AI voice is literally the only way I have to "read" an obscure article during 1h non-static commutes.

I understand, It can do things that weren't previously possible, but it will also replace things that were done by humans, by artists before. Overall, in my opinion, is still a loss.

I think calling this art is a stretch, as they usually aren’t the author.

By automating it, it lowers the barrier to access this type of audio content for the masses. If you want to choose to pay someone you read something for you, the market allows that. This feels like a net gain.

> I think calling this art is a stretch, as they usually aren’t the author.

I can't even remotely agree.

Narrating a book is absolutely an art. Listen to a book narrated by Stephen Fry, and all other books will sound awful. Considerable care and craft goes into a well-read book.

But this is why I'm actually excited about good TTS tools. Not because I want to displace Stephen Fry, but because there are so many books read by awful narrators and something like ElevenReader would be a huge step up in quality.

I share the parent commenter's concerns about the displacement of artists, but I'm less convinced that TTS tools are a net negative.

If the AI content is good enough, nobody will use it, or at least not in the numbers that Audible et similia had before. It will just be a tiny minority following their principles.

We lived this already with social networks. Initially us tech enthusiasts were all like "it will democratize access to news, it democratize producing the news! curated work will still be there, it's a net gain". And we all saw how it actually developed. As someone on the Internet said, I want AI to do my laundry and repeating task so I can do art or other more interesting things, I don't want AI to do arts and force me to do laundry by hand because due to AI taking my job now I don't have money to pay for a washing machine.

> I think calling this art is a stretch, as they usually aren’t the author.

So I guess in your worldview a concert violinist also doesn’t make art, when they are playing a Mozart composition?

"replace things that were done by humans" isn't a loss by itself, if it frees up human labour to do other things. If human replaced by AI can't find better things to do, such that it makes them poorer, or anti-social its a loss but not necessarily AI's fault.

Doesn't apply to all situations, but "replace things that were done by humans" in arts can absolutely be a loss by itself. Making graphics/speech/video a commodity doesn't replace designers, voice actors, or directors, but we've definitely see it can directly harm them and the people that enjoy their work.

> can't find better things to do, such that it makes them poorer, or anti-social its a loss

I feel like this misses the point a bit - lost income/sustainability for artists is obviously a big issue we'll be facing, but looking for a performance indicator in an artistic endeavour doesn't really get you anywhere. There's more ways to value a painting than "what the market would pay" and "potential heat output as firewood", right?

How do you feel about what word processors did to the typist career?

How do you feel about replacing general labor, period, and doing so for a class that no longer maintains a semblance of a social safety net? Do you think there's a difference between displacing one profession and displacing most professions at once?

Do you people ever step out of the abstract and think about the actual context you're living in?

I will gladly pay taxes directed for retraining artists, but I will not pay to listen to Wil Wheaton narrate another book badly when my computer can do it better.

I mentioned typists, you abstracted it to “most professions at once”, and you give me a hard time for being too abstract?

I agree with your criticism, just not sure you understand who you were criticizing. But I hope you can think about actual context and see if that tempers what seems like a pretty emotional take on AI.

Would've been valid if TTS was, indeed, art, but it's not. Audiobooks won't be able to replace TTS in e-readers just because they need to be produced first. And I don't think my mom would be able to find an audiobook of all the Russian books, or, especially, articles she's reading, and especially synchronise it with the actual book in her reader app.

Of all the criticisms leveled against GenAI, I'd say making the case against "TTS on-demand" would probably be the weakest.

Having natural sounding TTS enhances accessibility for blind users, enables language localizations, etc. It's 100% a win even though there will be (and already is) disruption in the VA community.

I feel conflicted about this. I somewhat agreeing with you, but the other hand not needing voice actors is a big help to people with disabilities that prevent them from reading.