This comment implies that no humans were involved with operating the AI. Seems doubtful.

It's one thing for out of touch executives who blindly replace entire departments with "AI" while fundamentally misunderstanding the role of the department being replaced and the capability of AI, tanking the quality of the product--that's real self harm for everyone involved; it's another thing to be advancing the creative processes with more advanced tools and automation, something that we've been doing for centuries without much fuss.

The creative part of voice acting isn't just in moving one's lips. The creative part of voice acting is just as much, if not more, in feeling and direction--in deciding if a sound sample produces a certain desired emotion, and if that emotion is valuable to the overall experience or not. This is not the territory of generative AI. This is the territory AGI, which does not yet exist. Producing the sound with your lips is just a small part of that. There's still a human involved in producing the work of art (and if not, then yeah, we are back at that first category, of leadership ignorant of the creative process, and we should bemoan a crappy product lead by executives who have no clue how to retain talent).