6 ms·
My favorite quote on this topic is "Why should I bother to read something you didn't bother to write?" Especially when you're talking about fiction and reading
by bdndndndbve 2y ago
My favorite quote on this topic is "Why should I bother to read something you didn't bother to write?"
Especially when you're talking about fiction and reading/watching for enjoyment, what does it matter if you can shit out 1000 hours of AI content? Maybe it's good to keep babies entertained? Studios have gotten so into the habit of treating "content" as a fungible commodity, but the fact is that even blockbuster movies still live and die by actually being entertaining.
- spiderice 2y ago> Why should I bother to read something you didn't bother to write? The answer seems obvious: because it's better. Obviously it isn't better now. But it's easy to imagine a day in the not-too-distant future where AI can shit out 1000 hours of content that is better in every way than what humans create. And it will even feel more human than the human made stuff because the AI will have learned that we like that. What do you do then? Watch the worse stuff? Maybe, and I think a lot still will. But how long does that last?
- mkleczek 2y ago> The answer seems obvious: because it's better. Define "better". The point really is that "better" in this context means "made by a human" - not "faked to look like made by a human". People need connection to other people - art is one of the means of communicating _between people_.
- bdangubic 2y agoI see maybe 4 things of TV per year this days than make me feel this way… the rest is garbage that may as well be created by non-human
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- impomura 2y agoit's impossible to answer to this line of reasoning without wasting time so I'll just start right away with the ad hominem. you just don't like art, you don't understand it and you want slop, admit it and don't feel compelled to enter the discussion with your growth oriented bullshit mindset
- spiderice 2y agoYou're conflating the reality of the situation with me. I didn't say I wanted AI generated content. Just that it seems like it will inevitably win. All the insults in your comment just stem from an imaginary and inaccurate picture of me, a stranger, that you created in your head. > don't feel compelled to enter the discussion with your growth oriented bullshit mindset Then why respond?
- stego-tech 2y agoLiterally this. Ben hits the nail on the head that these tools can “write convincing Elizabethan language but can’t write Shakespeare”, along with his metaphor about craftsmen vs artists. These tools can never create art because art is the imperfection of reality transposed from the mind’s eye using the talent of the artisan and their tools. Writing a convincing enough prompt to generate an assortment of visual outputs that you “choose” as the final product can never be art, because your art skills ended with the prompt itself - everything after was just maths, and not even maths you had a direct hand in. Even then, you cannot really shill your prompt as art either, because you wrote tokens to ingest into a LLM to generate pseudorandom visual outputs, not language to be interpreted by other humans and visualized on their own accord. Art is one of those things you cannot appreciate until you make it, and generating slop is not creating art. A preschooler with a single, broken crayon and a napkin makes better art than anything generated via tokens and math models - and to really drive that home, I’d argue that the teenager goofing around with math formulas on their graphing calculator to create visually beautiful or interesting designs is also superior art than whatever the LLM can spew forth using far more advanced maths. If you really want art, then make it. Learn to draw, practice photography, paint some scenery, experiment with formula visualizations, layout a garden, or heck, just commission an artist to bring your idea into reality. Learning to articulate your vision with language in such a way others can illustrate or create it is a far more valuable skill than laying out tokens for an LLM.
- xenospn 2y agoCan AI write really funny jokes? honest question
- tessellated 2y agoI asked ChatGPT to write about walking the dog in scientific language. It came up with this gem: "Logging middleware records metrics (distance, stops, events) into a shared datastore for analytics on future walk optimization."
- cholantesh 2y agoTrain it to attribute its failure to land on wokeness, have it generate designs for merch that communicate this idea, and book an appearance on JRE and it'll have completed the arc of a lot of short run comics.
- Yizahi 2y agoReminds me of a short story "Jokester" by Asimov :)
- andrewinardeer 2y agoMechanizing the expression of artist endeavour seems silly. Does an LLM know the pleasure and pain that love can instill or does it just regurgitate tokens in a pattern it thinks is best fit?
- omikun 2y agoHow do you think most creatives are doing?? Rare is someone who can express anything that isn't a derivative of what came before.
- josefritzishere 2y agoI can easily imagine AI spitting out volume. I can't imagine it spitting out quality. Most of what it generates now is just trash. Like the Tourist/bear paradigm in dumpster security there may be overlap between the worst human writing and the best AI writing... but that's not how you make a successful film.
- globalnode 2y agoart is essentially human, warts n all, how can something non-human make human art.
- tartoran 2y agoIt can't, what it can do is mimic other human art and generate it 10000x faster.
- jfactorial 2y agoA brush makes human art
- red-iron-pine 2y agobecause its held by a human. an autonomic system making inferences based on a dataset isn't capturing a feeling, it's just regurgitating a statistical average.
- jfactorial 2y agoGenerative AI is not autonomous, it's wielded by a user just as a brush is, prompted and tweaked by a human being, a new tool in the artist's tackle box, like acrylic paint, Photoshop, "content-aware fill" etc.
