6 ms·
Not sure why they put so much investment into videoSlop and imageSlop. Anthropic seems to be more focused at least.
by password54321 10mo ago
Not sure why they put so much investment into videoSlop and imageSlop. Anthropic seems to be more focused at least.
- SAI_Peregrinus 10mo agoBecause their main use is for advertising/propaganda, which is largely videoSlop & imageSlop even without AI.
- password54321 10mo agoOutside of this: https://openai.com/index/disney-sora-agreement/ https://openai.com/index/disney-sora-agreement/ I don't think there has been much of a win for them even in advertising for image/video slop.
- anomaly_ 10mo agoIt's like half the poster on here live in some parallel universe. I am making real money using generated image/video advertising content for both B2C and B2B goods. I am using Whisper and LLMs to review customer service call logs at scale and identity development opportunities for staff. I am using GPT/Gemini to help write SQL queries and little python scripts to do data analysis on my customer base. My business's productivity is way up since GenAI become accessible.
- bdangubic 10mo agothat (very vocal) half tried it once and it didn’t work :)
- piskov 10mo agoBecause as with the internet 99% of the usage won’t be for education, work, personal development, what have you. It will be for effing kitten videos and memes.
- nine_k 10mo agoAre the posters of effing kitten videos a customer base with a significant LTV? (The obvious well-paying market would be erotic / furry / porn, but it's too toxic to publicly touch, at least in the US.)
- piskov 10mo agoOpenrouter stats already mention 52% usage is roleplay. As for photo/video very large number of people use it for friends and family (turn photo into creative/funny video, change photo, etc.). Also I would think photoshop-like features are coming more and more in chatgpt and alike. For example, “take my poorly-lit photo and make it look professional and suitable for linkedin profile”
- Tcepsa 10mo agoAlso FWIW I understand that the furry community has a strong culture of commissioning artists for their work, so that's likely to be a headwind against using genAI that isn't explicitly trained only on licensed materials. Sure, there are likely some who would use it regardless, but I expect the use of genAI to generate furry porn to be at least as toxic within that community as the use of genAI to generate furry porn outside of that community.
- candiddevmike 10mo agoIf only 99% of the Internet was kitten videos and memes
- johnnyfived 10mo agoBut how much more profitable are they? We see revenue but not profits / spending. Anthropic seems to be growing faster than OpenAI did but that could be the benefit of post-GPT hype.
- Alconicon 10mo agoBecause OpenAI stands for AI leader. If Gemini can create or edit an image, chatgpt needs to be able to do this too. Who wants to copy&paste prompts between ai agents? Also if you want to have more semantics, you add image, video and audio to your model. It gets smarter because of it. OpenAI is also relevant bigger than antropic and is known as a generic 'helper'. Antropic probably saw the benefits of being more focused on developer which allows it to succeed longer in the game for the amount of money they have.
- password54321 10mo ago>Also if you want to have more semantics, you add image, video and audio to your model. It gets smarter because of it. I think you are confusing generation with analysis. As far I am aware your model does not need to be good at generating images to be able to decode an image.
- adastra22 10mo agoIt is, to first approximation, the same thing. The generative part of genAI is just running the analysis model in reverse. Now there are all sorts of tricks to get the output of this to be good, and maybe they shouldn't be spending time and resources on this. But the core capability is shared.
- kaoD 10mo ago> The generative part of genAI is just running the analysis model in reverse. I think that hasn't been the case since DeepDream?
- mbreese 10mo agoI think you're partially right, but I don't think being an AI leader is the main motivation -- that's a side effect. I think it's important to OpenAI to support as many use-cases as possible. Right now, the experience that most people have with ChatGPT is through small revenue individual accounts. Individual subscriptions with individual needs, but modest budgets. The bigger money is in enterprise and corporate accounts. To land these accounts, OpenAI will need to provide coverage across as many use-cases as they can so that they can operate as a one-stop AI provider. If a company needs to use OpenAI for chat, Anthropic for coding, and Google for video, what's the point? If Google's chat and coding is "good enough" and you need to have video generation, then that company is going to go with Google for everything. For the end-game I think OpenAI is playing for, they will need to be competitive in all modalities of AI.
- jdminhbg 10mo agoBecause for all the incessant whining about "slop," multimodal AI i/o is incredibly useful. Being able to take a photo of a home repair issue, have it diagnosed, and return a diagram showing you what to do with it is great, and it's the same algos that power the slop. "Sorry, you'll have to go to Gemini for that use case, people got mad about memes on the internet" is not really a good way for them to be a mass consumer company.
- Ginden 10mo agoBecause almost everyone involved in AI race grew up in "winner takes it all" environments, typical for software, and they try really hard to make it reality. This means your model should do everything to just take 90% of market share, or at least 90% of specific niche. The problem is, they can't find the moat, despite searching very hard, whatever you bake into your AI, your competitors will be able to replicate in few months. This is why OpenAI is striking deal with Disney, because copyright provides such moat.
- sod22 10mo agoStriking deals without a proper vision is a waste of resources. And that’s the path OAI is on.
- worldsayshi 10mo ago> your competitors will be able to replicate in few months. Will they really be able to replicate the quality while spending significantly less in compute investment? If not then the moat is still how much capital you can acquire for burning on training?
- the_gipsy 10mo agoWhat does moat even mean anymore
- AlotOfReading 10mo agoIs that not what distillation is?
- Ginden 10mo agoThere are multiple tech companies with quadrillion-deep pockets.
