4 ms·

Judging by how they've been trying to ram AI into YouTube creators workflows I suppose it's only a matter of time before they try to automate the entire pipelin

Judging by how they've been trying to ram AI into YouTube creators workflows I suppose it's only a matter of time before they try to automate the entire pipeline from idea, to execution, to "engaging" with viewers. It won't be good at doing any of that but when did that ever stop them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26QHXElgrl8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26QHXElgrl8 https://x.com/surri01/status/1867433782992879617 https://x.com/surri01/status/1867433782992879617

larodi 2y ago
And then suddenly this is not something that fascinates people anymore… in 10 years as non-synthetic becomes the new bio or artisan or whatever you like. Humanity has its ways of objecting accelerationism.
- turnsout 2y ago
  Put another way, over time people devalue things which can be produced with minimal human effort. I suspect it's less about humanity's values, and more about the way money closely tracks "time" (specifically the duration of human effort).
  - PittleyDunkin 2y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value
    - turnsout 2y ago
      Yes, exactly. Marx had this right. Money is a way to trade time.
  - EGreg 2y ago
    I strongly disagree. How many clothes do you buy that have 100 thread count, and are machine-made, vs hand-knit sweaters or something? When did you ask people for directions, or other major questions, instead of Google? You can wax poetic about wanting "the human touch", but at the end of the day, the market speaks -- people will just prefer everything automated. Including their partners, after your boyfriend can remember every little detail about you, notice everything including your pupils dilating, know exactly how you like it, when you like it, never get angry unless it's to spice things up, and has been trained on 1000 other partners, how could you go back? When robots can raise children better than parents, with patience and discipline and teaching them with individual attention, know 1000 ways to mold their behavior and achieve healthier outcomes. Everything people do is being commodified as we speak. Soon it will be humor, entertainment, nursing, etc. Then personal relations. Just extrapolate a decade or three into the future. Best case scenario: if we nail alignment, we build a zoo for ourselves where we have zero power and are treated like animals who have sex and eat and fart all day long. No one will care about whatever you have to offer, because everyone will be surrounded by layers of bots from the time they are born. PS: anything you write on HN can already have been written by AI, pretty soon you may as well quit producing any content at all. No one will care whether you wrote it.
    - vouaobrasil 2y ago
      > PS: anything you write on HN can already have been written by AI, pretty soon you may as well quit producing any content at all. No one will care whether you wrote it. People theoretically would care, but the internet has already set up producing things to be pseudo-anonymous, so we have forgotten the value of actually having a human being behind content. That's why AI is so successful, and it's a damn shame.
      - skeledrew 2y ago
        What exactly is the value of having a human behind content if it gets to the point that content generated by AI is indistinguishable from content generated by humans?
        PittleyDunkin 2y ago
        > What exactly is the value of having a human behind content if it gets to the point that content generated by AI is indistinguishable from content generated by humans? What would be the point of paying for AI content if nobody did anything to produce it? Just take that shit!
        skeledrew 2y ago
        There won't even be any "paying" or "taking" per se. What is generated by one can be generated by another, making those concepts generally moot in that regard.
        turnsout 2y ago
        I think "indistinguishable" is a receding horizon. People are already good at picking out AI text, and AI video is even easier. Even if it looks 100% realistic on the surface, the content itself (writing, concept, etc) will have a kind of indescribable "sameness" that will give it away. If there's one thing that connects all media made in human history, it's that humans find humans interesting. No technology (like literally no technology ever) will change that.
- echelon 2y ago
  Are you kidding? TikTok is one of the easiest platforms to create for, and look at how much human attention it has sucked up. The attention/dopamine magnet is accelerating its transformation into a gravitational singularity for human minds.
  - tokioyoyo 2y ago
    TikTok’s main attraction are the people, not just the videos. Trends, drama and etc. all involve real humans doing real human stuff, so it’s relatable. I might be wrong, but AI videos are on the same path as AI generated images. Cool for the first year, then “ah ok, zero effort content”.
- gom_jabbar 2y ago
