• avguser@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    10 months ago

    The special was actually really good in my opinion. I personally like the idea of preserving cultural icons a la the talking heads in Futurama via AI. I do think the estate should get royalty rights like they would with deceased artists, but why not embrace this medium of immortality?

    • Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      10 months ago

      The special was actually really good in my opinion. I personally like the idea of preserving cultural icons

      What if the cultural icon specifically says no before their death. Should that be respected?

      I do think the estate should get royalty rights like they would with deceased artists,

      Does the estate get veto rights?

      • FaceDeer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        What if the cultural icon specifically says no before their death. Should that be respected?

        Did he, though? The article only seems to talk about what his daughter wants.

    • fsxylo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Preservation would be keeping copies of his standup. This is not a special by George Carlin, this is a copycat. And the copycat will get stale because it won’t create anything new, it will only regurgitate jokes based on the very limited material that exists.

    • golden_zealot@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      The content is not Carlin himself, its mimicry.

      This means it’s not preservation, it is invention and by extension of that, it’s nothing close to immortality, it’s bastardization.

      • Thomrade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        the first two minutes or so of the special make it abundantly clear it’s an imitation, it’s intended as an impersonation, and should not under any circumstances be taken as a “AI clone” of carlin. they’re very up front about it, and the reasoning for doing it.

        it’s been blown way out of proportion by newsfeeds jumping on the “his daughter doesn’t like it” side of the story. it’s no different than comedians doing impersonations of each other on late night talk shows

    • ramirezmike@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      why not embrace this medium of immortality?

      isn’t it weird that it’s not them, it’s like a caricature of them? And, as time goes on is their legacy who they actually were or would it be this? It seems questionable even for people who agree before they die, but it seems really unethical for anyone who didn’t agree or were even aware of the possibility.

    • jballs@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      My major problem with it is not getting permission from his heirs before creating it. With that being said, the AI Bill Cosby joke was pretty damn good.