As someone who has an uncanny ability to recognize voices, I'm skeptical about how good these really are. Of course, most people don't share that ability.
Meanwhile, I could probably be fooled by a picture.
Hmm, I understand your sentiment, but how would you know. Of course you'd pick out the bad dupes but this technology is getting really good that I fear it would go unnoticed, especially if they keep the detectable ones to reinforce bias
I don’t have examples but having listened to some samples of various Ai generated clones (the one paper had samples of I believe 10s, 30s, 1min, 5 min) and all of them progressively sounded better. The 10 second one basically sounded like a voice call whose bit rate dropped out mid word. And the voice so long as you used words that were similar in phoenix sounded pretty close. Although this is just my experience, but to you it might sound pretty bad while to me it sounded pretty reasonable if under bad audio conditions.
That code was state of the art (for free software) when the author first published it with his master's thesis four years ago, but it hasn't improved a lot since then and I wouldn't recommend it today. See the Heads Up section of the readme. Coqui (a free software Mozilla spinoff) is better but also is sadly still nowhere near as convincing as the proprietary stuff.
Wait it’s been 4 years? Time really goes by. Yeah with most Ai things I assumed those with more time and resources would create better models. OS Ai is at a great disadvantage when it comes to data set size and compute power.