  Sure, humanity has its ways of objecting Accelerationism, but the process fundamentally challenges human identity: "The Human Security System is structured by delusion. What's being protected there is not some real thing that is mankind, it's the structure of illusory identity. Just as at the more micro level it's not that humans as an organism are being threatened by robots, it's rather that your self-comprehension as an organism becomes something that can't be maintained beyond a certain threshold of ambient networked intelligence." [0] See also my research project on the core thesis of Accelerationism that capitalism is AI. [1] [0] https://syntheticzero.net/2017/06/19/the-only-thing-i-would-impose-is-fragmentation-an-interview-with-nick-land/ https://syntheticzero.net/2017/06/19/the-only-thing-i-would-... [1] https://retrochronic.com/ https://retrochronic.com/
- vouaobrasil 2y ago
  > Humanity has its ways of objecting accelerationism. Actually, typically human objection only slows it down and often it becomes a fringe movement, while the masses continue to consume the lowest common denominator. Take the revival of the flip phone, typewriter, etc. Sadly, technology marches on and life gets worse.
  - adolph 2y ago
    Does life get worse for the majority of people or do the fruits of new technology rarely address any individual person’s progress toward senescence? (The latter feels like tech moves forward but life gets worse.)
    - vouaobrasil 2y ago
      Of course, it depends on how you define "worse". If you use life expectancy, infant mortality, and disease, then life has in the past gotten better (although the technology of the past 20 years has RARELY contributed to any of that). If you use 'proximity to wild nature', 'clean air', 'more space', then life has gotten worse. But people don't choose between these two. They choose between alternatives that give them analgesics in an already corrupt society creating a series of descending local maximae.
noch 2y ago
> Judging by how they've been trying to ram AI into YouTube creators workflows […] Thanks for sharing that video and post! One way to think about this stuff is to imagine that you are 14 and starting to create videos, art, music, etc in order to build a platform online. Maybe you dream of having 7 channels at the same time for your sundry hobbies and building audiences. For that 14 year old, these tools are available everywhere by default and are a step function above what the prior generation had. If you imagine these tools improving even faster in usability and capability than prior generations' tools did … If you are of a certain age you'll remember how we were harangued endlessly about "remix culture" and how mp3s were enabling us to steal creativity without making an effort at being creative ourselves, about how photobashing in Photoshop (pirated cracked version anyway) was not real art, etc. And yet, halfway through the linked video, the speaker, who has misgivings, was laughing out loud at the inventiveness of the generated replies and I was reminded that someone once said that one true IQ test is the ability to make other humans laugh.
- jsheard 2y ago
  > laughing out loud at the inventiveness of the generated replies Inventive is one way of putting it, but I think he was laughing at how bizarre or out-of-character the responses would be if he used them. Like the AI suggesting that he post "it is indeed a beverage that would make you have a hard time finding a toilet bowl that can hold all of that liquid" as if those were his own words.
- handsaway 2y ago
  "remix culture" required skill and talent. Not everyone could be Girl Talk or make The Grey Album or Wugazi. The artists creating those projects clearly have hundreds if not thousands of hours of practice differentiating them from someone who just started pasting MP3s together in a DAW yesterday. If this is "just another tool" then my question is: does the output of someone who has used this tool for one thousand hours display a meaningful difference in quality to someone who just picked it up? I have not seen any evidence that it does. Another idea: What the pro generative AI crowd doesn't seem to understand is that good art is not about _execution_ it's about _making deliberate choices_. While a master painter or guitarist may indeed pull off incredible technical feats, their execution is not the art in and of itself, it is widening the amount of choices they can make. The more and more generative AI steps into the role of making these choices ironically the more useless it becomes. And lastly: I've never met anyone who has spent significant time creating art react to generative AI as anything more than a toy.
spankalee 2y ago
They basically already have this: https://workspace.google.com/products/vids/ https://workspace.google.com/products/vids/
- cj 2y ago
  Last week I started seeing a banner in Google Docs along the lines of "Create a video based on the content of this doc!" with a call to action that brought me to Google Vids.
  - lukan 2y ago
    Hey, it's AI and so it is good, right? Seriously, it sounds like something kids can have fun with, or bored deskworkers. But a serious use case, at the current state of the art? I doubt it.
EGreg 2y ago
Who needs viewers anyway? Automate the whole thing. I just see the endgame for the internet is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Internet_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Internet_theory
- wruza 2y ago
  They already do that. 90% of cheerful top comments on some channels are clearly generated. They never mention content (yet) and are abstract as hell. “Very useful video, thanks”, “I’m watching this every day, love the content” and so on. It’s unclear if they have a real view count either, at least in promotion phase.