- tartoran 2y agoMaybe AI will enjoy reading AI generated stuff but humans like flawed human made 'content'. Made by humans for humans (R).
- tokioyoyo 2y agoMy cynical take is, younger generation who is growing up with AI generated content will accept it as normal and move on. We only enjoy human-created stuff, as that seems "natural" to us. That "natural" feeling tends to change in every new generation.
- rsynnott 2y agoIs that easy to imagine? I’m not sure it is, particularly. Ultimately, the LLM industry can’t run on jam tomorrow forever. At some point, people have to stop concentrating on the hypothetical magic future, and concentrate on what actually exists.
- bestouff 2y agoOnce AI is entrenched and the economics work out, it will become way more expensive to shoot a "traditional" movie. You won't find the trained technical staff, the actors, scripts, etc. which will be all out of jobs and doing something else. Like today if you want to run a steam locomotive, it's way way more expensive than their modern counterpart because the infrastructure isn't there anymore. So yes, the AI will eventually get better even if it doesn't !
- aetherson 2y agoThis is the classic expression of the fallacy that the value of something is based on the cost to create it from the seller, not the benefit it brings to the buyer.
- njtransit 2y agoAdditionally, there are lots of examples where cheaper production has produced an inferior product yet the difference in price causes the inferior product to usurp in superior product. Building materials exhibit this effect frequently: plaster vs. drywall, asphalt vs. slate, balloon framing vs structural masonry, etc. In media, TikTok exemplifies this effect. People watch fewer movies (expensive, high quality) and watch more short-form content (cheap, low quality).
- hnthrowaway6543 2y agoSaying movies are inherently a superior product to TikTok shorts is incredibly untrue. I would rather watch 90 minutes of the dumbest TikTok crap imaginable than sit through Madame Web again.
- njtransit 2y agoThe quality floor of all mediums will always be 0.
- bdndndndbve 2y agoCheaper movies in terms of cost are often better than expensive movies because they have a humanity that shows through. Let me know when an AI can make a Jon Carpenter movie
- frm88 2y agoThis. Christopher Nolan, but yes. AI can never capture the subtlety of the (failings) of the human mind/memory and the implications. It would have to learn it somehow and I don't see a method with which that can be taught.
- fldskfjdslkfj 2y agoWe already have procedurally generated content in games - and quite a few of those seem to be pretty popular.
- bdndndndbve 2y agoIn specific genres of game where the developers put a lot of effort into the mechanics to facilitate procedural generation, yes it's interesting. You can't tell me Dwarf Fortress was fast and easy to make because fortresses are procedurally generated.
- chefandy 2y agoPCG and NN-generated are definitely not the same thing though. I've done both, and most PCG is made using plain-old programming and art assets-- it's just more flexible to configure at runtime. Anyone I've seen trying to do real on-the-fly game content generation using generative AI is either a) making flexible but useless NPC dialog, or b) basically using it as an expensive random number generator because it's nowhere close to good enough to create immediately usable game assets that reliably work with a game.
- TheAceOfHearts 2y agoAI tools will continue to get better, and they'll really shine when they can enable increasingly smaller teams of people to execute on their creative vision. Existing non-AI tools have already helped enable tiny teams to create media which is enjoyed by millions of people; the biggest and most recent example is how Source2 is used to animate Skibidi Toilet. But there's still room for increasing accessibility. The biggest issue I've noticed with most existing AI-gen tools is that they only focus on generating completed output. Ideally you'd have tools that can generate multiple layers or scenes within creative tools to allow for continued iteration. The future is when one person can do by themselves what previously would've taken hundreds or thousands of people. I'm really looking forward to what sort of creative works we'll get from people that wouldn't normally have access to Hollywood-tier resources.
- MichaelZuo 2y agoWhen do estimate there to be quality AI generated content better than say the 90th percentile of Hollywood output?
- tartoran 2y agoThe bar could drop too...
- coldtea 2y ago>My favorite quote on this topic is "Why should I bother to read something you didn't bother to write?" "If you're like the average consumer, because you have no life, and would doomscroll whatever shit we post for you, and watch whatever slop we produce for you. You did it with the tons of crap remakes, rehashes, franchize, and "multiverse" crap in the 2010-2024 span, you ain't gonna stop just because it's an AI writing it. It's not like the commercial hacks writing the stuff you watched earlier were any more creative than AI".
- init2null 2y agoSequelitis and remakes have persuaded me that some people really want intellectual baby food. I'm worried that the majority really just wants content to pass the time. Let's hope creative indie movies will continue to flourish, as we may just end up depending on them.
- ruthmarx 2y ago> Maybe it's good to keep babies entertained? It's more than sufficient to keep the majority of the adult population entertained. It can perfectly shit out a script for the next Fast and the Furious movie and the audience would never be able to tell the difference.