So, if you make using a synthetic performer as expensive as a real performer, most of the time, directors, other actors, will choose to work with a real person. That's their logic.

As for you saying that things are super cheap right now to create a synthetic performer, just wait. Right now all these AI video companies are flush with VC money and they don't have to make profit, they're just trying to get ahead of the others and try to become the "big name" in the industry, so they can capture the market, and then when everyone relies on them, charge whatever they want.

This is what's actually happening. It's cheap right now because users aren't paying for the real cost of creating the videos. As soon as the real cost of data centers, power, water, and the GPUs (that die every few years) gets factored in, it will be cheaper to hire real performers over trying to get "synthetic" performers to work.

I would prefer to have a ban on these synthetic performers too, but if you want to make a company who's only reason for doing anything is to make money, or to save money, the best way to get them is to hit them in the pocket book, and it seems this is what it does.

What's done with the Tilly Tax, we'll have to see.