larodi 2y ago

And then suddenly this is not something that fascinates people anymore… in 10 years as non-synthetic becomes the new bio or artisan or whatever you like. Humanity has its ways of objecting accelerationism.

turnsout 2y ago
Put another way, over time people devalue things which can be produced with minimal human effort. I suspect it's less about humanity's values, and more about the way money closely tracks "time" (specifically the duration of human effort).
- PittleyDunkin 2y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value
  - turnsout 2y ago
    Yes, exactly. Marx had this right. Money is a way to trade time.
- EGreg 2y ago
  I strongly disagree. How many clothes do you buy that have 100 thread count, and are machine-made, vs hand-knit sweaters or something? When did you ask people for directions, or other major questions, instead of Google? You can wax poetic about wanting "the human touch", but at the end of the day, the market speaks -- people will just prefer everything automated. Including their partners, after your boyfriend can remember every little detail about you, notice everything including your pupils dilating, know exactly how you like it, when you like it, never get angry unless it's to spice things up, and has been trained on 1000 other partners, how could you go back? When robots can raise children better than parents, with patience and discipline and teaching them with individual attention, know 1000 ways to mold their behavior and achieve healthier outcomes. Everything people do is being commodified as we speak. Soon it will be humor, entertainment, nursing, etc. Then personal relations. Just extrapolate a decade or three into the future. Best case scenario: if we nail alignment, we build a zoo for ourselves where we have zero power and are treated like animals who have sex and eat and fart all day long. No one will care about whatever you have to offer, because everyone will be surrounded by layers of bots from the time they are born. PS: anything you write on HN can already have been written by AI, pretty soon you may as well quit producing any content at all. No one will care whether you wrote it.
  - vouaobrasil 2y ago
    > PS: anything you write on HN can already have been written by AI, pretty soon you may as well quit producing any content at all. No one will care whether you wrote it. People theoretically would care, but the internet has already set up producing things to be pseudo-anonymous, so we have forgotten the value of actually having a human being behind content. That's why AI is so successful, and it's a damn shame.
    - skeledrew 2y ago
      What exactly is the value of having a human behind content if it gets to the point that content generated by AI is indistinguishable from content generated by humans?
      - PittleyDunkin 2y ago
        > What exactly is the value of having a human behind content if it gets to the point that content generated by AI is indistinguishable from content generated by humans? What would be the point of paying for AI content if nobody did anything to produce it? Just take that shit!
        skeledrew 2y ago
        There won't even be any "paying" or "taking" per se. What is generated by one can be generated by another, making those concepts generally moot in that regard.
      - turnsout 2y ago
        I think "indistinguishable" is a receding horizon. People are already good at picking out AI text, and AI video is even easier. Even if it looks 100% realistic on the surface, the content itself (writing, concept, etc) will have a kind of indescribable "sameness" that will give it away. If there's one thing that connects all media made in human history, it's that humans find humans interesting. No technology (like literally no technology ever) will change that.
echelon 2y ago
Are you kidding? TikTok is one of the easiest platforms to create for, and look at how much human attention it has sucked up. The attention/dopamine magnet is accelerating its transformation into a gravitational singularity for human minds.
- tokioyoyo 2y ago
  TikTok’s main attraction are the people, not just the videos. Trends, drama and etc. all involve real humans doing real human stuff, so it’s relatable. I might be wrong, but AI videos are on the same path as AI generated images. Cool for the first year, then “ah ok, zero effort content”.
gom_jabbar 2y ago
Sure, humanity has its ways of objecting Accelerationism, but the process fundamentally challenges human identity: "The Human Security System is structured by delusion. What's being protected there is not some real thing that is mankind, it's the structure of illusory identity. Just as at the more micro level it's not that humans as an organism are being threatened by robots, it's rather that your self-comprehension as an organism becomes something that can't be maintained beyond a certain threshold of ambient networked intelligence." [0] See also my research project on the core thesis of Accelerationism that capitalism is AI. [1] [0] https://syntheticzero.net/2017/06/19/the-only-thing-i-would-impose-is-fragmentation-an-interview-with-nick-land/ https://syntheticzero.net/2017/06/19/the-only-thing-i-would-... [1] https://retrochronic.com/ https://retrochronic.com/
vouaobrasil 2y ago
> Humanity has its ways of objecting accelerationism. Actually, typically human objection only slows it down and often it becomes a fringe movement, while the masses continue to consume the lowest common denominator. Take the revival of the flip phone, typewriter, etc. Sadly, technology marches on and life gets worse.
- adolph 2y ago
  Does life get worse for the majority of people or do the fruits of new technology rarely address any individual person’s progress toward senescence? (The latter feels like tech moves forward but life gets worse.)
  - vouaobrasil 2y ago
    Of course, it depends on how you define "worse". If you use life expectancy, infant mortality, and disease, then life has in the past gotten better (although the technology of the past 20 years has RARELY contributed to any of that). If you use 'proximity to wild nature', 'clean air', 'more space', then life has gotten worse. But people don't choose between these two. They choose between alternatives that give them analgesics in an already corrupt society creating a series of descending local maximae.

