Recently, the topic of AI actors has successively topped the social media hot topic list. According to media reports, a domestic film and television company announced the "signing" of two AI actors and will simultaneously release AIGC dramas starring them. Some insiders quoted news that some drama teams planned to try AI generation technology on supporting role and group performers below the second male and female second male, and the term "actors below the second male use AI" immediately aroused heated debate, including a large number of boycotts. AI actors have an almost impeccable and perfect face that can be called the "common denominator of public aesthetics". Compared to real actors, they do not need to rest and their schedules are always open; No mistakes will be made, and there is no need to worry about 'collapse of the house'. For capital and platforms, this means lower trial and error costs, higher production efficiency, and more controllable expectations. This is also the core reason why AI actors are daring to venture into micro dramas, short videos, and other fields, especially for small teams, which even gives them unlimited possibilities to "fight big with small things". However, the audience's reactions seem to be different in frequency. Where did their resistance to AI actors come from? The emergence of AI actors has challenged people's inherent understanding of "performance". Performance in film and television creation is never just about making actions or reciting lines. People watching dramas are actually establishing emotional connections with characters and actors, sharing life experiences. We often get caught off guard by a micro expression of an actor in a drama, precisely because we know that that moment not only carries the actor's understanding of the character, but also injects their unique life experiences and feelings. On the other hand, although AI actors can accurately make various expressions such as crying, laughing, anger, sadness, etc. on camera, we clearly know that their flawless performance in front of the screen is just a data-driven replica of human emotions, rather than an expression grown from life experiences. This kind of 'simulated sincerity' brings a sense of unreality and absurdity to people, resulting in discomfort and rejection, which is understandable. From this perspective, in the foreseeable future, top actors with their unique personal charm and excellent acting skills will further amplify their value and competitiveness. And those assembly line actors with poor acting skills, serious standardization, and lack of recognition may also suffer the heaviest impact of AI at the earliest, until they step out of the comfort zone of "tool people". The audience's boycott of AI actors is not a boycott of AI technology, but rather an inability to accept the complete loss of "liveliness" in film and television creation. Practitioners in the film and television industry should be able to understand the implied meaning of netizens, which is their thirst for truth and respect for "people". AI technology will inevitably affect the film and television industry, and we need to be prepared and establish clear basic norms and boundaries for the use of AI actors. Which characters in the drama are generated by AI should be clearly labeled, respecting and satisfying the audience's right to know. For example, the training data for AI actors often comes from a large number of real actors, including faces, expressions, voices, etc. It is necessary to accelerate the clarification of authorization mechanisms and the identification of AI infringement, rights remedies, and other details. Only by doing so can technology truly serve people, empower industries, and bring more surprises and possibilities. (New Society)