I definitely do not want to support this practice, but there’s no way to filter these out 😠.
One blogger cited in the report claimed converting an ebook to audio using the AI narration took just 52 minutes
This does not inspire confidence. The technology is there to do this very well, but it takes skill and effort. The technology to automate it end to end with high quality does not yet exist.
52 minutes. That’s maybe 1/10th the time it would take to listen to it. I wonder how much of these 40,000 books were even proof-listened once.
Honestly, I don’t really care if the LLM can spit out a perfect replica of Stephen Fry with every inflection and intonation possible and in the correct spots.
Tools like these can and will be used to take jobs from actual voice actors. I want no part of it.
I get where you’re coming from, but it doesn’t sit quite right with me. The whole point of technology is to save human time and effort. That should be a good thing. The problem is the capitalist hellscape that is the status quo. I don’t think we should put the onus of propping up that capitalist hellscape onto book authors. I mean, maybe that’s the easiest way to maintain the status quo, but the status quo was never sustainable in the first place.
I don’t know. This is not a fully fleshed out philosophy. At some level I’m sure it’s the same old idealism-vs-pragmatism debate.
I mean, when that time and effort is someone’s chosen profession, then there’s only so many ways it can go.
The authors are free to not release an audiobook with some soulless, robotic voice behind it and stick to print/ebook. Amazon is also free to use the AI voices as enhanced TTS for regular books, and I would be fine with that (no one expects those to sound human, and they’re not sold as audiobooks).
For me, the narrator makes the audiobook experience. As an example, pretty much all of the Revelation Space series was narrated by John Lee. One of the later books was narrated by someone else (forget their name, but they were definitely forgettable), and it just didn’t do it for me. It was an actual person, but they read it so robotically I lost interest halfway through the prologue and just read it on e-reader.
Yep, it’s already happening. I did freelance voice work for a client for awhile but was replaced by a voice model because it’s vastly cheaper, even if the output is also proportionally worse.
That sucks. Just know I’m doing my very tiny, infinitesimally small part to not support that practice.
That’s how automation works. It’s just a fact of technological advancement.
If people will happily listen to it and it’s way cheaper it’s going to happen I’m afraid.
I agree on the technological advancement, but automating human creativity and emotion (yes, there’s definitely a degree of creativity in voice acting) is a bridge too far for me. An AI-narrated audiobook automatically loses 3 stars on the review lol.
I agree with the job loss part, but it seems like a really weak argument. What about the increase deals for the author? Many steps in progress lead to job losses, because the world changes. What’s important is to do it in a responsible manner, and I think that’s where Amazon is failing.
If this moves forward they should cost 10% the average price of human narration.
If they are as shitty as the obviously ai powered closed captioning we are seeing now, they will hopefully be easy to recognize.
I very much understand the misgivings about this, and certain parts make me uncomfortable with it, too. But this could be revolutionary for media accessibility, and in my mind could easily be worth it for the ability to make new media immediately accessible to folks with vision challenges, deaf and hard of hearing individuals, and a lot of other folks for whom most media is not easily interactive/accessible. For many people in this situation, you wait months after a traditional version of something is published before an accessible version is released, if it ever is. Often, it’s just not seen as worth a publisher’s time to make their content accessible to an audience they don’t see as significantly profitable.
Like the printing press took jobs from scribes, but had far more significant impacts democratizing information and education, so might AI in the long run.
But this could be revolutionary for media accessibility, and in my mind could easily be worth it for the ability to make new media immediately accessible to folks with vision challenges, deaf and hard of hearing individuals, and a lot of other folks for whom most media is not easily interactive/accessible
As an accessibility add-on / upgrade to standard TTS, sure. Sounds great, even. But I will not accept soulless, robotic, AI-generated voices for something being sold as an audiobook. I just won’t.
What about if we sweeten the deal and allow you to choose the voice actor on the fly? Want Star wars novels read by James Earl Jones, or Tolkien read by Arnold Schwarzenegger? You can have that with AI voices.
Lol, there is no sweetening the deal. Every one of those is a lost job opportunity for an actual voice actor.
“I will not accept soulless robotic machine-generated typescript being sold as a book. I just won’t.” -Some hipster arguing against the printing press
Not denying audiobook performers don’t have real valuable talent (and should be fairly paid for it), but when was the last time you paid a premium for a handwritten novel?
What if Amazon sold TTS voice packages that can read any novel in your catalogue? “Hello yes I would like the James Earl Jones voice package and every Star Wars book ever written please.” But the existing audiobook storefront still had only audiobooks read by real people in it, protecting their jobs.
Just ban it and have people report the violators.
