5 ms·

We are hitting the awkward transition period between the actor being the person performing the script in front of a microphone and/or camera and someone doing t

We are hitting the awkward transition period between the actor being the person performing the script in front of a microphone and/or camera and someone doing the performance at a keyboard, directing computers to create an emotive performance. It seems only a matter of time before actors are only walking the boards in live performances or in retro media. Not surprised they are pissed.

not_math 4y ago
Actors are much more than just talents, by which I mean being able to carry emotions, being charismatic and delivering lines in the way a director wants it. There is an undeniable human aspect to it that AI won't ever be able to replace. Sure, it'll probably be an important part of the industry, but saying all future media is going to be 24/7 AI generated content like that Seinfeld twitch stream is a pretty bleak view of the future. We watch movies because we try to connect with people and share our feelings with humans. I can't relate to an AI.
- rcme 4y ago
  > There is an undeniable human aspect to it that AI won't ever be able to replace. Why do you think an AI could not replicate this? AI has shown a remarkable ability to achieve things once thought impossible for an algorithm.
  - ihatepython 4y ago
    I wonder if an AI would become obsessed with creating Human Intelligence (HI)
  - pwdisswordfishc 4y ago
    Celebrity culture, the ability to refuse a job, character traits suggested by or shared with the actor… can't wait until cookie-cutter AI slaves replicate all of that.
- tluyben2 4y ago
  > won't ever be able to replace Humanity is recent in the cosmos, modern computing and AI are not 100 years old. You think your statement will hold in 1000 or 10000 years? You obviously believe the human brain is something supernatural which I do not (in fact, the past 10 years of AI boosts kind of convinced me our brain mechanism is vastly simpler than we thought; it’s just a complex, overarchitected implementation), but even believing that, we are just beginning to scratch the surface. I think it can do a convincing simile within years, at max decades from now. Something you cannot tell apart on the screen or audio. You might not even be told it is an AI.
  - 8bitsrule 4y ago
    >You obviously believe the human brain is something supernatural... convinced me our brain mechanism is vastly simpler than we thought; it’s just a complex, overarchitected implementation) Cults can often convince all kinds of people of all kinds of things. Long ago LaPlace asserted a clockwork universe; that didn't hold water for too long. Too simplistic. Just kidding, but really, anecdotes don't constitute evidence that the mind is a 'brain mechanism'. Yep, many of our voluntary and involuntary routine behaviors are quite robot-like .. breathing, eating, sleeping, sexing. That said, some of us are less content with the routine. The expert systems now being referred to as 'artificial intelligence' are limp P.T. Barnum simulations of true intelligence, and of course there is little substantial evidence to support -any- model of creativity or consciousness ... let alone a mechanical one. In the face of that lack of evidence, a supernatural theory is no worse than a mechanical one. I prefer and will continue to prefer real intelligence and creativity of the human kind because it is substantially superior to limp simulations ... and because I am a human. I'll resist lowering my standards. Those who've tried to teach machines the mechanics of music have learned from continued failure that great music is beyond any of our so-called 'music theory'. I'll confidently assert that the same is true of dramatic performances.
  - ihatepython 4y ago
    > You obviously believe the human brain is something supernatural which I do not (in fact, the past 10 years of AI boosts kind of convinced me our brain mechanism is vastly simpler than we thought It's entirely possible that this statement applies to your brain specifically, but not necessarily to all brains
sublinear 4y ago
Actors are only pigeonholed because of the whims of the industry. They are usually unimaginable wells of deep creativity and anyone who disagrees is incredibly ignorant of what's possible. AI as currently implemented, literally, and by definition, just produces average mediocre junk that is easily branded and controlled. This is fundamentally incompatible with any progress or meaningful novelty. Buyer beware.
- izzygonzalez 4y ago
  This may be true today, but the rate of progress on these tools is hitting a curve. Text and image generation are already basically indiscernible from human creations, and the entire space is now turning its attention to audio in tandem.
  - sublinear 4y ago
    No you don't understand my comment. The AI only knows, and therefore can average from, what the actor has published. It cannot produce what the actor has not.
    - valdiorn 4y ago
      That won't be true pretty soon. It's currently not true for image generation.
      - sublinear 4y ago
        Ugh I'm not going to keep fighting off the goon squad of people desperate to invest in something, anything, that will hedge against the recession. We desperately need a hero for art.
- stubish 4y ago
  If you took a raw script and fed it to an AI, sure, you will get rubbish and I don't see that changing any time soon. However, if someone carefully choreographed the performance like a puppeteer... I think someone will still be needed to add that spark of life to performances, but I don't see that being an 'actor', chosen as much for their physical attributes and stage presence as their ability to breath life into a script. Script writers, directors, cinematographers, choreographers, and yes, perhaps even actors, keep tweaking the AI performance with details until they get it right. You already see this with animations, except with existing technology they still need voice actors and often find motion capture less cumbersome than manually animating characters.

