4 ms·

By a whisker, I would bet you're right. But only because of your clause 'completely done by AI'. And I think that renders the bet kind of irrelevant. I would a

By a whisker, I would bet you're right. But only because of your clause 'completely done by AI'. And I think that renders the bet kind of irrelevant. I would also bet that sometime in the next 10 years, we'll have a masterpiece of cinema on our hands where the heavy lifting (visuals, sound, even screenwriting) was largely done by an AI, helpfully nudged and curated at important moments by human experts. Or, by just one person.

cogman10 2y ago
I'm willing to modify the bet to "Just one person does all the labor with AI as the primary tool". What I meant by "completely done by AI" is that AI is doing the vast majority of the heavy lifting. Sound, visuals, script and ultimately humans are just acting as the director of that AI. In otherwords, a masterpiece of cinema created by one person and AI prompts. Masterpiece being judged by the above success criteria. I won't accept some spam film that an AI magazine touts as being a masterpiece.
- echelon 2y ago
  > humans are just acting as the director of that AI. My pro-AI director friends tell me this is ultimately what they've been doing with humans all along. Sometimes he humans don't give them what they're looking for, so they ask again. And they have to fit within logistical and budgetary constraints.
- hathawsh 2y ago
  Is there such a thing as a "HN Vote" post? Because this would be a great vote to put on the front page. The question would be "How much of the production will AI be doing in the movie/TV industries in 10 years?" and these would be the choices: 1) Everything. A single prompt will generate a full-length, high quality movie. 2) One person will be able to spend a few weeks or months to produce a high quality movie using purely AI generated visuals and audio, with at least part of the script written by AI. 3) AI will never replace some aspects of high quality movies, although it's not quite clear yet which aspects. It could be writing, acting, directing, or something else. 4) AI will never replace most aspects of high quality movies. 5) Society will rebel against any form of AI in movies; it doesn't matter how good AI gets, nobody will watch movies touched in any way by AI. My guess is 2.
  - echelon 2y ago
    #2, minus the part about AI script writing, and with a caveat that changes "purely AI generated visuals and audio" to something human-driven, AI-accelerated.
  - buzer 2y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/newpoll https://news.ycombinator.com/newpoll
    - hathawsh 2y ago
      Wow, cool! Here's my poll. We'll see if anyone notices. :-) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42955244 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42955244
- psytrancefan 2y ago
  The bet is stupid. David Lynch The Grandmother would be considered a "masterpiece" by this definition. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4y0rYWVcxF4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4y0rYWVcxF4 Anyone could make something along those lines right now with AI tools. The ratings is because of what the fame David Lynch achieved after making this. AI video is going to stall bad because it is just too expensive and what we have now is complete trash. Sora is such a massive disappointment to anyone who was interested in doing exactly what is being described.
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    > The ratings is because of what the fame David Lynch achieved after making this. Okay, so that's a risk of false positive success. It doesn't mean the bet is pointless, just that it's not the ultimate metric.
  - cogman10 2y ago
    Nope, the video isn't long enough and wouldn't qualify. I also agree that AI will stall which is the point of the bet. I also don't think an AI recreation of the Grandmother would see critical acclaim. Lynch already did it.

cogman10 2y ago

I'm willing to modify the bet to "Just one person does all the labor with AI as the primary tool". What I meant by "completely done by AI" is that AI is doing the vast majority of the heavy lifting. Sound, visuals, script and ultimately humans are just acting as the director of that AI. In otherwords, a masterpiece of cinema created by one person and AI prompts. Masterpiece being judged by the above success criteria. I won't accept some spam film that an AI magazine touts as being a masterpiece.

echelon 2y ago
> humans are just acting as the director of that AI. My pro-AI director friends tell me this is ultimately what they've been doing with humans all along. Sometimes he humans don't give them what they're looking for, so they ask again. And they have to fit within logistical and budgetary constraints.
hathawsh 2y ago
Is there such a thing as a "HN Vote" post? Because this would be a great vote to put on the front page. The question would be "How much of the production will AI be doing in the movie/TV industries in 10 years?" and these would be the choices: 1) Everything. A single prompt will generate a full-length, high quality movie. 2) One person will be able to spend a few weeks or months to produce a high quality movie using purely AI generated visuals and audio, with at least part of the script written by AI. 3) AI will never replace some aspects of high quality movies, although it's not quite clear yet which aspects. It could be writing, acting, directing, or something else. 4) AI will never replace most aspects of high quality movies. 5) Society will rebel against any form of AI in movies; it doesn't matter how good AI gets, nobody will watch movies touched in any way by AI. My guess is 2.
- echelon 2y ago
  #2, minus the part about AI script writing, and with a caveat that changes "purely AI generated visuals and audio" to something human-driven, AI-accelerated.
- buzer 2y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/newpoll https://news.ycombinator.com/newpoll
  - hathawsh 2y ago
    Wow, cool! Here's my poll. We'll see if anyone notices. :-) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42955244 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42955244
psytrancefan 2y ago
The bet is stupid. David Lynch The Grandmother would be considered a "masterpiece" by this definition. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4y0rYWVcxF4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4y0rYWVcxF4 Anyone could make something along those lines right now with AI tools. The ratings is because of what the fame David Lynch achieved after making this. AI video is going to stall bad because it is just too expensive and what we have now is complete trash. Sora is such a massive disappointment to anyone who was interested in doing exactly what is being described.
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  > The ratings is because of what the fame David Lynch achieved after making this. Okay, so that's a risk of false positive success. It doesn't mean the bet is pointless, just that it's not the ultimate metric.
- cogman10 2y ago
  Nope, the video isn't long enough and wouldn't qualify. I also agree that AI will stall which is the point of the bet. I also don't think an AI recreation of the Grandmother would see critical acclaim. Lynch already did it.