@omer, Exactly. Just because something is publicly available, doesn't mean it's to be treated like a toy.

I'm not worried, but I'm damn well not gonna help you do something I consider to be unethical.

Oriol, what you say in post three I feel is a form of character assassination. You have no idea if this is actually what’s happening. All you’re doing is making wild accusations with apparently, no evidence. If you have any, I think we would all love to see it.
DeathStar, you can’t disprove a negative. that is a logical fallacy. Just because he doesn’t have anything to prove he’s not doing it, does not show guilt.
While I understand why he may seem a little suspicious, why are we all so ready to jump down someone’s throat? What if he had just wanted to imitate his friend for a silly joke? I’m not saying that deep fakes our not a problem, because obviously they are. What I am saying, is that it’s very telling of how mistrustful we all are that are immediate reaction is That he’s trying to swindle someone.
Also, that audiobook above was quite funny

Yeah, seriously i wanted to use it to prank someone, i know the consequences of impersonating someone, and i don't want my friend to feel effects of saying something that i shoudn't or scamming by using his voice.
I have awareness how powerfull those tools are, but having fun and pranking with someone's voice and not hurting anyone in any way is not a crime.
I don't no why people who doesn't know me personally are thinking that i will use it in unethical way.
For exmple again hacking:
I am asking someone how to begin my hacking adventure?
But this person will not give me any tips, because he/she things that i will start scamming, steeling data, spoofing, etc., but maybe i wanna be a pentester, threadresearcher, and generally be a whitehat hacker?
Those are stereotypes, when someone will tell ya something like "i am a hacker", and you don't know anything about computers, hackers, you will thing something like:
"this person is a bad guy, hackers are doing only bad things".
You will thing that way, because you heard in TV about hacker who steel 10000 dollars from someone, in TV you will not hear about cybersecurity researchers, they are not existing for TV, and hacker only means a cybercryminal person.
Regards.

@28 first thing, your example was good, but then you said, even if I use deep fake voice for bad purpose. You just admitted you are going to.
To respond to @33, if you just say you are a hacker, yeah people are going to think that. If you say, I am a white hat hacker, then they won't think that. It is about how you address and carry yourself, and how much you initially tell someone. Clearly you don't understand or care about this concept, as me and others have pointed out.

@Jimmy69: STop. You're literally giving the benefit of the doubt to someone who is attempting to use an ai that is, kind of free for you the user, but has a lot of resources going into it for legitimate use cases, to use someone else's voice. The company specifically states that it should only be used for your own voice. End of story. If you want to prank someone, then go off of audio of them that's already out there, like what DJ Wonderbread (aka Liam) did masterfully on anyaudio. It'll sound funnier that way anyway. Even if someone gave you permission to use their voice, it that's like giving them the inside scoop on the prank and them giving you the parting wink on the way out. And if you don't have permission? Forget it!
Know this. AI of this magnitude is not a toy. Unless you're the one doing the voice-processing on your own terms, you play by their rules, plain and simple. Where do you think the voice data goes? Into the server. For machine learning. You could probably just go and delete that voice, yes, but still. It's a fools errand if there ever was one. Don't do it. Just, don't.
Also, fyi, a white hat hacker doesn't go around wearing a "hey, look at me, I'm a hacker" sign. A white hat hacker has a list of companies for whom they have done vulnarebility testing for, and usually keeps those vulnerabilities on a strictly need-to-know basis between themselves and the companies to whom they are reporting to.
It's ok to not know everything. Seriously, it is. It is not ok to act like you know it all, or talk like you're something that you aren't.

I defended the guy because in the way he was writing he sounded frustrated with being attacked. It sounded like he honestly was just trying to emulate his friend. I stand by my point about the earlier posts, but I can understand why people would not want to help him Looking at it more closely I can understand how it would seem suspicious. I hope the best of this guy though, and really would be sad if he is trying to do something illegal.

@Grif: I can appreciate standing up for someone, but this isn't a matter of that.
When using an online service to generate a speech synthesis engine of a voice, one that specifically syas for your own use only, then you don't use another one's voice. Plain and simple. If they want their voice made they can make an account and do it themselves. As for the prank argument, seriously, you guys act as if there was absolutely nothing to do to prank people into saying stuff? Sounds to me like someone wants to take the easy way out, just record 30 or some sentences of someone talking, and then make them say whatever. When they could, if there is raw audio of them around, be creative and splice them.
So, yeah. I can appreciate standing up for someone, but in this case, it's too much of an unusual request to just give this guy the benefit of the doubt on. You can't expect us to welcome the idea of using someone else's voice/likeness when it's a clear and present policy violation for almost all the services this guy is after.

moderation
this post has weird and creepy writin all over it. it is currently undergoing investigation to be closed

Moderation:
Smoothgunner, please do not under any circumstances make posts that look on the surface like a moderator or administrator trying to do their job. I know you're trying to be funny and all, but this can be confusing to some folks, and quite outside of that, it's not a good idea to pretend to hold a position you don't, not in such a case as this. Given that there had as yet been no action taken in this thread - I didn't even see it till twenty minutes ago - it can even be construed as you trying to tell us how to do our job. This again may not have been your intent, so I'm just going to issue an official caution. You aren't actually in trouble. It's totally fine to ask if a thread is going to be locked or if punishment is going to be brought against someone, but making a post to suggest that this is happening is something we would prefer that nobody without the requisite authority actually do.

On this subject, by the way, here's the deal as I see it:
Nothing stops a person from pranking a friend with this technology, except that it would mean illegal use of the software in question. If you want to do that in your own way and in your own time, we can't stop you; if you talk about the exact steps on how to do it here, however, that's going to fall into enabling users to impersonate others - ironic, considering how this post started - and that's potentially troublesome.
My general rule of thumb is that there may be some edge cases where doing this is funny or harmless, but there's also a ton of use cases with a much more malevolent slant. I would prefer that we not enable people to misuse this technology. Do any of you remember how a prior user recorded a person's voice without their permission and was then asking how to get in touch with that person? Kinda creepy, right? This is sort of under the same umbrella.

@45. smoothgunner did not have the rank of mod or admin so i dont get how that can be confusing.

OK, but when someone tell me it even if i write that i wanna use it with my voice, it doesn't change anything, cause it is the same process, so i don't no what is wrong here.