3 ms·

Sounds like outright class warfare. Within a five years it will be possible to create realistic AI virtual actors and sets that generate the entire video seque

by ilaksh 3y ago

Sounds like outright class warfare. Within a five years it will be possible to create realistic AI virtual actors and sets that generate the entire video sequence including the performance. We can already do simplistic and less realistic versions of this.

duped 3y ago
This ultimately misses the point of art
- goblinux 3y ago
  1000% they don't want to make art, they want to make content
  - babyshake 3y ago
    And the ones that want to make art get iced out or pushed out.
- silisili 3y ago
  Have you missed the whole explosion of terrible movies that make tons of money(Marvel, Avatar, etc)? Apparently, the masses don't care about art.
- add-sub-mul-div 3y ago
  It's fascinating how this has exposed two different fundamental outlooks on art. One that doesn't care if art comes from an algorithm, as long as it's "good" enough on some linear measure. And another that considers the context/subtext of the creator's intent, process, etc. so much as to render art empty or pointless or meaningless if that dimension isn't there.
  - __loam 3y ago
    One sees it only as a commodity to be consumed and the other actually gives a shit about art.
- nitwit005 3y ago
  Studio executives have never made art, nor cared about it for the most part.
cogman10 3y ago
I'm way more pessimistic here. One of the weaknesses of LLM and the current state of AI is it's forgetful. Sure, you can ask it to draw a beach, but can you ask it to draw the SAME beach with a character interacting with items on that beach? The current simplistic versions of this have very tightly bound environments for the characters to interact (I'm thinking endless Seinfeld).
- krapp 3y ago
  This isn't about the current state of AI, this is about laying the foundations for the legal framework and infrastructure for AI in the future, when all of this stuff is feasible.
  - cogman10 3y ago
    > Within a five years it will be possible to create realistic AI virtual actors and sets that generate the entire video sequence including the performance. That to me means we are talking about the current state of AI. I don't disagree with setting a legal framework around ownership of AI derived art. However, I don't think this is a pressing issue. AI art, outside of maybe simple picture generation, is bad. AI books are terrible. And I don't see it getting any better. I'd be shocked if in the next 5 years there's any hit AI art generated. Heck, I'd be shocked if it happens within the next 20 years.
    - ilaksh 3y ago
      Over the last year the LLM state of the art which might be used to create scripts has gained at least 20 IQ points. The Claude 2 LLM just released has 100,000 token context and is fairly intelligent. Take a look at the output of Stable Diffusion XL 0.9 versus Stable Diffusion 1.5. It's a massive improvement. Metahumans is on an early version and already fairly realistic. Look at the realism of a game like Unrecord. AI is getting much better very rapidly.
      - cogman10 3y ago
        > Over the last year the LLM state of the art which might be used to create scripts has gained at least 20 IQ points. Citation needed. How is IQ being measured? What was it previously?
Legend2440 3y ago
It's not class warfare. The endgame here isn't "Hollywood execs fire all the actors and make billions for themselves", it's "an app on your phone makes whatever movie you want for free, and the Hollywood execs don't get anything either".
- dkh 3y ago
  Sure, it's both sides trying to survive a little longer than the other, but the studios are also better positioned to create or run this hypothetical app. Throughout the years, the one thing that has remained unchanged is that the power ultimately lies in controlling distribution.
  - satvikpendem 3y ago
    If we support open source AI enough, there really won't be anyone able to control said distribution. Now, if we shoot ourselves in the foot and have some sort of regulatory capture based legislation where only the rich can afford to have an "AI license" then it truly would be ironic when only studios can create AI pieces while both actors/writers and the common user suffer.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
Joeri 3y ago
So basically we’re inventing the holodeck, and people are freaking out as if it is the end of acting. The holodeck does characters better than humans, but they still go to plays on the enterprise. There will always be humans willing to act and humans willing to watch them. Maybe there won’t be 10 million dollar wages for a single role, but so what?

by ilaksh 3y ago

duped 3y ago

This ultimately misses the point of art

goblinux 3y ago
1000% they don't want to make art, they want to make content
- babyshake 3y ago
  And the ones that want to make art get iced out or pushed out.
silisili 3y ago
Have you missed the whole explosion of terrible movies that make tons of money(Marvel, Avatar, etc)? Apparently, the masses don't care about art.
add-sub-mul-div 3y ago
It's fascinating how this has exposed two different fundamental outlooks on art. One that doesn't care if art comes from an algorithm, as long as it's "good" enough on some linear measure. And another that considers the context/subtext of the creator's intent, process, etc. so much as to render art empty or pointless or meaningless if that dimension isn't there.
- __loam 3y ago
  One sees it only as a commodity to be consumed and the other actually gives a shit about art.
nitwit005 3y ago
Studio executives have never made art, nor cared about it for the most part.

cogman10 3y ago

I'm way more pessimistic here. One of the weaknesses of LLM and the current state of AI is it's forgetful. Sure, you can ask it to draw a beach, but can you ask it to draw the SAME beach with a character interacting with items on that beach? The current simplistic versions of this have very tightly bound environments for the characters to interact (I'm thinking endless Seinfeld).

krapp 3y ago
This isn't about the current state of AI, this is about laying the foundations for the legal framework and infrastructure for AI in the future, when all of this stuff is feasible.
- cogman10 3y ago
  > Within a five years it will be possible to create realistic AI virtual actors and sets that generate the entire video sequence including the performance. That to me means we are talking about the current state of AI. I don't disagree with setting a legal framework around ownership of AI derived art. However, I don't think this is a pressing issue. AI art, outside of maybe simple picture generation, is bad. AI books are terrible. And I don't see it getting any better. I'd be shocked if in the next 5 years there's any hit AI art generated. Heck, I'd be shocked if it happens within the next 20 years.
  - ilaksh 3y ago
    Over the last year the LLM state of the art which might be used to create scripts has gained at least 20 IQ points. The Claude 2 LLM just released has 100,000 token context and is fairly intelligent. Take a look at the output of Stable Diffusion XL 0.9 versus Stable Diffusion 1.5. It's a massive improvement. Metahumans is on an early version and already fairly realistic. Look at the realism of a game like Unrecord. AI is getting much better very rapidly.
    - cogman10 3y ago
      > Over the last year the LLM state of the art which might be used to create scripts has gained at least 20 IQ points. Citation needed. How is IQ being measured? What was it previously?

Legend2440 3y ago

It's not class warfare. The endgame here isn't "Hollywood execs fire all the actors and make billions for themselves", it's "an app on your phone makes whatever movie you want for free, and the Hollywood execs don't get anything either".

dkh 3y ago
Sure, it's both sides trying to survive a little longer than the other, but the studios are also better positioned to create or run this hypothetical app. Throughout the years, the one thing that has remained unchanged is that the power ultimately lies in controlling distribution.
- satvikpendem 3y ago
  If we support open source AI enough, there really won't be anyone able to control said distribution. Now, if we shoot ourselves in the foot and have some sort of regulatory capture based legislation where only the rich can afford to have an "AI license" then it truly would be ironic when only studios can create AI pieces while both actors/writers and the common user suffer.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

Joeri 3y ago

So basically we’re inventing the holodeck, and people are freaking out as if it is the end of acting. The holodeck does characters better than humans, but they still go to plays on the enterprise. There will always be humans willing to act and humans willing to watch them. Maybe there won’t be 10 million dollar wages for a single role, but so what?