not_math 4y ago

Actors are much more than just talents, by which I mean being able to carry emotions, being charismatic and delivering lines in the way a director wants it. There is an undeniable human aspect to it that AI won't ever be able to replace. Sure, it'll probably be an important part of the industry, but saying all future media is going to be 24/7 AI generated content like that Seinfeld twitch stream is a pretty bleak view of the future. We watch movies because we try to connect with people and share our feelings with humans. I can't relate to an AI.

rcme 4y ago
> There is an undeniable human aspect to it that AI won't ever be able to replace. Why do you think an AI could not replicate this? AI has shown a remarkable ability to achieve things once thought impossible for an algorithm.
- ihatepython 4y ago
  I wonder if an AI would become obsessed with creating Human Intelligence (HI)
- pwdisswordfishc 4y ago
  Celebrity culture, the ability to refuse a job, character traits suggested by or shared with the actor… can't wait until cookie-cutter AI slaves replicate all of that.
tluyben2 4y ago
> won't ever be able to replace Humanity is recent in the cosmos, modern computing and AI are not 100 years old. You think your statement will hold in 1000 or 10000 years? You obviously believe the human brain is something supernatural which I do not (in fact, the past 10 years of AI boosts kind of convinced me our brain mechanism is vastly simpler than we thought; it’s just a complex, overarchitected implementation), but even believing that, we are just beginning to scratch the surface. I think it can do a convincing simile within years, at max decades from now. Something you cannot tell apart on the screen or audio. You might not even be told it is an AI.
- 8bitsrule 4y ago
  >You obviously believe the human brain is something supernatural... convinced me our brain mechanism is vastly simpler than we thought; it’s just a complex, overarchitected implementation) Cults can often convince all kinds of people of all kinds of things. Long ago LaPlace asserted a clockwork universe; that didn't hold water for too long. Too simplistic. Just kidding, but really, anecdotes don't constitute evidence that the mind is a 'brain mechanism'. Yep, many of our voluntary and involuntary routine behaviors are quite robot-like .. breathing, eating, sleeping, sexing. That said, some of us are less content with the routine. The expert systems now being referred to as 'artificial intelligence' are limp P.T. Barnum simulations of true intelligence, and of course there is little substantial evidence to support -any- model of creativity or consciousness ... let alone a mechanical one. In the face of that lack of evidence, a supernatural theory is no worse than a mechanical one. I prefer and will continue to prefer real intelligence and creativity of the human kind because it is substantially superior to limp simulations ... and because I am a human. I'll resist lowering my standards. Those who've tried to teach machines the mechanics of music have learned from continued failure that great music is beyond any of our so-called 'music theory'. I'll confidently assert that the same is true of dramatic performances.
- ihatepython 4y ago
  > You obviously believe the human brain is something supernatural which I do not (in fact, the past 10 years of AI boosts kind of convinced me our brain mechanism is vastly simpler than we thought It's entirely possible that this statement applies to your brain specifically, but not necessarily to all brains

sublinear 4y ago

Actors are only pigeonholed because of the whims of the industry. They are usually unimaginable wells of deep creativity and anyone who disagrees is incredibly ignorant of what's possible. AI as currently implemented, literally, and by definition, just produces average mediocre junk that is easily branded and controlled. This is fundamentally incompatible with any progress or meaningful novelty. Buyer beware.

izzygonzalez 4y ago
This may be true today, but the rate of progress on these tools is hitting a curve. Text and image generation are already basically indiscernible from human creations, and the entire space is now turning its attention to audio in tandem.
- sublinear 4y ago
  No you don't understand my comment. The AI only knows, and therefore can average from, what the actor has published. It cannot produce what the actor has not.
  - valdiorn 4y ago
    That won't be true pretty soon. It's currently not true for image generation.
    - sublinear 4y ago
      Ugh I'm not going to keep fighting off the goon squad of people desperate to invest in something, anything, that will hedge against the recession. We desperately need a hero for art.
stubish 4y ago
If you took a raw script and fed it to an AI, sure, you will get rubbish and I don't see that changing any time soon. However, if someone carefully choreographed the performance like a puppeteer... I think someone will still be needed to add that spark of life to performances, but I don't see that being an 'actor', chosen as much for their physical attributes and stage presence as their ability to breath life into a script. Script writers, directors, cinematographers, choreographers, and yes, perhaps even actors, keep tweaking the AI performance with details until they get it right. You already see this with animations, except with existing technology they still need voice actors and often find motion capture less cumbersome than manually animating characters.