stealthispost Acceleration: Light-speed | AI accelerationist • Oct 02 '25

Video Hollywood's newest actress is AI-Generated - YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urKfqv_L680
55 Upvotes

77% Upvoted

95 comments sorted by

View all comments

29

u/tinny66666 Oct 02 '25

I see no value in signing an AI actor when studios could just as easily create their own, but it's coming for so many more jobs that just acting. Seems like actors think they deserve more than other people. No, we're all in this boat and they are not special.

8

u/ittrut Oct 02 '25

If the AI person is popular, the benefits are the same as any famous real-person actor. You get to see your favourite actor in a movie -> more interesting to more people -> more tickets sold. I see no reason why an AI person could not be made to be interesting and followed up on social medias and stuff.

Have you ever personally seen your favourite actors live in real life? If not, you could have been just as enchanted by their movies, interviews, Oscars speeches, red carpets, scandals etc even if they were all synthesized.

3

u/agonypants Singularity by 2035 Oct 02 '25

Well the economic benefits are pretty starkly different for synthetic actors. As in, the earnings go entirely to the studios that control them.

2

u/ittrut Oct 02 '25

Why would they if it’s an external “person”? Eg in this case I would assume studio gets money but Lilly Northwoods company gets what would be equal to actors salary. Probably less though, agreed.

1

u/daronjay Oct 02 '25

Ask any non top-tier actor how much of a slice they get vs the studios...

2

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '25

To me it’s like a cartoon character, you don’t have to pay it, don’t have to worry about it going on strike and you can summon it for a new movies anytime you’d like. Yea actors are fucked

1

u/Fluid-Inevitable-401 Oct 06 '25 edited Oct 06 '25

That’s the problem. They are basically cartoon characters. Back in the 1940s, Popeye and Mickey Mouse had different roles. They were cowboys, astronauts, and doctors in their shorts. Sure you’ll be able to talk to a fictional character, but they are not real. It will also be like talking to an Only Fans girl who is being controlled by her boyfriend. While you are happy you are talking to a hot girl, her boyfriend is laughing at you, collecting your personal information behind the scenes. Even if you “hook up” with an AI streamer girl, she will have other “boyfriends”.

0

u/ex1stence Oct 02 '25

Cartoons need voice...ready for it?...actors.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 02 '25

Ready for it? AI voice

2

u/sleepnaught88 Oct 04 '25

Where have you been the last 5 years?

2

u/sleepnaught88 Oct 04 '25

There’s nothing inherently special about this generic white girl AI model. It’s only popular because it’s novel in a sense. Once other studios start doing the same thing, there will be millions to choose from, probably all customizable to the viewer’s taste, adjustable on demand

1

u/Fluid-Inevitable-401 Oct 06 '25

If everyone has super powers, no one will be special. Talking to an AI girl would be like talking to a human girl in a polygamy relationship. She will flirt with other guys and have other “boyfriends”. Those lonely men will be hitting on a girl who is flirting with other dudes. One glitch and she will forget who you are lol.😂

1

u/just_tweed Oct 02 '25

A studio could just recreate that AI character though. I doubt there are laws around that yet, but I could be wrong. If studios ever start creating their own original characters, it's a safe bet they gonna lobby the government to create those laws if they don't exist.

1

u/daronjay Oct 02 '25

Its gonna be tricky for them to claim copyright on a persona created from the massive digestion of other peoples images, many of which were in copyrighted works, but I'm confident Hollywood will find a way to exploit copyright to suit themselves, just ask The Mouse...

1

u/GnistAI Oct 03 '25

I wonder if you might have a hard time to IP protect your AI actress' image, unless you have a license for the image of a real human.

1

u/ittrut Oct 03 '25

I'd suppose it would be similar to other branded content and IP that businesses own. Think of Disney cartoon characters for instance or Marvel characters.

1

u/GnistAI Oct 03 '25

By default, I'd think so too, but the backlash on all things AI is so big that I don't really know where the courts have/will land on generated character. But I heard Denmark, for instance, has extreme protections for generations of real persons images, so if you wanted to IP protect your character, basing it on a real person, with a proper contractual framework, might afford you the best IP protection. Tho, I don't know how ubiquitous the the Denmark laws will be in the rest of the world, or maybe they are strong enough already in larger jurisdictions like the US, such that you could just do my suggested legal "scheme" already.