- thisgetsit 10mo ago> copyright provides such a moat. Been saying this since the 2016 Alice case. Apple jumped into content production in 2017. They saw the long term value of copyright interests. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/08/apple-reportedly-ready-to-spend-1-billion-on-original-content-next-year/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/08/apple... Alice changed things such that code monkeys algorithms were not patentable (except in some narrow cases where true runtime novelty can be established.) Since the transformers paper, the potential of self authoring content was obvious to those who can afford to think about things rather than hustle all day. Apple wants to sell AI in an aluminum box while VCs need to prop up data center agrarianism; they need people to believe their server farms are essential. Not an Apple fanboy but in this case, am rooting for their "your hardware, your model" aspirations. Altman, Thiel, the VC model of make the serfs tend their server fields, their control of foundation models, is a gross feeling. It comes with the most religious like sense of fealty to political hierarchy and social structure that only exists as hallucination in the dying generations. The 50+ year old crowd cannot generationally churn fast enough.
- Cyclone_ 10mo agoThe fact that they do this isn't very bullish for them achieving whatever they define as AGI.
- fastball 10mo agoYou don't expect AGI to be multi-modal?
- madeofpalk 10mo agoWhat is AGI?
- fittingopposite 10mo agoArtificial general intelligence
- dyauspitr 10mo agoBecause those and world models are the endgame, way way more than text is.
- dktp 10mo agoOpenAI is (was?) extremely good at making things that go viral. The successful ones for sure boost subscriber count meaningfully Studio Ghibli, Sora app. Go viral, juice numbers then turn the knobs down on copyrighted material. Atlas I believe was a less successful than they would've hoped for. And because of too frequent version bumps that are sometimes released as an answer to Google's launch, rather than a meaningful improvement - I believe they're also having harder time going viral that way Overall OpenAI throws stuff at the wall and see what sticks. Most of it doesn't and gets (semi) abandoned. But some of it does and it makes for better consumer product than Gemini It seems to have worked well so far, though I'm sceptical it will be enough for long
- raw_anon_1111 10mo agoSelling a bunch of $20 a month subscriptions isn’t going to make a dent in OpenAI losses. Going viral for a day or two doesn’t help. Normal people are already getting tired of AI Slop
- johnnyanmac 10mo agoGoing viral is great when you're a small team or even a million dollar company. That can make or break your business. Going viral as a billion dollar company spending upward of 1T is still not sustainable. You can't pay off a trillion dollars on "engagement". The entire advertising industry is "only" worth 1T as is: https://www.investors.com/news/advertising-industry-to-hit-1-trillion-dominated-by-the-new-big-5/ https://www.investors.com/news/advertising-industry-to-hit-1...
- drowsspa 10mo agoI guess we'd have to see the graph with the evolution of paying customers: I don't see the number of potential-but-not-yet clients being that high, certainly not one order of magnitude higher. And everyone already knows OpenAI, they don't have the benefit of additional exposure when they go viral: the only benefit seems to be to hype up investors. And there's something else about the diminishing returns of going viral... AI kind of breaks the usual assumptions in software: that building it is the hard part and that scaling is basically free. In that sense, AI looks more like regular commodities or physical products, in that you can't just Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V: resources are O(N) on the number of users, not O(log N) like regular software.
- johnnyanmac 10mo agobecause these are mostly the same players of the 2010's. So when they can't get more investor money and the hard problems are still being cracked, the easiest fallback is the same social media slop they used to become successful 10-15 years prior. Falling back on old ways to maximize engagement and grind out (eventually) ad revenue.
- conception 10mo agoWhen they released their first good image model is when they got a new 100 million users in a week.
- mFixman 10mo agoBecause there is only so much programmers and companies will pay for AI coders. The big prizes is AI-generated TikTok. The entertainment industry is by far the easiest way to tap into global discretionary income.
- andy12_ 10mo agoBecause the general idea here is that image and video models, when scaled way up, can generalize like text models did[1], and eventually be treated as "world models"[2]; models that can accurately model real world processes. These "world models" then could be used to train embodied agents with RL in an scalable way[3]. The video-slop and image-slop generators is just a way to take advantage of the current research in world models to get more out of it. [1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2509.20328 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2509.20328 [2] https://deepmind.google/blog/genie-3-a-new-frontier-for-world-models/ https://deepmind.google/blog/genie-3-a-new-frontier-for-worl... [3] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2509.24527 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2509.24527
- Verdex 10mo agoI get the allure of the hypothetical future of video slop. Imagine if you could ask the AI to redo lord of the rings but with magneto instead of gandalf. Imagine watching shawshank redemption but in the end we get a "hot fuzz" twist where andy fights everyone. Imagine a dirty harry style police movie but where the protagonist is a xenomorph which is only barely acknowledged. You could imagine an entirely new cultural engine where entire genres are born off of random reddit "hey have you guys every considered" comments. However, the practical reality seems to be that you get tick toc style shorts that cost a bunch to create and have a dubious grasp on causality that have to compete with actual tick toc, a platform that has its endless content produced for free.
- ep103 10mo agoYou and I see the tiktok slop. But as that functionality improves, its going to make its way into the toolchain of every digital image and video editing software in existence, the same way that its finding its way into programming IDEs. And that type of feature build is worth $. It might be a matter of time until we get to the point where we start seeing major Hollywood movies (for example) doing things that were unthinkable the same way that CGI revolutionized cinema in the 80s. Even if it doesn't, from my layman perception, it seems that Hollywood has spent the last ~20 years differentiating itself from the rest of global cinema largely based on a moat built on IP ownership and capital intensive production value (largely around name brand actors and expensive CGI). AI already threatens to remove one of those pillars, which I have to think in turn makes it very valuable.