noch 2y ago

> Judging by how they've been trying to ram AI into YouTube creators workflows […] Thanks for sharing that video and post! One way to think about this stuff is to imagine that you are 14 and starting to create videos, art, music, etc in order to build a platform online. Maybe you dream of having 7 channels at the same time for your sundry hobbies and building audiences. For that 14 year old, these tools are available everywhere by default and are a step function above what the prior generation had. If you imagine these tools improving even faster in usability and capability than prior generations' tools did … If you are of a certain age you'll remember how we were harangued endlessly about "remix culture" and how mp3s were enabling us to steal creativity without making an effort at being creative ourselves, about how photobashing in Photoshop (pirated cracked version anyway) was not real art, etc. And yet, halfway through the linked video, the speaker, who has misgivings, was laughing out loud at the inventiveness of the generated replies and I was reminded that someone once said that one true IQ test is the ability to make other humans laugh.

jsheard 2y ago
> laughing out loud at the inventiveness of the generated replies Inventive is one way of putting it, but I think he was laughing at how bizarre or out-of-character the responses would be if he used them. Like the AI suggesting that he post "it is indeed a beverage that would make you have a hard time finding a toilet bowl that can hold all of that liquid" as if those were his own words.
handsaway 2y ago
"remix culture" required skill and talent. Not everyone could be Girl Talk or make The Grey Album or Wugazi. The artists creating those projects clearly have hundreds if not thousands of hours of practice differentiating them from someone who just started pasting MP3s together in a DAW yesterday. If this is "just another tool" then my question is: does the output of someone who has used this tool for one thousand hours display a meaningful difference in quality to someone who just picked it up? I have not seen any evidence that it does. Another idea: What the pro generative AI crowd doesn't seem to understand is that good art is not about _execution_ it's about _making deliberate choices_. While a master painter or guitarist may indeed pull off incredible technical feats, their execution is not the art in and of itself, it is widening the amount of choices they can make. The more and more generative AI steps into the role of making these choices ironically the more useless it becomes. And lastly: I've never met anyone who has spent significant time creating art react to generative AI as anything more than a toy.

spankalee 2y ago

They basically already have this: https://workspace.google.com/products/vids/ https://workspace.google.com/products/vids/

cj 2y ago
Last week I started seeing a banner in Google Docs along the lines of "Create a video based on the content of this doc!" with a call to action that brought me to Google Vids.
- lukan 2y ago
  Hey, it's AI and so it is good, right? Seriously, it sounds like something kids can have fun with, or bored deskworkers. But a serious use case, at the current state of the art? I doubt it.

EGreg 2y ago

Who needs viewers anyway? Automate the whole thing. I just see the endgame for the internet is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Internet_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Internet_theory

wruza 2y ago
They already do that. 90% of cheerful top comments on some channels are clearly generated. They never mention content (yet) and are abstract as hell. “Very useful video, thanks”, “I’m watching this every day, love the content” and so on. It’s unclear if they have a real view count either, at least in promotion phase.